Critical Reasoning

Lecture 1
Mandel Cabrera – Fall 2015
Outline of today’s lecture

▪ Syllabus overview
▪ Introduction to course topic
Syllabus overview
Course Description

The aim of this course is to introduce students to logic – the

study of good reasoning – in three different ways: i.e., by
introducing them to (a) informal logic, (b) formal logic, and (c)
the philosophy of logic. We will begin by reviewing basic
principles of a particular kind of reasoning – deductive
reasoning – as well as some fundamental principles of
intellectually responsible debate. Then, the remainder of the
course will be devoted to mastering the fundamentals of a
mathematical apparatus – formal or symbolic logic – which is
used to represent some basic features of the deductive reasoning
we do using ordinary language. To help us understand the
conceptual foundations of formal logic, we will, in addition,
read and discuss some classic texts in the philosophy of logic.
Course texts

(1) Wesley Salmon, Logic (available online, at

http://www.ditext.com/salmon/logic.html)

(1) Terry Parsons, An Introduction to Symbolic Logic

(http://tinyurl.com/p69ad4j)

(1) Additional readings (available on YSCEC)

Course requirements

Homework (20%)
▪ Homework will mostly be due on Tuesdays, but always by class time on the
day it is due. Neither late homework nor any homework submitted in any
other than the prescribed way will receive any credit. However, you may
miss one homework assignment without any penalty, if you make a
contribution to the CR wall within two weeks after the homework was due
(at the latest, by the time of the final exam).
▪ On a typical Tuesday, we'll review the homework, and you'll have the
chance to make corrective notes on your homework. Because this will be
our Tuesday routine, unless you submit your homework online (as will be
true for some assignments), you must type and print out your homework,
or else make a photocopy of your written work and turn in this photocopy.
Course requirements

Homework (20%)

▪ Online homework submission: After the first 1/3 of the course, we

will make use of a computer program called Logic 2010. Once we
begin doing so, you will submit most of your homework to an online
database using this program.
Course requirements

Participation and attendance (10%)

▪ 10% of your grade concerns participation and attendance. You can fulfill this
requirement through joining in on informal in-class discussions, talking to
me outside of class (e.g. in office hours), or by asking substantive questions
over email. You will also be expected to at least occasionally participate in
homework reviews: e.g., by giving your answer to a question or logic
problem to the rest of the class.
▪ In-class participation: We will track in-class participation using participation
chips, which I’ll hand out during class. At the end of each class, you’ll give
these back to me, and sign your name on the participation list for that day.
▪ Office hours participation: When you visit in office hours to talk about class
material, you will sign in on a sign-in sheet.
▪ I’ll keep track of email correspondence on my own.
Course requirements

Midterm (30%)
▪ The midterm will be an in-class exam held during the midterm
period, and will cover informal logic, as well as the rudiments of
propositional formal logic.
Course requirements

Final (40%)
▪ The final will be an in-class exam held during the final exam period,
and will cover propositional and first-order predicate formal logic, as
well as selected topics in the philosophy of logic.
Course mechanics

Logic 2010
▪ During the formal logic portions of the course, we will be using a
piece of software developed and run out of UCLA, called Logic 2010.
Before we begin using the program, we will devote one class session
to learning how to install and use the program (it’s quite simple and
easy to use). Before then, I strongly encourage you to peruse the
website for the program, install the program on your computer, and
take a quick look at some of the help documents (which I’ve posted
on YSCEC). Here’s the program website:

– https://logiclx.humnet.ucla.edu/
Course mechanics

Powerpoint presentations
▪ For most lectures, I will use Powerpoint presentations and/or (later in
the class) Logic 2010 presentations. When I use Powerpoint
presentations, I will endeavor always to upload them to YSCEC at
least one hour before class.
Introduction to course topic
Logic

▪ Logic is, roughly, the study of good reasoning.

▪ Reasoning: coming to (i.e. inferring) conclusions on the basis of

evidence or reasons or premises .

– Of the three latter terms, the term we'll use most will be “premise.”

– And, in this class, we'll exclusively consider reasoning whose premises and
conclusions can be expressed using only declarative sentences.
Logic

▪ An example of a conclusion we might reason to is “Socrates is mortal”.

▪ An example of some premises we might use to justify this conclusion are
“Socrates is human” and “All humans are mortal”.
▪ One way of representing this piece of reasoning (i.e. this inference) is in the
form of an argument.
▪ An argument is a collection of (at least two) sentences, in which one
expresses the conclusion of a piece of reasoning, and the others express its
premises.
▪ The word “argument” is often used to describe a dispute, especially an
emotionally charged one. The present use doesn’t imply either.
Logic

▪ Diagramming an argument:

(1) Socrates is human. OR (1) Socrates is human.

(2) All humans are mortal . (2) All humans are mortal.

(C) Socrates is mortal. ∴ Socrates is mortal.

▪ In English, we use contextual clues and special terms to indicate which

claim is the conclusion, and which claims are the premises (e.g. expressions
like “because”, “therefore”, “so”, “thus”, and “as a result”).
Logic

▪ The most basic definition of good reasoning is that it is reasoning

that effectively justifies its conclusion.
▪ There are many standards for effective justification that might be
applicable, depending on the context. The one that we will focus on
in this course is the standard of validity.
▪ An argument is valid iff it’s impossible for the premises to be true and
the conclusion false. Otherwise, it’s invalid.
▪ When an argument is valid, we can also say that its premises entail its
conclusion, or that its conclusion follows from its premises.
▪ Please note: the word “validity” here is being used in a very special
sense defined above.
Logic

▪ The example argument already given is valid:

(1) Socrates is human.
(2) All humans are mortal.
(C) Socrates is mortal
Logic

▪ The example argument already given is valid:

(1) Socrates is human.
(2) All humans are mortal. Humans

(C) Socrates is mortal Socrates

Premise (1)
Logic

▪ The example argument already given is valid:

(1) Socrates is human.
(2) All humans are mortal. Humans

(C) Socrates is mortal Socrates

Mortals
Premise (2)
Logic

▪ One of the most basic tasks in logic is to study validity.

▪ The first step in this task lies in identifying valid logical forms of
argument, because an argument is valid in virtue of having a valid
logical form.
▪ A logical form of argument is a certain kind of pattern or structure
that the argument exemplifies.
▪ The logical form is valid iff any argument with that form is valid.
Logic

▪ Example:
(1) Socrates is human.
(2) All humans are mortal.
Fs
(C) Socrates is mortal
x
▪ Logical form of the example:
(1) x is F.
(2) All Fs are G. Gs

(C) x is G
Logic

▪ Another example with the same form:

(1) Mandel is a professor (x is F)

Professors
(2) All professors are teachers (All Fs are G)
Mandel
(C) Mandel is a teacher (x is G)

Teachers
Logic

▪ Logicians attempt to arrive at a systematic understanding of logical

form: i.e., to understand what forms there are, which forms are valid
or invalid, as well as why they are valid or invalid.
▪ These are all fundamental topics in the philosophy of logic.
▪ In their investigations of these topics, logicians (beginning in the late
19th century) developed a set of mathematical techniques to model
the logically important features of arguments (e.g. their logical
forms). These techniques developed into a branch of mathematics
called formal or symbolic logic.
The units of the course:

▪ Unit 1: Informal logic

– Valid and invalid logical forms of argument (Salmon)
– Using arguments in an intellectually responsible way (Class notes)

▪ Unit 2: Formal logic and philosophy of logic

– Philosophy of logic 1: Truth functions (Course reader)
– Formal logic I: Propositional logic (Parsons, chapters 1 and 2)
– Philosophy of logic 2: Functions, concepts, and objects (Course reader)
– Formal logic II: First-order predicate logic (Parsons, chapter 3)
For next time:

▪ Reading: Wesley Salmon’s Logic, ch. 1; ch.2 (sections 1-9).