............................................................................................................................................................

3
1. .................................................................................................................................................12
1.1 ............................................................................................................................12
1.2 ........................................................................................................16
1.3 ....................................................................................................................................22
1.4 .......................................................................................................................................25
2. .................................................................................................................................................30
2.1 ................................................................................................................................30
2.2 ............................................................................................................................38
2.3 ................................................................................................................................45
2.4 ................................................................................................................................53

3. .................................................................................................................................................62
3.1 ................................................................................................................................62
3.2 ................................................................................................................................68
3.3 ................................................................................................................................74
4. .................................................................................................................................................78
4.1 ................................................................................................................................78
4.2 ............................................................................................................................84

2011

(induction)

4.1 4.2 (fallacy)

rational thinking

Logic
Critical Thinking

reason
reasoning

1 2009 9 2009 10
2012 Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education
HKDSE

()

1.

1.

2. (1)

2. (1)

1.1

3. (2)

3. (2)

1.2

4. (3)

1.3

5. (4)

1.4

4. (1)

6. (1)

2.1

5. (2)

7. (2)

2.2

6. (3)

8. (3)

2.3

7. (4)

2.4

8. (1)

9. (1)

3.1

9. (2)

10. (2)

3.2

10. (3)

A. B. C. D.3

3.3

11. (1)

11. (1)

4.1

12. (2)

12. (2)

4.2

13.

13.

1.1 1.4 2.1 2.4

(categorical syllogism)(validity) 3.1 3.3

()

2007 2
3
2009-04-06 C

(deduction)(categorical logic)(symbolic logic)

80% 20%

2008 11 20

general education liberal studies liberal studies

artes liberales

4
5

2009-03-31
2009-3-31

()

2007 102

viewpoint
)

1112

5 L1 L5 L5*L5**

L2

L2
L5

L58 clear argument viewpoint

argument with exampleclear

argumentargument with example

argument

argument =

viewpoint

evidence

13

Independent Enquiry Study IES

propositionargument

10

argument

ppt
http://www.hkeaa.edu.hk/DocLibrary/HKDSE/Subject_Information/LS_Briefing_Session_KY_Lo-11_Aug_08.pdf
8

10

http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/200909/18/P200909180191.htm
11

97
12

97
13

104

16

1-2

14

200 IES

17

IES IES

15

mind-map

Mindmap

14

16

15

http://www.hkeaa.edu.hk/DocLibrary/HKDSE/Subject_Information/LS_Briefing_Session-SBA2.pdf

80
9

17

90

89-90
10

18

1.

19

1.1

Copi and Cohen Introduction to Logic Moore

and Parker Critical Thinking

1982

Logic is the study of the methods and principles used

to distinguish correct reasoning from incorrect reasoning.(Copi 2009: 4)

(proposition)(argument)

(declarative)(interrogative)(imperative)
(exclamatory)

18

http://www.liberalstudies.tv/ls_skills_main.html

135

19

11

(premise)
(conclusion)
12

X X

(inference)

(claim)I argue I claim

(mind-map)

(reasoning)

(sudoku)

(explanation)

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 3-70.

Q P

Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007, pp.1-76.
Q Q Q P
13

14

1.2

(1)

(truth)(validity)(soundness)

(2)

%&*^)@%)%E@)*&%

dispute

(ambiguity)(disagreement)

15

16

(obviously genuine disputes)

(species)

(genus)

(difference)

(merely verbal disputes)

(ambiguity)(vagueness)

(0.6kg)(0.5kg)

0.6 0.60478982

(apparently verbal disputes that are really

genuine)

(negative euthanasia)

[W]e define

(positive euthanasia)

validity as follows: A deductive argument is valid when, if its premisses are true, its conclusion must

be true.(Copi 2009: 26)

All M is P
(definiens)
(definiendum)
(extension)(intension)

All S is M
All S is P

All P is M
All S is M

(definition by example)

All S is P

(ostensive definition)(pointing)
(gesture)
(semi-ostensive definition)

(1)

17

18

(6)
(2)

(7)
(3)

(4)

(5)
(soundness)

19

20

 M P

1.3

S M

S P

(credibility)

(ambiguity)

(trust)(faith)

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 3-70.

Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007, pp.1-76.

(1)

(claim)

(2)

21

22

80

80

Wikipedia
Encyclopdia Britannica
Wikipedia

(Free University)

Wikipedia

Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,

pp.77-116.

(1)

(2) Wikipedia

23

24

1.4

(rhetoric)

(proposition)

(persuasive writing)

(rhetorical definitions)
A B(ambiguity)

(informative)(expressive)(directive)

(rhetorical analogies)
A BA B B A

(rhetorical explanations)

A B A B A(explanation)
(argument)

(Euphemism)

25

26

(Dysphemism)

(Downplayers)

(Stereotypes)

Stereotypes

(Horse laugh)

(Innuendo)

(Hyperbole)

(Loaded question)
yesno

(Proof Surrogates)

(Weaselers)

X
X

27

28

2.

Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,

2.1

pp.117-144.

(1)

(Categorical Logic)
(Truth-functional Logic)(Categorical

(2)

Proposition)(Categorical
Syllogism)

S P

S (subject): P (predicate):

A
E
I
O

(quality)

(affirmative)

A, I

(negative)

E, O

(quantity)

29

(all)(no)

A, E

(some)

I, O

30

(copula)(subject)(predicate)

AEIO

A S P

E S P
(distribution)

A proposition distributes a term if it refers

I S P
O S P

to all members of the class designated by the term.

AEIO
A S A P
E S E P
I S I P
O S O P

A A S P A S
P

E S P E S P

I S P I S P

(contrary)(sub-contrary)
(contradictory)(subalternation)
(contrary)A E
A:

O S P O S P

E:

31

32

(sub-contrary)I O

I:

S P

I: P S

O: S P

I:
O:

A (conversion by limitation) A I
O

(contradictory)A O E I
(obversion)(P)(complement, non-P)
O:

A:
A: S P

E:

S P

I:

E:

S P

A:

S P

E:

I:

S P

O:

S P

I:

S P

O: S P
(subalternation) A I S P S PE O S
P S P

(contraposition)(S)(non-P)(P)
(non-S)

A:
I:

A: S P

A:

P S

O:

P S*

E:

S P

E:

I:

S P

O:

O: S P

O:

P S

(inference)(conversion)

E E OI

(obversion)(contraposition)

(conversion)(S)(P)

(1)

A: S P

I: P S*

(2)

E:

E: P S

(3)

S P

33

34

SP0) A,E (SP 0, SP 0)

(3)(3)(fallacy

A O E I

of existential assumption)

I O S (class)(member)
I O

O:
A:

A E I O A E
A O

I:
E:

I O

I:

AEIO

O:

S (empty class)

I O

(George Boole, 1815-1864)A E (empty class) A E I O

(pp.206-207)(Boolean square of opposition)

I O A E A E

A:

x(Ux Wx)

E:

x(Ux ~Wx)

(A,E)
(I,O)

I,O (SP0,
35

36

2.2

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 180-223.
Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,
pp.247-286.

(categorical syllogism)

(major premise)(P)(M)

(1) A

(minor premise)(S)(M)
(conclusion)(S)(P)

(2) (1)

(major term, P)
(minor term, S)
(middle term, M)

(figure)

1 : 2 : 3 : 4 :
M-P

P-M

M-P

P-M

S-M

S-M

M-S

M-S

S-P

S-P

S-P

S-P

37

38

A: M-P

A: S-M

A: S-P

A: SP=0 (empty!)

E : SP=0 (empty!)

AAA-1

O : SP0

I : SP0

(A,E,I,O)4x4x4=64
(1,2,3,4)4
64x4=256

(Venn Diagram Method)(Rules Method)

S P

AAA-1

All M is P
AEIO (Venn diagram)

A: M-P

All S is M

A: S-M

All S is P

A: S-P

39

40

(1)

(2)
(3)

AAA-2

All P is M

A: P-M

All S is M

A: S-M

All S is P

A: S-P

(4)
(5)
(6)

(1)
(2)
(3)

41

42

A : S P

E : S P
I:

(1)

S P

O: S P
III-4

(2)

EAO-3

A: P-M
I: S-M
I: S-P
AII-2

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 224-314.
Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,
pp.247-286.

43

44

p q (variables)~p

2.3

(substitution instance)

p~p

(truth functional logic)

(truth table)

If P then Q
not P

~p

not Q

P or Q

not P
Q

(conjunction) pq

pq

(Not):

(And):

(Or):

(Imply):

(If and only if):

(disjunction) p q
p

pq

~p

(negation form)

pq

(conjunctive statement form)

pq

(disjunctive statement form )

pq

(conditional statement form)

p q

(biconditional statement form)

45

46

(implication) p q
p

pq

A GPA 4.0

(If)

(P)(Q)
(Q)(P)

~(p~q)
p

~q

p~q

~(p~q)

QP
(Only if)

(R)(S)
(R)(S)
RS

(equivalence)

(Q if P) P Q (Q only if P)

p q

Q P
(Q if P, and Q only if P)(P Q)(Q P) P Q

pq

(necessary condition)(sufficient
condition)(necessary and sufficient condition)

(necessary condition)
(p q)(q p)

q p
p only if q

pq

qp

(p q)(q p)

47

pq

48

(false)P~ P
(sufficient condition)
q p

p if q
qp

~P

P~ P

PQ

(necessary and sufficient condition)

PQ

q p q p

(p q)(q p)

pq

A GPA4.0
p q

(p.344~)

(material equivalence)
(law of identity)
(truth table)(truth value)
(validity)

(tautology)(contradictory)

P P
P

PP

(contingent)(true)P ~ P
(law of contradiction)
~P

P~P

P P
~P

~(P~P)

49

50

 (law of excluded middle)

P Q

P P

~P

P ~P

P Q

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 315-371.

PQ

Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,

~P

pp.287-332.

pq

(1)

(2)

51

52

2. /

2.4

Modus Tollens (M.T.)

(variables)

pq
~q
~p

5 32 (25=32)

(testing)
(proof)(Rules of inference)
(Modus Ponens, M.P.)

3.
Hypothetical Syllogism (H.S.)
pq
qr
p r

pq
p

4.

Disjunctive Syllogism (D.S.)

(substitution instance)

pvq
~p

PQ

P
Q

5.

(justification) M.P.

Constructive Dilemma (C.D.)

(p q) (r s)
pvr

1. /

qvs

6.

Modus Ponens (M.P.)

Absorption (Abs.)

pq

pq

p (p q)

q
7.
53

54

1. P Q

Simplification (Simp.)
pq

2. Q R

3. P
R

8.

4. Q

1,3, M.P.

Conjunction (Conj.)

5. R

2,4, M.P.

p
q

pq

(Double Negation, D.N.)

9.

p ~~p

Addition (Add.)
p

(tautology)

pvq

p ~~p~~p p

10.
De Morgan's Theorem (De M.)

~(p q) (~p v ~q)

~(p v q) (~p ~q)

11.

Commutation (Com.)
(p v q) (q v p)

(p q) (q p)
PQ
QR

12.

Association (Assoc.)
[p v (q v r)] [(p v q) v r]

[p (q r)] [(p q) r]

13.
55

56

Distribution (Dist.)
[p (q v r)] [(p q) v (p r)]

[p v (q r)] [(p v q) (p v r)]

14.
Double Negation (D.N.)

p ~ ~p
A ~B
15.

~(C ~A)

Transposition (Trans.)

C ~B

(p q) (~q ~p)

16.
Material Implication (Impl.)

1. A ~B

(p q) (~p v q)

2. ~(C ~A)
C ~B

17.
Material Equivalence (Equiv.)
(p q) [(p q) (q p)]
(p q) [(p q) v (~p ~q)]
18.

3. ~C v ~~A

2, De M.

4. C ~~A

3, Impl.

5. C A

4, D.N.

6. C ~B

5,1, H.S.

19 (rules of inference) 9

Exportation (Exp.)

(Elementary valid argument forms) 10 (Logically equivalent expressions) 19

[(p q) r] [p (q r)]

All Some 4
(p.404)

19.
Tautology (Taut.)

1. Universal Instantiation, UI

p (p v p)

(x)(x),

p (p p)

2. Universal Generalization, UG

y, (x)(x)
57

58

(x)(Hx Mx)
3. Existential Instantiation, EI

Hs

(x)(x),

Ms

4. Existential Generalization, EG

, (x)(x)
1. (x)(Hx Mx)
2. Hs

(x)(Hx Mx)
Hs Ms

Ms

A: All H is M (For all X if x is H, then x is M)

UI

3. Hs Ms

1, UI

4. Ms

3,2, M.P.

Hs ~Ms
(x)(Hx ~Mx) UG

E: No H is M (For all X if x is H, then x is not M)

(x)(Hx Mx)

I: Some H is M (For some X x is H and x is M)

Hs Ms

~p

EI

q
Hs ~Ms
(x)(Hx ~Mx) EG

O: Some H is not M (For some X x is H and x is not M)

1. p
2. ~p
q

A, E, I, O

3. p v q

1. Add.

4. q

3,2, D.S.

59

~p q

0 1

0 0

1 1

1 0

60

3.

(inconsistency)p ~p p~p

3.1

~p

9 10 4

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 372-436.

Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,
pp.287-332.

(1)

1. p (qr)
2. p q

1, Simp.

(2)

~Q(~S~T)

P (Q S)

~P

61

62

(valid)(invalid)(strong)(weak)

B A

(terms) A(07xxxxxx)
100 B(04xxxxxx) 1000 B

(analogical argument)
(dissimilar) A X
B X, Y, Z B

a,b,c,d P Q
a,b,c R

(similar) A P, Q, R

d R

B P, Q, R, S, T, U B

(relevant) A
S, T, U B P, Q, R B

(disanalogies) b a (point of difference)

A B

B A

29.6km/L

10km/L
A
30km/L B

20km/L B

63

64

(enumeration)
(instances)

95% 1000
3% 1500

(self-selected samples)(slanted

questions)

(generalization)

X
X 20%
20%

(sample size)
(error margin)(confidence
level)
95%

(%)

10

30

25

22

50

14

100

10

250

500

1000

1500

65

66

3.2

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 482-511.
Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,
pp.333-370.

(cause)(effect)

(causal claim)(causal argument)

(fallacy)

(1)

(2)

(post hoc fallacy)X

Y X Y X Y
X Y

(John Stuart Mill 1806~1873)

(method of agreement)(method of difference)(method of agreement
and difference)(method of residues)(method of concomitant variation)

()
()()
A B C D w x y z
A E F G w t u v
A w

(A)(w)
A B C D w
A E F G w
A w

67

68

A B C x y z

B y C z
A x

A B C D w x y z
B C D x y z
A w

(A)(w)

A B Cx y z

A B C D w

A(+/-)BCx(+/-)y z

B C D w

A x

A w

A x

50%

30%

A B Cx y z
A D Ex t w

A B Cx y z
B Cy z

A x

A x

A x
A x
A x

(general causal argument)

(1) (controlled cause-to-effect experiment)

(2) (non-experimental cause-to-effect study)

(3) (non-experimental effect-to-cause study)

A B Cx y z
B y C z

(experimental group)(control

A x

group)(Cause, C)(Effect, E)(difference, d)

(statistically

A x

69

70

significant).05 Level

(%)

10

40

100

A%

25

27

100

B%

50

19

A-B%

100

13

250

500

1000

1500

13%

100

C%

100

D%

C E 100 ( C) E

C-D%

30% 100 ( C) E 10%

13%

(d)30%-10%=20% 13%
C
E C E

(C)
(C)(E)(d)

500 10%
500 5%5% 6%

(E)
(E)(C)(d)

50 80%
50 50%30% 19%

71

72

3.3

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 512-558.
Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,
pp.371-418.

Science, Natural Science, scientia, Wissenschaft

(~logy)Humanistic science

(scientific method)

(1)

(2)
(J. S. Mill)
(general method of controlled experiment)

(scientific explanation)(argument)
Q P Q(explanation) Q P
Q(relevant)
(general)

(scientific attitude)(tentative)
(provisional)(testability)

(hypothesis)

(verification principle)(falsification principle)(conformability

73

74

principle)

(Uranus)

(verifiability)

(Neptune)

(Galileo)

(falsifiability)

(Kepler)(Newton)

(conformability)

(Ockhams Razor)

A B

(P)(Q)(P)(P)

A B
(competing)
(compatibility with previously well-established hypotheses)
(predictive or explanatory power)(simplicity)

75

76

4.

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 559-587.

4.1

(1)

(2)
2008-09-09
2008-10-06
Life is incomplete if you don't have children.
2009-02-23

B
B

B B

77

78

2009-02-11

2008-07-25

(fallacy)

(fallacy)

office politics show off

A type of argument that may seem to be correct, but that proves, on

msnhi hi sms

examination, not to be so. (p.138)

chum
Don't you have better ways to spend
(formal fallacies)(informal fallacies)

your time?

(informal fallacies)

wonder
email wonder

wonder wonder
wondering skip

(affirming the consequent)

auto-pilot

p q, q, p

better option

(denying the antecedent)

p q, ~p, ~q

? book

confirm
ok

IFC H One

sales

79

80

pq

AAA-2

()

OOO-3

pq
~p
~q

81

82

4.2

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 118-178.
Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,
pp.486-490.

(1)
The top ten fallacies of all time
(2)

Moore and Parker 2007: 486-490

Post hoc fallacy

X Y X Y

X:

Y: A

Argument from popularity

X X

X:

Wishful thinking
(Ostrich fallacy)
X X

X:

83

84

 Attention-span fallacy

X Y

Scare Tactic

X:

X Y X

Y:

X:

Y:

Group Thinking

Argument from outrage

X Y

()Shouting matches

X():

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpz-iKN0QLA

Y():

Hasty conclusion

Straw man fallacy

X Y

a) (anecdotal fallacy)

Y:

A X X

X:

A:

X:

Ad Hominem Argument
b) (irrelevant analogy)

A,B X A Y B Y

A:

B:

X:

Y:

c) (jumping to conclusion) X Y

X:

Y:

(Relevance)(Presumption)
85

86

(Ambiguity)
() 04 02 05:05AM

R1

QCA 9 30
3

R2

R6

R3

R7

R4
A A

P1

R5

P2

87

88


A4
P3

(circular
A5

argument)

P4

P5

R1 (argument from ignorance)

R2 (appeal to inappropriate authority)

R3 (argument ad hominem)

A1

R4 (appeal to emotion)

R5 (appeal to pity)

R6 (appeal to force)

equivocation

R7 (irrelevant conclusion)

A2

P1 (complex question)

P2 (false question)

amphiboly

P3 (begging the question)

P4 (accident)

A3

P5 (converse accident)

(accent)

A1 (equivocation)

89

90

A2 (amphiboly)

A3 (accent)

Copi and Cohen, Introduction to Logic (13th edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2009, pp. 118-178.

A4 (composition)

Moore, B.N. and Parker, R., Critical Thinking (8th edition), New York: McGraw-Hall, 2007,
pp.486-490.

A5 (division)

(1)

(2) (1)

91

92