Premises and conclusions

Examples
1. Research universities also must aggressively support teaching. After all, a significant
percentage of their students are undergraduates, and such institutions are clearly
obligated to provide them a quality education
ChatGPT
Premises:

1. Research universities must aggressively support teaching.

2. A significant percentage of their students are undergraduates.
3. Such institutions are clearly obligated to provide them a quality education.

Conclusion: Therefore, research universities must prioritize and actively support teaching in
order to fulfill their obligation of providing a quality education to their undergraduate students.

2. We have good reason to believe that people will exist in the future and that they will be
similar enough to us that we can have a good idea of whattheir well-being requires. Knowing
this and knowing that our present actions can influence their future well-being, it is reasonable
to conclude that future people must be given some ethical consideration by presently living
human beings
ChatGPT
Premises:

1. We have good reason to believe that people will exist in the future.
2. People in the future will be similar enough to us that we can have a good idea of what their
well-being requires.
3. Our present actions can influence the future well-being of those people.
4. It is reasonable to conclude that future people must be given some ethical consideration.

Conclusion: Therefore, presently living human beings should consider and take ethical actions
that positively impact the well-being of future people, based on the belief that they will exist
and their well-being can be influenced by our present actions.

Paper Solution
1. Identify the premises and the conclusions –
 a. Many of those children whose conduct has been most narrowly watched become
the weakest man because their instructors only instil certain notions into their mind
that have no other foundation than their authority and if they be loved or respected
the mind is crammed in its exertions and wavering in its advances.
b. For there is all together one fitness (or harmony) and as the universe is made up out
of all bodies to be such a body as it is so out of all existing causes necessity (destiny)
is made up to be such a cause as it is
c. If students were environmently aware they would object to the endangering of
any species of animal. The well known Greenwood white squirrel has become
endangered as it has disappeared from the lander campus because the building
of the library destroyed its native habitat. No lander students objected. This,
lander students are not environmentally aware.
d. Joe probably will have heart problems in the future because he has creased earlobes
and a depressed sternum and these characteristics have been associated with heart
attacks.
e. We humans appear to be meaning seeking creatures who have had the misfortune
of being thrown into a world devoid of meaning. one of our major tasks is to invent
a meaning sturdy enough to support a life and to perform the tricky manoeuvre of
denying our personal authorship of this meaning. Thus, we conclude instead that it
[our meaning of life] was out there waiting for us.

Statement 1: Premise:

 Children whose conduct has been most narrowly watched become the weakest man.
 Instructors only instill notions based on their authority, without other foundations.
 If instructors are loved or respected, the mind becomes crammed and wavering.

Conclusion:

 The conduct and education provided by narrowly watching instructors can lead to weakness in
individuals.

Statement 2: Premise:

 The universe is made up of all bodies to be a unified body.

 Necessity (destiny) is made up to be such a cause as it is.

Conclusion:

 There is a harmonious fitness in the universe, and necessity functions as it does.

 Statement 3: Premise:

 If students were environmentally aware, they would object to endangering any animal species.
 The Greenwood white squirrel has become endangered due to the building of the library,
destroying its habitat.
 No Lander students objected.

Conclusion:

 Lander students are not environmentally aware.

Statement 4: Premise:

 Joe has creased earlobes and a depressed sternum.

 These characteristics have been associated with heart attacks.

Conclusion:

 Joe probably will have heart problems in the future.

Statement 5: Premise:

 Humans are meaning-seeking creatures.

 We are thrown into a world devoid of meaning.
 Our task is to invent a meaning to support our lives.
 We deny personal authorship and instead conclude that the meaning was waiting for us.

Conclusion:

 We conclude that the meaning of life was externally determined and waiting for us to discover
it.

It's important to note that these statements may contain subjective opinions and unsupported
claims.

2.State whether argument is deductive – valid or invalid and inductive- strong or weak.
1. Some cats are animals. Some cats are Siamese. Therefore, some animals are Siamese.
2. Professor Smith wore a bright red the twice last week. He rarely wears a tie. So, he will
probably wear a bright red tie next week.
 3. Every Friday night for the past five years Yusuf has taken Sherry to an action movie, and
Yusuf has noticed that Sherry didn't like the movie. So, it is likely that Sherry won't like the next
action movie that they go to.
4. Whenever people go to a wedding, they dress up. Whenever they go to a funeral, they dress
up. Whenever they go to the opera, they dress up. Consequently, when they go to a party, they
should dress up. 5. If Sue wins, then Ed will be happy. If Ed is happy, then George will be happy.
So, if Sue wins, then George will be happy.

ChatGPT
Let's analyze each argument to determine whether it is deductive or inductive
and evaluate its validity/strength:

1. Some cats are animals. Some cats are Siamese. Therefore, some animals are
Siamese.

This argument appears to be deductive. However, it is incomplete as the

conclusion is cut off. Without the complete conclusion, we cannot evaluate its
validity.

2. Professor Smith wore a bright red tie twice last week. He rarely wears a tie. So,
he will probably wear a bright red tie next week.

This argument is inductive. It draws a probable conclusion based on observed

patterns and generalizations. The strength of the argument depends on the
reliability of the observed pattern and the assumption that Professor Smith will
likely continue the pattern. However, since wearing a bright red tie is not
directly linked to his rare tie-wearing habits, the argument may be weak.

3. Every Friday night for the past five years, Yusuf has taken Sherry to an action
movie, and Yusuf has noticed that Sherry didn't like the movie. So, it is likely
that Sherry won't like the next action movie that they go to.

This argument is inductive. It generalizes based on the observed pattern that

Sherry didn't like the past action movies. The conclusion suggests that Sherry
will likely have the same opinion about the next action movie. The strength of
the argument depends on the consistency of Sherry's preferences in the past.
If her dislikes have been consistent, the argument may be strong.
4. Whenever people go to a wedding, they dress up. Whenever they go to a
funeral, they dress up. Whenever they go to the opera, they dress up.
Consequently, when they go to a party, they should dress up.

This argument appears to be inductive. It generalizes based on observed

patterns and assumes that the pattern of dressing up for specific occasions
applies to parties as well. The argument is weak because there is no strong
logical connection or evidence provided to support the assumption that
dressing up at other events implies the same for parties.

5. If Sue wins, then Ed will be happy. If Ed is happy, then George will be happy.
So, if Sue wins, then George will be happy.

This argument is deductive. It follows a valid deductive form known as the

hypothetical syllogism. Since the argument follows a valid pattern, it is
considered valid.

In summary:

1. Incomplete argument. Unable to determine deductive or inductive or evaluate

its validity.
2. Inductive argument. Possibly weak.
3. Inductive argument. Strength depends on the consistency of Sherry's
preferences.
4. Inductive argument. Weak due to lack of strong evidence or logical
connection.
5. Deductive argument. Valid.

Name the fallacy committed by each of the following arguments reconstruct the argument (into
premises and conclusions) to demonstrate fallacies.

1. If the attendance criterion is relaxed, many students will become eligible to

appear for the exam. The attendance criterion is not relaxed, so many students
will not be able to appear for the exam.
2. Most reasonable law-abiding people think that rapists' punishments may be
reduced. Therefore, its ok to grant remission to rapists
 3. The judge should rule against the charge of financial scam committed by Lalit
Modi. He is very popular and has introduced the pioneering concept of T-20 in
the world of cricket.
4. Gautam Adani says HCQ drug is effective in curing Covid-19. Afterall he is the
richest person in India. If he says, it must be effective.
5. The government's reservation policy is a joke. How can we take them seriously
when they abuse it for their political gains?
6. If the banks reduce interest rates, inflation will increase. Inflation has increased,
so banks have reduced the interest rates.
7. As no one has proved that aliens exist, it's reasonable to assume that they don't.
8. Poverty is the obvious cause of gender bias. Ninety per cent of girls leaving
school come from homes whose income is at least 50 per cent below the national
average.

a. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of denying the antecedent (invalid form of
denying the consequent).

Reconstructed argument:

Premise 1: If the attendance criterion is relaxed, many students will become eligible to appear
for the exam.

Premise 2: The attendance criterion is not relaxed. Conclusion: Therefore, many students will
not be able to appear for the exam.

b. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of appealing to popularity.

Reconstructed argument:

Premise 1: Most reasonable law-abiding people think that rapists' punishments may be
reduced.

Conclusion: Therefore, it's okay to grant remission to rapists.

c. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of appealing to popularity.

Reconstructed argument:

Premise 1: The judge should rule against the charge of financial scam committed by Lalit Modi.
Premise 2: He is very popular and has introduced the pioneering concept of T-20 in the world of
cricket.

Conclusion: Therefore, the judge should rule against the charge.

d. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of appealing to authority.

Reconstructed argument:

Premise 1: Gautam Adani says HCQ drug is effective in curing Covid-19. Premise 2: Gautam
Adani is the richest person in India. Conclusion: Therefore, the HCQ drug must be effective.

e. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of ad hominem.

Reconstructed argument:

Premise 1: The government's reservation policy is a joke.

Conclusion: Therefore, we cannot take them seriously when they abuse it for their political
gains.

f. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc (correlation implies
causation).

Reconstructed argument:

Premise 1: If the banks reduce interest rates, inflation will increase.

Premise 2: Inflation has increased.

Conclusion: Therefore, banks have reduced the interest rates.

g. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Reconstructed argument:

Premise 1: No one has proved that aliens exist.

Conclusion: Therefore, it's reasonable to assume that they don't exist.

h. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of oversimplification or causal oversimplification.

 Premise 1: Poverty is the obvious cause of gender bias.

Premise 2: Ninety per cent of girls leaving school come from homes whose income is at least 50
per cent below the national average.

Conclusion: Therefore, poverty is the sole cause of gender bias.

1 Determine for any four of the following passages whether they contain an argument or an
explanation. Give reasons for your answer.
1. Many independent candidates won recent elections, even beating out strong incumbents. It
must be because voters are disappointed with the two-party system.
2. Welcome to the fall of Les Miles. That sentence is all about context-because 1 mean fall as a
season, not as a drop from grace.
3. To make Windows Phone 7 a success, Microsoft has to win over not just phone manufacturers
and phone companies, but software developers. The iPhone and Android are popular in part
because of the tens of thousands of tiny applications, or "apps," made by outside software
developers.
4. Years ago I used to think sometimes of making a lecturing trip through the antipodes and the
borders of the Orient, but always gave up the idea, partly because of the great length of the
journey and partly because my wife could not well manage to go with me.
5. The officer shook his head, perplexed. The handprint on the wall had not been made by the
librarian himself; there hadn't been blood on his hands. Besides, the print did not match his, and
it was a strange print, the whorls of the fingers unusually worn. It would have been easy to
match, except that they'd never recorded one like it.
ChatGPT
Let's analyze each passage to determine whether they contain an argument or an explanation:

1. Passage 1: "Many independent candidates won recent elections, even beating out strong
incumbents. It must be because voters are disappointed with the two-party system."

This passage contains an argument. It presents evidence (the success of independent candidates)
and draws a conclusion (voters are disappointed with the two-party system) based on that
evidence. The statement "It must be because" indicates an inference or conclusion being made.

2. Passage 2: "Welcome to the fall of Les Miles. That sentence is all about context - because I mean
fall as a season, not as a drop from grace."

This passage does not contain an argument or an explanation. It is a statement clarifying the
meaning of the word "fall" in a specific context. It does not present a claim or provide reasons to
support a conclusion.

3. Passage 3: "To make Windows Phone 7 a success, Microsoft has to win over not just phone
manufacturers and phone companies, but software developers. The iPhone and Android are
 popular in part because of the tens of thousands of tiny applications, or 'apps,' made by outside
software developers."

This passage contains an explanation. It provides reasons or factors (the popularity of iPhone and
Android due to third-party applications) to explain why Microsoft needs to win over software
developers to make Windows Phone 7 successful. It does not present a structured argument with
premises and a conclusion.

4. Passage 4: "Years ago I used to think sometimes of making a lecturing trip through the antipodes
and the borders of the Orient, but always gave up the idea, partly because of the great length of
the journey and partly because my wife could not well manage to go with me."

This passage does not contain an argument or an explanation. It is a personal statement

expressing the speaker's thoughts and reasons for giving up the idea of a lecturing trip. It does
not present a claim or provide reasoning to support a conclusion.

5. Passage 5: "The officer shook his head, perplexed. The handprint on the wall had not been made
by the librarian himself; there hadn't been blood on his hands. Besides, the print did not match
his, and it was a strange print, the whorls of the fingers unusually worn. It would have been easy
to match, except that they'd never recorded one like it."

This passage contains an explanation. It provides evidence and reasons to explain why the
handprint on the wall couldn't have been made by the librarian. The information about the
absence of blood, the mismatch with the librarian's print, and the unusual characteristics of the
print all contribute to the explanation of the officer's perplexity. The passage does not present a
structured argument.

In summary, Passage 1 contains an argument, Passage 2 and Passage 4 do not contain arguments
or explanations, and Passage 3 and Passage 5 contain explanations.

1 Name the fallacy committed by each of the following arguments and reconstruct the argument
(into premises and conclusions) to demonstrate the fallacies.
a. Given the evidence that so many students indulge in cheating, there is no point in
invigilating the exams.
b. The judge should rule against the charge of financial scam committed by Lalit
Modi He is very popular and has introduced the pioneering concept of T-20 in the
world of cricket.
c. If the attendance criterion is relaxed, many students will become eligible to
appear for the exam. The attendance criterion is not relaxed, so many students
will not be able to appear for the exam.
d. Ratan Tata is arguably one of the best businessmen in India of all time and he says
that Hobbit is his favourite movies. It must be the best.
e. The government's reservation policy is a joke. How can we take them seriously
when they abuse it for their political gains?
 f..How can anyone claim that the caste system in India be abolished? It has been a
part of our belief and culture for centuries.
g. As no one has proved that angels exist, it's reasonable to assume that they don't.
h. You only have to look at the statistics to see that poverty is the obvious cause of
educational underachievement. Eighty per cent of those who leave school with no
qualifications come from homes whose income is at least 50 per cent below the
national average
ChatGPT
Let's analyze each argument, identify the fallacy committed, and reconstruct the argument into
premises and conclusions to demonstrate the fallacies:

a. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of hasty generalization.

Reconstructed argument: Premise 1: Given the evidence that many students indulge in cheating.
Conclusion: There is no point in invigilating the exams.

b. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of appealing to popularity.

Reconstructed argument: Premise 1: Lalit Modi is very popular and has introduced the
pioneering concept of T-20 in the world of cricket. Conclusion: The judge should rule against the
charge of financial scam committed by Lalit Modi.

c. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of affirming the consequent (invalid form of
affirming the antecedent).

Reconstructed argument: Premise 1: If the attendance criterion is relaxed, many students will
become eligible to appear for the exam. Premise 2: The attendance criterion is not relaxed.
Conclusion: Therefore, many students will not be able to appear for the exam.

d. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of appealing to authority.

Reconstructed argument: Premise 1: Ratan Tata is arguably one of the best businessmen in India
of all time. Premise 2: Ratan Tata says that Hobbit is his favorite movie. Conclusion: Therefore,
Hobbit must be the best movie.

e. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of hasty generalization.

Reconstructed argument: Premise 1: The government's reservation policy is abused for political
gains. Conclusion: Therefore, the government's reservation policy is a joke and should not be
taken seriously.

f. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of appeal to tradition.

Reconstructed argument: Premise 1: The caste system in India has been a part of our belief and
culture for centuries. Conclusion: Therefore, it cannot be claimed that the caste system should be
abolished.

g. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Reconstructed argument: Premise 1: No one has proved that angels exist. Conclusion: Therefore,
it's reasonable to assume that they don't exist.

h. Fallacy: This argument commits the fallacy of oversimplification or causal oversimplification.

Reconstructed argument: Premise 1: You only have to look at the statistics to see that poverty is
the obvious cause of educational underachievement. Premise 2: Eighty per cent of those who
leave school with no qualifications come from homes whose income is at least 50 per cent below
the national average. Conclusion: Therefore, poverty is the sole cause of educational
underachievement.

Please note that the reconstructed arguments demonstrate the structure of the original arguments
and may not necessarily reflect valid or sound reasoning. The focus here is on identifying the
fallacies committed in each case.