Philosophy

Chapter 1: [1.2] #2, 3, 5, 6, 8 2) No statement. 3) Statement. 5) No statement. 6) No statement. 8) Statement. [1.3] #2, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12 2) No argument. 5) No argument. 6) No argument. 8) No Argument. 10) Argument. Conclusion: We should know the facts about a subject on which we are to speak and argue. 12) Argument. Conclusion: People should have the right to stop offensive language. [1.4] #2, 3, 5, 9 2) Argument. Premise(s): (1) You have neglected your duty on several occasions. (2)You have been absent from work too many times. Conclusion: You are not fit to serve in your current capacity. 3) No argument. 5) Argument. Premise(s): (1) Only naive, impressionable pinheads believe in communism. Conclusion: Communism is crazy. 9) Argument. Premise(s): (1) There are many people today who claim to be witches. (2) In the US, they put a number of witches on trial during the late seventeenth century. Conclusion: Witches are real. [1.6] #3, 6, 9 3) Conclusion: Restaurants in these cities should see a decline in profits. 6) Conclusion: Therefore, there is no morality. 9) Conclusion: Nancy cannot be trusted. [1.7] #2, 4 2) Argument. Premise(s): There was not a man who had any idea of experimental philosophy before Chancellor Bacon. (2) And of an infinity of experiments which have been made since his time, there is hardly a single one which has not been point out in his book. (3) He even made a good number of them himself Conclusion: Francis Bacon is the father of experimental philosophy. 4) Argument. Premise(s): (1) It implies that each of us is morally infallible. (2) This cannot be right. (3) What Hitler did was wrong, even if [he] believed otherwise. Conclusion: A persons’ belief or approval of their own actions does not make it morally right. Chapter 3: [3.1] # 10, 11 10) A valid argument can have a false premise and conclusion, but it cannot have false premises and a true conclusion. A valid argument is such that if its premises are true, its conclusion must also be true. 11) If an argument is valid, but has a false conclusion, we can conclude that at least one of the premises uis false. [3.2] # 3, 5, 8, 13 3) Step 1: Conclusion: You’re nuts. Premise(s): (1) If you go to that party you’re completely nuts. (2) You’re going to the party. Step 2: Deductively valid. Step 3-4: Do not apply. 5) Step 1: Conclusion: All absent-minded people are teachers. Premise(s): (1) All philosophers are absent-minded. (2) All philosophers are teachers. Step 2: Deductively valid. Step 3-4: Do not apply. 8) Step 1: Conclusion: There’s a conspiracy. Premise(s): (1) If Elvis Presley’s name is spelled wrong on his tombstone, there must be some kind of conspiracy surrounding the death of the King. (2) His name is spelled wrong. Step 2: Deductively valid. Step 3-4: Do not apply. 13) Step 1: Conclusion: He’s probably guilty. Premise(s): (1) All the evidence in this trial suggests that Paul Bernardo is guilty of murder. Step 2: Not deductively valid. Step 3: Inductively strong. Step 4: Does not apply. [3.3] #2, 5, 10, 11, 17 2) Valid. 5) Strong. 10) Strong. 11) Valid. 17) Valid. [3.4.1] #4, 6, 10 4) Implicit Premise: If the RCMP doesn’t have a very serious focus on stopping terrorism, a major terrorist attack will happen in this country. 6) Implicit Premise: If a conflict is a genuine war, it can’t possibly be morally justified. 10) Implicit Premise: People who do not criticize the US military’s actions in war must be pro-American. [3.5] #2, 3, 7, 8, 10, 12 2) Valid; affirming the antecedent. 3) Valid; disjunctive syllogism. 7) Invalid; affirming the consequent. 8) Invalid; denying the antecedent. 10) Invalid; denying the antecedent. 12) Valid; hypothetical syllogism. [3.9] #2, 4, 15, 18 2) (1) The Prime Minister is soft on the environment. (2) He has weakened clean air regulations and lifted restrictions on logging in the West.