PHIL 231 Handout 1: Reasoning

I. Argument: a course of reasoning designed to establish the truth of

some assertion.

II. Arguments are comprised of premises and a conclusion.

A. Conclusion: the assertion that the arguer wants you to believe.

1. Conclusions sometimes have indicator words: therefore, so, thus,

consequently, it follows that, consequently, hence, ergo…
2. Sometimes the conclusion comes first. Compare:

a. Capital punishment deters crime; therefore it’s just.

b. Capital punishment is just, because it deters crime. (Conclusion
is first.)
c. What do I think of capital punishment? Well, it deters crime,
doesn’t it? (Conclusion is unstated).

B. Premises: Statements offered in support of the conclusion, i.e., the

evidence for the truth of the conclusion.

C. Making arguments explicit: List the premises; draw a line, and put the
conclusion last. (see handout 3 for examples of arguments from Book
1 made explicit).

1. If capital punishment deters crime, capital punishment is just.

2. Capital punishment deters crime.
3. Capital punishment is just.

III. The Virtues of Deductive Arguments

A. Validity. If the premises imply their conclusion, we call the argument

valid. An argument is valid if and only if it's logically impossible for its
premises to be true while its conclusion is false.

1. Note that a valid argument need not have true statements: All
dogs have five heads; my cat is a dog. Therefore, my cat has five
heads.
2. Validity just says the conclusion follows from the premises or the
premises imply the conclusion. If the premises are true, the
conclusion must be true too. But they need not be true for the
argument to be valid.

B. Soundness. If the argument is valid and its premises are true, we call
the argument sound.
 1. Clearly, the “five headed dog” argument in III.A.1 is valid but
unsound.
2. The “capital punishment” argument (II.C.) is valid. Is it sound?
More argumentation, analysis, and evidence is required.

IV. The Virtues of Inductive Arguments (Inductive arguments are those

that purport to raise the likelihood of their conclusions.)

A. Strength. An argument is strong if and only if, given the premises,

the conclusion is more likely than not (probability > .5).

B. Reliability. An argument is reliable if and only if it’s strong and has

true premises.

V. Whether an argument is deductive or inductive, one can always ask

the following two questions:

A. Given these premises, should I believe the conclusion? (i.e., is the

argument either valid or strong?).

B. Are the premises actually true? (i.e., is the argument either sound or
reliable?).

C. Beware: just because you agree with an arguments premises doesn't

mean you must accept the conclusion; the argument may be invalid.

D. Beware: The fact that you agree with an argument's conclusion doesn't
make it a good argument. There may be better arguments to the same
conclusion.

E. Do not confuse distinct arguments with identical conclusions.

VI. Sometimes the truth of a premise is hard to ascertain. Then ask

whether or not that premise is at least plausible. If the argument is
valid or strong, and the premise is plausible, the whole argument can
be judged to plausible, even if you suspect that premise is not true.

VII. Socratic method of reasoning (elenchus):

A. Ask: What is x?
B. Interlocutor attempts an answer.
C. Answer is refuted [try again!].
D. Interlocutor admits ignorance (aporia).