MPU3193 Module 2

MPU3193
Philosophy and current issues
© 2023 James ChunHan Loi | This publication contains materials adapted from various source materilals which are reproduced purely for educational purposes only.
Introduction to Logic
 Meaning of Logic
From the Greek “logos”, with a
variety of meanings including word,
thought, idea, argument, account,
reason or principle, discussion,
intellect.
 It is the study of reasoning, or the
study of the principles and criteria
of valid inference and
demonstration.
 It attempts to distinguish good
reasoning from bad reasoning.
 It demands that all activities
corresponding to man’s line of
thinking must be correct.
 But the correctness or
incorrectness of thinking is not the
sole concern of logic but also the
rules and guidelines that go with it.
 Individuals who learn and practice
these principles of logic are more
likely to be able to argue properly
and reason correctly than those
who do not learn it.
 Yet, that does not rule out the
possibility that individuals who
have not studied logic can also
argue reasonably.
 Fundamentally, the aim of logic is
the elaboration of a coherent
system that allows us to investigate,
classify, and evaluate good and bad
forms of reasoning.
How scholars define Logic
“Generally, logic is understood as
the science and art of correct thinking.”
Cruz, 1995
“Logic is an art,
it guides man’s reasoning so he can proceed with order and ease
and without error in the constructive activity of making definitions
of terms, propositions and inferences.”
Gualdo, 2000
“Logic as a speculative science, is concerned primarily with

what is correct reasoning and why it is correct.”
McCall 1971
What is logic?
 Logic is the study of argument
consists of premise and
conclusion.
 Argument consist of a
sequence of premises in which
a conclusion is attempted to
be made from the premise of
the premise.
 An example:
 Premise 1 (P1): All human beings
will die
 Premise 2 (P2): I am human
 Conclusion (C): I will die
Premise 1 Premise 2 Conclusion
(P1) (P2) (C)
Argument
 Arguments are not the same as opinions.
 An argument contains a sequence of statements in which one
of the statements is a conclusion drawn.
 A proposition is an assertion, or a declaration in a statement
whether true or false.
 If all the premises are true, then the conclusions drawn are
true, then the argument is valid.
Logic is not a matter of opinion
 When it comes to evaluating arguments, there are specific
principles and criteria that you should use.
 If you use those principles and criteria, then you are using logic;
if you aren’t, then you are not justified in claiming to use logic
or be logical.
 This is important because sometimes people don’t realise that
what sounds reasonable isn’t necessarily logical.
 This reasoning process – using principles of logic in your
reasoning, thinking and arguments – is critical to the practice of
philosophy.
Types of logical reasoning
Deductive Indictive
logic logic
Abductive Heuristic
logic logic
Deductive logic
 Deductive reasoning concerns what follows
necessarily from given premises that is from
a general premise to a particular one.
 It is a process of reasoning from one or more
statements (premises) to reach a logical
conclusion.
 However, it should be remembered that a false
premise can possibly lead to a false conclusion.
 Having said that, if all premises are true, the
terms are clear, and the rules of deductive
logic are followed, then the conclusion reached
is necessarily true.
Example Formula
P1: All spiders have eight legs. P1: All P is Q.
P2: A tarantula is a spider. P2: S is P.
C: Therefore, tarantulas have eight legs. C: Therefore, S is Q.
 Based on the example above, if we accept premise 1 and

premise 2 as true and valid, then we cannot reject the
conclusion or the result.
 This is because the resulting result is according to the premises
with certainty.
 If every premise is true, and its structure is correct, then the
result is also certainly true and valid.
 In the deductive method of thinking, the
most important thing to emphasize is
adherence to two main conditions:
1. All premises must be true.
2. The structure must be correct.
 However, some deductive arguments are
still considered valid even if the premises
are not true.
 For example, the deductive thinking
below has the correct premise structure,
hence the result produced is valid even if
it is not true.
Example
P1: All cows are blue in colour.
P2: Socrates is a cow.
C: Therefore, Socrates is blue in colour.
 A valid deductive thinking methods must adhere to a correct
premise structure.
 When the premises are not arranged in a valid form, even if the
premise is true, the result or conclusion drawn will still be
erroneous, untrue and invalid.
Wrong Formula Example

P1: All P is Q. P1: All philosophers are wise.
P2: S is P. P2: Abu is a wise person.
C: Therefore, S is Q. C: Therefore, Abu is a philosopher.
Deductive reasoning
Formulate Do/don’t reject

Existing theory Collect data Analyse data
hypothesis hypothesis
Example:
Study all land All land

All biological All land Null
mammal mammal
life depends mammals hypothesis
species to see species
on water to depend on does not ger
if they depend depend on
exist water to exist rejected
on water water
Inductive logic
 Inductive reasoning is the process of
deriving a reliable generalisation
from observations (i.e., from the
particular to the general)
 The premises of an argument are
believed to support the conclusion,
but do not necessarily endure it.
 Basically, inductive is used to
describe reasoning that involves
using specific observations, such as
observed patterns, to make a
general conclusion.
Inductive logic
 Inductive logic is not concerned with
validity or conclusiveness, but with
the soundness of those inferences
for which the evidence is not
conclusive.
An example:
 Ali found Sofiah, Ahmad and few of his
friends from Kelantan enjoy sweet
food. Ali comes to the conclusion that
all Kelantanese enjoy sweet food.
 The conclusion about all Kelantanese
enjoy sweet food is true but at the
same time is probable. There is a
possibility that there are Kelantanese
who do not like sweet food that Ali has
not known.
 In most situations, the inductive
method is only able to give a probable
result because it is impossible for Ali to
know all the people of Kelantan.
Deductive reasoning Inductive reasoning
Stated as facts or general principles. Based on observations of specific cases.

Premises
E.g. It is warm in the summer in Spain. E.g. All crows that Knut have seen are black.
Conclusion is more specific than the Conclusion is more general than

information the premises provide. the information the premises provide.
Conclusion
It is reached directly by applying logical It is reached by generalising
rules to the premises. the premises information.
If the premises are true, If the premises are true,

Validity
the conclusion must be true. the conclusion is probably true.
More difficult to use (mainly in logical
Used often in everyday life (fast and easy).
Usage problems). One needs facts
Evidence is used instead of proved facts.
which are definitely true.
Class Activity
Give two examples of deductive
and inductive arguments each.
Other approaches of logical reasoning
Specific General conclusion

Inductive
observation (maybe true)
General Specific conclusion

Deductive
rule (always true)
Incomplete Best prediction

Abductive
observation (maybe true)
Abductive logic
 Abductive reasoning is to abduce (or
take away) a logical assumption,
explanation, inference, conclusion,
hypothesis , or best guess from an
observation or set of observations.
Abductive logic
 Because the conclusion is merely a
best guess, a conclusion that is
drawn may or may not be true.
 From there a conclusion is made
about what happened before the
existence of the phenomenon which
can explain why the phenomenon
exists or occurs.
 That is, we try to give the best
explanation based on the
phenomenon that exists. In this case
we think by thinking backwards.
Examples of
abductive method
1. The grass is wet (the observation),
therefore, It probably rained last night
(the most likely hypothesis).
2. These are my favourite jeans, and
I can’t fit into them anymore. I must
have gained weight.
3. I went on a first date last night, but
my date kept checking her phone
and didn’t ask me a single question.
I guess she wasn’t interested.
Heuristic logic
 A heuristic is a mental shortcut that
allows people to solve problems and
make judgements quickly and
efficiently.
 These strategies shorten decision-
making time and allow people to
function without constantly stopping
to think about their next course of
action.
Heuristic logic
 Heuristic methods are not a formal
problem-solving method as they do
not have a systematic or orderly rules
that can be applied as in deductive or
inductive logic.
 Heuristic thinking is exploratory. It is
not an evaluation nature as found if
deductive and indictive logic where an
argument is to be accepted as valid or
invalid.
 Although heuristic logic does not have
specific rules, there are guidelines to
implement heuristic thinking.
What is heuristic?
Past results
or experiences
Individuals Lack of time Mental Quick, satisfactory,

or entities complex or data or apply shortcuts short-term, and
Minimal
situation resources relevant details practical
solution/conclusion
problem-solving and
decision-making approach
Types of heuristics
• This involves • In case an • This involves • This is a

making individual is making decision
Availability heuristics
Representative heuristics
Affect heuristics
Satisficing heuristics
decisions trying to choices that making
based on the decide if are influenced strategy
information someone is by emotions wherein the
that is readily trustworthy that an first option
available in they may individual is that fulfils the
one’s mind compare the experiencing criteria is
incident with at the moment selected even
other mental if there are
examples better
alternatives
available
Fallacies (false belief)
 Logical fallacies are flawed, deceptive, or false arguments that
can be proven wrong with reasoning.
Fallacies (false belief)
 Fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine
the logic of your argument.
 Fallacies can be either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points
that are often identified because they lack evidence to support
their claim.
Prejudiced
Factors of Insufficient Deviant
and
data/facts conclusions
pessimistic
fallacy
in life
False Emotional
Force
assumptions stress
Types of fallacies
Formal fallacy Informal fallacy

A flaw in A flaw in
the structure the substance
of the argument of the argument
Formal fallacy Informal fallacy
 A formal fallacy is a defect in  An informal fallacy is
the structure of an argument. a defect in the content
 In other words, the of an argument.
conclusion doesn’t follow  Arguments that have
from the premises. incorrect or irrelevant
premises.
Example:
P1: All cats are animals. Example:
P2: All dogs are animals. P1: I am the senior.
C: Therefore, all cats are dogs. P2: You are the junior.
C: Therefore, you have no
rights to tell me what to do.
Logical fallacies
Discussion
In your opinion,
why it matters to
think logically and
to be able
to identify fallacy
in arguments?
Conclusion
 This topic invites students to
understand the methods to think
correctly through logic.
 The ability to discern a valid
argument from a false one is an
important skill. It is a key aspect of
critical thinking, and it can help you
to avoid falling prey to fake news.
 If you’re taken in by a logical fallacy,
false conclusions might cause you to
make decisions that you may regret.
Discussion
1. How do you practice the
national principles in your
daily life?
2. What is the relationship
between our National
Education Philosophy and
National Principles?

MPU3193 Module 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MPU3193 Module 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MPU3193

Philosophy and current issues

“Logic as a speculative science, is concerned primarily with

 Based on the example above, if we accept premise 1 and

Wrong Formula Example

Formulate Do/don’t reject

Study all land All land

Stated as facts or general principles. Based on observations of specific cases.

Conclusion is more specific than the Conclusion is more general than

If the premises are true, If the premises are true,

Specific General conclusion

General Specific conclusion

Incomplete Best prediction

Individuals Lack of time Mental Quick, satisfactory,

• This involves • In case an • This involves • This is a

Formal fallacy Informal fallacy

You might also like