Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
McInerny
Part 1--Preparing the mind for logic
Deals with the proper frame of mind that must be established if logical thinking is to take place at all.
1. Be attentive
o Don’t skim situations, just because they are similar to others
Every situation is unique even if in a small way
Be alert to uniqueness
2. Get the facts Straight
o A fact is something made or done
Has clear objective status that is independent of others
o 2 types of facts
Things
• Ex.: The White House
• To determine validity pay it a visit
o If it is a fact it must exist somewhere in some form
Events
• Made up of things or the actions of things
• Ex.: Lincoln assassination
• To determine validity you must consult documents that account for it
o Objective
Things and Events
• They exist in the public domain
• Principle access to all
o Subjective
Limited to the subject experiencing it
• Indirect factualness
• Ex.: Pain
o Most facts must be indirectly experienced
Exercise care in established validity of indirect evidence
3. Ideas and the Objects of Ideas
o Every idea is a traceable thing
A subjective evocation of an objective fact
Clear ideas faithfully reflect the objective order they derive from
Unclear distort the representation of their lineage
o Ideas are the means, not the end, of knowledge
Look through ideas to the objects they represent
4. Be Mindful of the Origins of Ideas
o People naturally favor their own ideas
Ideas, however, ultimately owe existence to something outside of the creator
• These are either objective facts or other ideas
o Determine validity by seeking out a relative example in external reality
Ex. Cats
Vs centaurs which don’t have an external example in the real world
• Thus they are a subjective fact as they only exist in the mind
5. Match Ideas to Facts
o 3 basic components to human knowledge
Objective fact
• Ex.: Cats
The idea of cats
The word applied to the idea
• Ex.: in English, “Cats”
o Simple idea
Direct correlation between idea and objective fact
• Ex.: idea of cat
• Corresponding to idea of cat is an extramental world entity
o Clear, sound and corresponds to the real world
o Complex ideas
No simple one-to-one correspondence between idea and thing
• Instead correspondence is one-to-many
If a complex idea is to be communicable to others it must refer to what is
common to both you and others
• To prevent an idea from being pure subjectivism,
o you must continuously touch base with those many facts in the
objective world from which the idea is born
o Ex.: Democracy
Many thing in the objective world represent this
• People, events, constitutions, legislative acts,
past and present institutions
o An idea is only as good as the degree that it is distanced from its source
No idea can sever its ties no matter how complex
o Bad ideas are a product of the rejection of objective facts
6. Match Words to Ideas
o If ideas are sound to the extent they faithfully represent the thing they will be clearly
communicable
But only if we clothe them in words that accurately signify them
o To ensure the word is proper to the idea
You must go back to the source of the idea
• The objective facts that are the foundation
7. Effective Communication
o Don’t assume your audience understands your meaning
Be explicit
Especially important the more complex something is
• When in doubt, spell it out
o Speak in complete sentences
Declarative statements require the same care as any statement
o Don’t treat evaluative statements as if they were statements of objective fact
Evaluative statements do not lend themselves to a simple true/false response
Don’t invite unwarranted responses to statements
• This is what happens when an evaluative statement is passed off as a
statement of objective fact
o If you want an evaluative statement to be accepted you must
argue for it
• True statements of objective fact are not open to argument
o Avoid double negatives
o Gear your language to your audience
Know your audience and speak in terms they can understand
8. Avoid Vague and Ambiguous Language
o A word is vague if its referent is blurred
You don’t know precisely what the word is pointing to
The more general something is the more vague it is
Complex ideas are vague because they are rich in meaning and can mean
different things to different people
• You must explicitly use them in a way that is clear to your meaning
• Ex.: love, equality, democracy
o A word is ambiguous if it has more than 1 meaning and context does not clearly indicate
which meaning is intended
The only way to avoid ambiguity is to be explicit
• Ex.: “Bear to the right”
o Rather, “Keep to the right” or “Grizzly bears to the right”
9. Avoid Evasive Language
o Always be straightforward in language
This ensures any reasonably attentive audience to not miss your meaning
o Evasive language can
Deceive your audience
Distort the sense of reality of the people who use it
10. Truth
o The whole purpose of reasoning and logic is to arrive at the truth of things
o Truth has 2 basic forms
Ontological
• The truth of being or existence
o If it is ontologically true if it actually exists
Logical
• Truth as it manifests itself in thinking and language
o A statement is true if what it says reflects what is the case
A statement declares a correspondence of ideas in the mind (subjective facts)
with real states in the world (objective facts)
• This is done through the medium of language
It is a matter of bringing harmonious juxtaposition to the subjective and the
objective
• Focus on the objective order
o What determines truth or falsity is what exists in the real world
Thus logical truth is founded upon ontological truth
o Correspondence theory of truth
Understanding of the nature of truth
A correspondence between theory and objective reality
o Coherence theory of truth
Maintains that any given statement is true if it harmoniously fits into an already
established theory or system of thought
Subordinate to correspondence theory
This can be abused
• If a statement is judged to be true merely by virtue of the fact that it fits
into an established theory or system of thought that itself does not
correspond with or does so questionably
1. First Principles
o The principle of identity
A thing is what it is
• The whole of existing reality is not a homogenous mass
o It is a composition of individuals
The individuals are distinguishable from one another
• Obviously it is not something other than what it is
o The principle of the excluded middle
Between being and nonbeing there is no middle state
• Something exists or it does not exist
• The state of becoming is not between being and nonbeing
o There is no such thing as just becoming
There are only thing that become
o The state of becoming is already within the realm of existence
• What we call becoming is an alteration in a thing(s) already in existence
o The principle of sufficient reason
Also called the principle of causality
There is a sufficient reason for everything
• Everything that actually exists in the physical universe has an
explanation for its existence
• Nothing in the physical universe is self-explanatory or the cause of itself
• If something is the cause of another thing
o It explains the very existence of that thing
o It explains why the thing exists in this or that particular way
The mode of its existence
o The principle of contradiction
It is impossible for something both to be and not be at the same time and in the
same respect
• In the same respect refers to the mode of existence in question
o Ex.: you can be physically in New York, but mentally in Seattle
o First principles are self-evident
They cannot be proven
• They are not conclusions that follow from premises
• They are not truths dependent upon antecedent truths
• They represent truths that are absolutely fundamental
2. Real Gray Areas, Manufactured Gray Areas
o A gray area is a situation in which the truth can’t be clearly established
o Just because there is a situation in which you see no clear alternatives
Doesn’t mean there are no clear alternatives
• You just don’t see them
o A negative can only be recognized as a negative because you already see the positive
3. There’s an Explanation for Everything, Eventually
o To solve a problem focus on the cause (of problem), not the effect (problem)
4. Don’t stop short in the search for causes
o Causes often arrange themselves in a series
o If A->B->C
A is the cause of C as well as B
5. Distinguish among causes
o 4 types of causes
Efficient cause
• An agent whose activity brings something into existence
o Modifies its existence in one way or another
• Principle cause
o The ultimate explanation for something’s existence
• Instrumental cause
o Subordinate to principle cause
o passive
Final cause
• As applied to activity
o The purpose of activity
• As applied to an object
o The use to which the object can be put
Material cause
• The material out of which an object is composed
Formal cause
• The identifying nature of a thing
o That which makes it precisely what it is
o Not every type of cause can be applied to everything
6. Define your terms
o The most effective way to avoid vagueness or ambiguity in logical discourse
o Really defining the objects to which the terms apply
First we apply a word
• Second we further define what that word means
7. The categorical statement
o The most effective argument is one whose conclusion is a categorical statement
Tells us something that something definitely is the case
• Certainty, without doubt, that something is
• NO may, could be, might, etc.
8. Generalizing
o A general statement is one whose subject is very large in scope
Not necessarily inaccurate
o What makes a general statement sound is the fact that what is being attributed to the
class represented by the subject is:
True
Applies to the entire class
o Explicit language in general statements is important
Guards against any possible confusion on the part of an audience
Leave out linguistic qualifiers like all, some, etc
• Implies that what is being said applies to the entire class
o 2 types
Universal statement
• Affirmative or Positive
• Every or all or no statement
• Affirms or denies something about an entire class
Particular statement
• Usually marked by the qualifier some
Part 3—Argument: The language of logic
1. Skepticism
a. Should be selectively employed
i. A distinction should be made between skepticism as
1. Permanent attitude
a. Should be avoided
b. Subverts the reasoning process before it begins
2. Fitting response to a particular situation
b. Extreme skeptic
i. There is no truth
c. Moderate skeptic
i. Truth exists but the human mind is incapable of attaining it
2. Evasive agnosticism
a. An agnostic maintains that they lack enough knowledge regarding a particular issue to
be able to make a definite judgment about it
i. Neither denies the existence of truth or its attainability
1. Simply claims ignorance
b. Evasive agnosticism is the attitude that attempts to pass off vincible ignorance as
invincible
i. Result of indifference or laziness
3. Cynicism and naïve optimism
a. Illogical positions based on prejudice
i. A cynic is someone who makes emphatically negative estimates without
sufficient evidence
1. Blind to the possibilities
ii. A naïve optimist is someone who makes emphatically positive estimates without
sufficient evidence
1. Blind to the pitfalls
4. Narrow-mindedness
a. Limited scope of vision
b. Refuses to consider certain alternatives only because they do not meet his prejudiced
assumptions about what is and is not worth pursuing
c. to be tolerant of everything is to value nothing
i. the search for truth necessitates imposing judicious limitations on the
investigative area
5. Emotion and argument
a. Keep emotion out of an argument
i. The more intense an emotional state, the more difficult it is to think clearly
ii. A conclusion should be accepted not because it feels/sounds good, but because
it is seen as true and is worthy of acceptance
b. Manipulate people by appealing to emotions
6. The reason for reasoning
a. Reason can be employed for both good and bad
7. Argumentation is not quarreling
a. Argument is rational discourse
i. The object is to get at the truth
ii. The object of quarrelling is to get at other people
b. Do not waste time trying to argue with people who won’t or can’t
8. The limits of sincerity
a. Sincerity is a necessary condition for sound reasoning but not sufficient
i. If you do not have regard for the position that you advocate you abuse reason
9. Common sense
a. It is common sense in that it is shared by those animals considered rational