Logic Note Book |1

Name: Hssaan Abdeel

Roll #: BB-19-27
Logic Note Book
Submitted to: Mam Seerat
Fatima
 Logic Note Book |2

1-Difference between Argument & Non-Argument

Arguments
In logic and philosophy, an argument is a series of statements called the premises
intended to determine the degree of truth of another statement, the conclusion.
Different Types of Arguments
 Deductive
 Inductive
 Critical reasoning
 Philosophy
 Argument
 Deduction
 Arguments
 Induction
Non-Argument
A flawed, empty, or incorrect argument that should be dismissed or disregarded.
Explanation from Article (Argument)
Every individual is unique and born with certain inherent potential or talent, which
helps in learning things easily and quickly. Psychologists call this ‘aptitude’. In
Pakistan, however, the preferred method of instruction assumes that everyone can
learn different materials in the same pedagogy, without assessment and evaluation
of aptitudes of students of various grades and levels. Due to the lack of a learner-
centered approach along with the lack of counselling and guidance about their
aptitudes, many students face uncertainty in their selection of subjects and career
path.
Source: DAWN NEWS: https://www.dawn.com/news/1343484

As we have mentioned before that argument must have a premise along with a
conclusion. The above mentioned phrase is taken from an article and its premise to
conclusion cut down is as follows:
PREMISE: "Every individual is unique and born with certain inherent potential
or talent, which helps in learning things easily and quickly. Psychologists call
this ‘aptitude’. In Pakistan, however, the preferred method of instruction
assumes that everyone can learn different materials in the same pedagogy,
without assessment and evaluation of aptitudes of students of various grades
and levels." This part of phrase is indicating the premise in which leads to a
conclusion mentioned ahead.
CONCLUSION: "Due to the lack of a learner-centered approach along with the
lack of counselling and guidance about their aptitudes, many students face
 Logic Note Book |3

uncertainty in their selection of subjects and career path." This part of phrase
indicates the conclusion. As it affirms about the information provided.
Explanation from article (Non Argument)
To extract happiness from within, we have to introduce ourselves with the concept of self -
love. Self-love means being satisfied with ourselves, accepting our flaws and imperfections,
being kind and gentle with ourselves and forgiving ourselves for all the mistakes that we’ve
ever made. But the question here is, why is self-care important? Imagine yourself in a
situation where there seems to be no ray of hope and there is no one to listen to you or to keep
you calm. Then there is only one person with you that is your own self. If you have a positive
self-image about yourself and know your self-worth, then you will have the belief that “I can
overcome this situation” and you will focus on the solution.
Source: Dunya BlogSpot: http://blogs.dunyanews.tv/27801/
In this part of article, writer is giving some pieces of advice that how to be happy. Now
as we know that advice is not part of argument. Hence, this phrase is non argument.
2 Enthymematic Arguments
An enthymeme is a particular means of expressing a syllogistic argument which has
one proposition suppressed—i.e., one proposition (either a premises or a conclusion) is
not stated.

Principle of Charity
The principle of charity or charitable interpretation requires interpreting a speaker's
statements in the most rational way possible and, in the case of any argument,
considering its best, strongest possible interpretation.

Example
 Logic Note Book |4

This above mentioned figure is taken from the script of James Bond's movie "FROM
RUSSIA WITH LOVE". In this script Bond says that: There’s a saying in England.
Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.
In this Bond line, you don’t see the implied deduction that fire makes smoke.
Source: FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE (SCREEN PLAY BY RICHARD MAIBAUM Pg 140)

3. Diagrammatic Argument
For the analysis of an argument we also use diagramming. With a diagram we can
represent the structure of an argument graphically; the flow of premises and coclusion
can be displayed in a two dimensional chart or picture on the page.

Example:

The highlighted are in above figure represents the passage we have taken as an
example. The diagrammatic representation of this passage is as follows:
The argument is clearly marked with indicators:
For {1} and {2}, so {3}.
The premise indicator “for” connects another clause of equal standing, with the
conclusion marked by the conclusion indicator “so.”

1 2

Source: The
Meditation of Marcus
Aurelius
3 https://books.google.co
m.pk/books?id=l-
LVoRFzlQkC&pg=PT47
&lpg=PT47&dq=%E2%8
0%9C+For+there+is+alt
ogether+one+fitness+(or
+harmony).+And+as+th
e+universe+is+made+u
p+out+of+all+bodies+to
 Logic Note Book |5

4. Difference between Deductive & Inductive Argument

Deductive reasoning, also deductive logic, is the process of reasoning from one or more
statements to reach a logical conclusion. Deductive reasoning goes in the same
direction as that of the conditionals, and links premises with conclusions.

Example:

In this above pasted figure, it is a quote from Movie the Reigote Puzzle by Sherlock
Holmes. In this quote both premise and conclusion are true. So it is a deductive
argument. Because it is important to recognize the art of detection. So otherwise energy
will be dissipated instead of being concentrated.

Inductive Argument:
Inductive reasoning is a method of reasoning in which the premises are viewed as
supplying some evidence, but not full assurance, of the truth of the conclusion.
 Logic Note Book |6

Example:

I believe this article

shows inductive reasoning. It is based on a survey of pediatricians and family
physicians, and their response to parents’ requests to space out and/or delay
vaccinations. The article and the underlying study show the different strategies that
physicians are using in response to these requests. One of the findings of the study is
that these physicians believed these parents were putting their children in danger, but
they acquiesced to the parents’ requests to build trust with the families. The conclusion
or general principle from the observations is that “evidence-based interventions to
increase timely immunization are needed to guide primary care and public health
practice.”
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/02/science/most-doctors-give-in-to-requests-
by-parents-to-alter-vaccine-schedules.html
5. Categorical Syllogism
A categorical syllogism is an argument consisting of exactly three categorical
propositions (two premises and a conclusion) in which there appear a total of exactly
three categorical terms, each of which is used exactly twice. There are 3 terms of
syllogism. One of those terms must be used as the subject term of the conclusion of the
syllogism, and we call it the minor term of the syllogism as a whole. The major term of
the syllogism is whatever is employed as the predicate term of its conclusion. The third
term in the syllogism doesn’t occur in the conclusion at all, but must be employed in
somewhere in each of its premises; hence, we call it the middle term.
Standard form:
1. All three statements are standard form categorical prepositions.
2. The two occurrences of each term are identical.
3. Each term is used in the same sense throughout.
4. The major premise is listed first, the minor second, and conclusion last always.
Mood: - The classification of categorical syllogisms is according to the quantity
(universal or particular) and quality (affirmative or negative) of their constituent
 Logic Note Book |7

propositions. The vowels of these terms represent the forms of propositions in the
syllogism.
Figure: The classification of syllogisms according to the arrangement of the middle
term, namely, the term (subject or predicate of a proposition) that occurs in both
premises but not in the conclusion.

Example:
"Caius is man, men are mortal, therefor Caius is mortal, he had throughout his whole life
seemed to him right only in relation to Caius , but not to him at all.
Major: Man is mortal
Minor: Caius is mortal
Middle: Man
Mood: AAA

According to the example of this phrase

figure 4 seems to be correct.
6. Categorical Proposition
In logic, categorical propositions a proposition that asserts or denies that all or some
members of one category are included in another.
Categorical propositions have four basic forms which are designed by the letters A, E, I
and O.
The four basic forms are as follows:
 Universal affirmative proposition (All S is P)
 Universal negative proposition (No S is P)
 Particular affirmative proposition (Some S is P)
 Particular negative propositions (Some S is not P)

Example:

This phrase is taken from an essay

about mammals. It says that some mammals are adapted for life at sea. It means that
all mammals are not made to live in sea. Hence, it is a perfect example of categorical
proposition. It also fits on all basic forms of it.
o Universal affirmative proposition:
All mammals live in sea.
Orange ~ Quantifiers
Blue ~ Subject Term
Red ~ Predicate Term
 Logic Note Book |8

o Universal negative proposition:

No mammals live in sea

o Particular affirmative proposition:

Some mammals live in sea

o Particular negative proposition:

Some mammals don't live in sea

Source:
https://www.absolutestudy.co
m/essay-on-mammals-for-
school-college-students-
7. Rhetorical Questions
long-and-short-english-
A rhetorical question is a question that's askedessay-speech-for-class-10-
merely for effect with no answer
12-college-and-competitive-
expected. The answer may be obvious or immediately provided by the questioner.
exams/
Uses of Rhetorical Questions:
Rhetorical questions are used to emphasize a point where the answer to the question is
obvious due to the wording of the question. They are questions that do not expect an
answer but trigger an internal response for the reader such as an empathy
with questions like 'How would you feel?'

Example:

This
phrase has been taken from a speech of Barak Obama to his nation. The president is
continuously putting rhetorical questions in front of American Nation. He and the
audience know the answer of these questions. But he is asking just to raise a point and
leaving an effect. So this is a pure example of rhetorical questions.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/20/obama-plan-shield-five-
million-undocumented-migrants-deportation-speech
 Logic Note Book |9

8. Fallacies
There are four basic types of fallacies. They are as following:
 Fallacy of Relevance
 Fallacy of Deductive Induction
 Fallacy of Presumption
 Fallacy of Ambiguity
They basic types of fallacies are explained below:

1. Fallacies of Relevance:
These fallacies appeal to evidence or examples that are not relevant to the argument at
hand. It is further divided in to many types. They are as following:
 Appeal to Populace: when correct argument is replaced by devices calculated
to elicit emotional and non-rational support for the conclusion urged. For
example: I am a pepper; he's a pepper; she's a pepper; we’re all peppers!
You can be a pepper, too! (1980s Dr. Pepper jingle). In this phrase writer wants
to tell that when everyone is same a like then why you want to be a separate
clown. Be like everyone. Whether it's right or not.
 Appeal to emotion: when correct reasoning is replaced by the appeals to
specific emotions, such as pity, pride, or envy. Sometimes many ad production
companies use this tactic to emotionally convince their audience. For example,
Zameen.com a real estate company used the same fallacy by showing a family
whose son was abroad for 5 years. They had to face many hardships and they
were living in a house on rent. The parents begged their son to come to Pakistan
and visit them. But he was so busy in his work. Suddenly he hit with an idea to
surprise his parents. He came back and gifted them a big house of their own.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnR4V6sz8N0&t=55s

 Appeal to Ad Hominem: when correct reasoning about some issue is replaced

by an attack upon character or special circumstances of the opponent. Many
times, politicians use this fallacy in their debated and sometimes lawyers use this
fallacy in court room. Degrading other politician during a campaign when he
asked about a specific policy, he replied well we need to look at Mr. Smith's
failures regarding this issue. So, he attacked on another person to make his
side safe.
 Appeal to Straw Man: when correct reasoning is undermined by the deliberate
misinterpretation of the opponent. This fallacy is also used by the politicians or
 L o g i c N o t e B o o k | 10

the competitors to prove other one wrong. For example, once Elon Musk said:
"Self-driving cars are the natural extension of active safety and obviously
something we should do."
To his reply one opponent said that: "Self driving cars are not safe. Did you hear about
the self-driving Uber SUV that killed a pedestrian in Arizona"? That's how this fallacy is
used to prove someone wrong.
 Appeal to force: when reasoning is replaced by threats in the effort to win
support or assent. For example in Pakistan and India many rape cases are
reported on daily basis. But their further proceeding never happens. The big
reason behind this is ad baculum. Mostly in every case the rape victim are of
small and poor families and the suspects are from high class families. The
suspects threat the victims and her family. They force them to sign the apologia
so they can be free from any law.

2. Fallacies of Defective Induction

In fallacies of defective induction, the premise may be relevant to the conclusion, but
they are far too weak to support the conclusion. Its major types are as follows:
 Appeal to Ignorance: when it is argued that a proposition is true on the ground
that it has not been proved false, or when it is argued that a proposition is false
because it has not been proved true.

In this example, the author is not sure what he has said. He is talking about moon and
the rants about moon made till date are just on the basis of assumptions. So there is no
evidence about this phrase writer wrote.
 Appeal to Hasty Generalization: when one moves carelessly or too quickly
from one or a very few instances to a broad or universal claim.

3. Fallacy of Presumption:
In fallacy of presumption, the mistake arises in argument from relying on some
proposition that is assumed to be true but is without warrant and is false or dubious.
Three major fallacies are as follows:
 Appeal to Begging the Question: when one assumes in the premises of an
argument the truth of what one seeks to establish the conclusion of that same
argument. For example free trade will be good for this country. The reason is
patently clear. Isn't it obvious that unrestricted commercial relations will bestow
on all sections of this nation the benefits which result when there is an
unimpeded flow of goods between countries? It is a little bit more like the way the
fallacy appears typically in reality because most people are smart enough to
avoid stating their premises and conclusions in the same manner. In this case,
"unrestricted commercial relations" is simply a long way of stating "free trade"
 L o g i c N o t e B o o k | 11

and the rest of what follows that phrase is an even longer way of saying "good for
this country."
Source: (Quoted from With Good Reason, by S. Morris Engel).
 Appeal to Complex Question: when one argues by asking a question in such a
way as to presuppose the truth of some assumption buried in that question. For
example, "is Christianity the only true religion?" A loaded question can only
be considered to be as such if the implication being made (which, in this
example, is that Christianity is true) is not a verified fact. Because not everyone
agrees in the Christian faith, and “faith” by definition is backed by beliefs rather
than facts, this question is loaded.
 Appeal to Accident: when one mistakenly applies a generalization to an
individual case that it does not properly govern. For example, “Birds can fly;
therefore, emus must be able to fly too.” Now as we all know that birds can
fly. But those birds that are heavy in weight cannot fly. So, it is an absolute
example of appeal to accident. Emus are 2nd largest birds according to their
weight. So they can't fly. In this given phrase,, "birds can fly" is applied to every
bird.

4. Fallacies of Ambiguity:
In fallacies of ambiguity, the mistakes arise as a result of the shift in the meaning of
words or phrases, from the meaning that they have in the premises to different
meanings that they have in the conclusion. It has following main types:
 Appeal to Equivocation: when the same word or phrase is used with two or
more meanings, deliberately or accidently in formulating the argument. For
example,

It is true that Puff Daddy is a star.

A giant ball of gas is a star.

However, Puff Daddy is not a giant ball of gas.

In the example, the word ‘star’ is used to mean a famous person and a celestial body.
The double meaning of the word ‘star’ creates the fallacy. So an argument using
equivocation will appear to be valid but given the double meaning of the word, it is not.
See this in action through some real-life examples.

 Fallacy of Division: A fallacy of division is the error in logic that occurs when
one reasons that something that is true for a whole must also be true of all or
some of its parts. For example, Americans, on average, weigh more than
Europeans. So, my European cousin who is visiting in a few weeks is going
to be thinner than I am. In this example, it is said that Americans weigh more
than Europeans. It is true for whole. So cousin coming to visit is going to be
thinner, this part of phrase is true for part of part.
 Fallacy of Accent: The fallacy of accent is a type of ambiguity that arises when
the meaning of a sentence is changed by placing an unusual prosodic stress, or
 L o g i c N o t e B o o k | 12

when, in a written passage, it is left unclear which word the emphasis was
supposed to fall on. For example, in the hilarious Broadway musical, The Book of
Mormon, there is a musical number where one character is explaining how to
bury "bad thoughts" by just "turning them off" (like a light switch). The character
doing the explaining (in glorious song) is specifically explaining to the main
character how to suppress gay thoughts when the main character's "bad
thoughts" have nothing to do with being gay. After the instructions, the main
character tries to make this clear by affirming, "I'm not having gay thoughts," to
which the other characters respond "Hurray! It worked!" The stress on the "I'm"
was ignored and confused for "Hey, I'm not having gay thoughts anymore!"
Although this was comedy it portrayed an argument.

Source: The Book of Mormon

 Fallacy of Composition: The fallacy of composition refers to the logically

untenable position that what is true for a member of a group must necessarily
also be true for the group as a whole.

For example, "Paul is the smartest student in our school. Since he is in my class, I
must be in the smartest class.”
Notice here that only one part (Paul) is used to assume that the whole (class) is what
the single part is (smart).