LOGIC
MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY
- Critical thinking
- Branch of Philosophy
(under Practical Philosophy)
- Study of correct process of thinking
- From Greek “logos” meaning study
WHY STUDY LOGIC? Reasoning is important.
HISTORY OF LOGIC:
1. ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY
★ Aristotle
⤿a Greek philosopher and polymath
during the Classical period in Ancient
Greece. Taught by Plato, he was the
founder of the Lyceum, the
Peripatetic school of philosophy, and
the Aristotelian tradition.
⤿Born: 384 BC, Stagira, Greece
⤿Died: 322 BC, Chalcis, Greece
⤿Regarded as the Father of Logic.
⤿Successful in separating logic from
the totality of philosophy.
⤿His six treatises which were
collectively known as Organon
became the bible for logical study
during the Medieval and up to the
modern times.
⤿His legacy extended all the way to
the writings of his student named
Theophrastus of Lesbos
★ Organon (by Aristotle)
⤿Noun. -an instrument of thought,
especially a means of reasoning or a
system of logic.
⤿from Ancient Greek Ὄργανον,
meaning "instrument, tool, organ"
⤿Influence: Syllogism - a logical
argument that uses deductive
reasoning to arrive at a conclusion
2.
★ St. Thomas Aquinas
⤿Most influential figure in connection
to the development of Logic.
⤿Angelic doctor of the Church.
⤿introduced the logical ideas of
Aristotle to the Christian world.
⤿(c1225-1274) arguably the most
important Catholic theologian in
history. In his major work Summa
Theologica, widely considered as
the highest achievement of medieval
systematic theology, Aquinas
presented his five proofs of God's
existence known as the Quinque
Viae (Latin for "Five Ways").
Considered a new step in doing
Logic in the middle ages.
○ first way - evidence of motion.
➢ “All things move; there is a mover. There
is a prime mover (God).”
○ second way - notion of efficient cause.
○ third way - every existing thing does not
owe its existence to itself.
○ fourth way - there exist gradations in
things.
○ fifth way - behavior of things in the world
implies a Grand Designer/architect, God.
3. MODERN PHILOSOPHY
★ Francis Bacon and John Stuart Mill
⤿Made some negative criticism
regarding the traditional Logic of
Aristotle.
⤿They both claimed that the Logic of
Aristotle is outdated and needed to
be updated.
⤿Bacon introduced inductive
reasoning a.k.a as Scientific method
PEDAGOGICAL NATURE OF LOGIC
Logic as a branch of Philosophy is considered by
many to be the foundation of Philosophy since its
function is to train the thinking mind toward the
formulation of arguments necessary for the study of
their coherence, truthfulness, and validity.
CRITICAL THINKING
- focused on exercising objective, fair, and
skilled judgment and analysis of ideas,
beliefs and arguments. In other words, it
means thinking clearly, logically, and
intelligently.
- all about ASKING QUESTIONS.
- Questions that help you assess both the
meaning and significance of claims and
arguments
- stepping from a situation to see the angles
before making judgments or taking
decisions.
Three-Tier Model of Thinking (E.I.A)
The processes used in critical thinking can be
broken down into three tiers or levels: experience,
interpretation, and analysis.
-Keep in mind that this division is artificial and
merely helps to highlight the critical-thinking
process.
-Although analysis is at the pinnacle of the process,
the three-tier model is also recursive and dynamic,
with analysis returning to experience for
confirmation and interpretation being modified in
light of the analysis of the new information.
-People never have pure experience or engage in
pure analysis.
1. EXPERIENCE, the first level
-firsthand experience as well as information
or empirical facts that we receive from other
sources.
-the foundation of critical thinking and
argumentation. It provides the material for
interpretation and analysis.
-At this level of thinking, we merely
describe our experiences rather than try to
understand them.
2. INTERPRETATION, the second level
-trying to make sense of our experiences.
-includes individual interpretations of
experiences as well as collective and
cultural worldviews.
-Some of our interpretations may be well
informed; others may be based merely on
our opinions or personal feelings and
prejudices.
3. ANALYSIS, the third level
-requires that we raise our level of thinking
and critically examine our interpretations of
an experience, as well as those of others,
refusing to accept either narrow
interpretations of an experience or
interpretations that are too broad.
-often begins by asking a question.
*** The three-tier model of thinking provides a
dynamic model of critical thinking in which analysis
is always returning to experience for confirmation.
*** As critical thinkers, it is not only our reasoning
process that is important but also that our
reasoning is connected to reality.
CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS
★ Interpretative skills. Before we can assess
an argument, we must determine its
precise meaning – what it actually claims.
We need to clarify concepts or statements
in the argument which are vague (unclear)
and ambiguous (multi meaning). Analysis
of language and awareness of its
complexities will be very important here.
★ Verification skills. This refers to how we
determine whether statements are true or
false. It is because the soundness of
arguments depends as well on the truth of
their statements. No one would accept the
claim of an argument whose basis is false
or questionable.
★ Reasoning skills. These skills will enable us
to identify the criteria of a good argument, to
determine whether or not there is a valid
connection between its premise and
conclusion and to detect fallacies that
may be contained in the argument.
***Another important skill involved in critical thinking
which is actually inherent and essential in all the
above-mentioned skills is the skill in asking relevant
questions.
Conclusion Indicators: therefore, thus, hence, so
Premise Indicators: for, since, because
CHARACTERISTICS of a Critical Thinker
VALUE of Critical Thinking
1.) help students do better in school by improving
their higher-order thinking: the active, intelligent
evaluation of ideas and information.
2.) reduce the likelihood of making serious
mistakes in important personal decisions.
3.) Promote democratic processes by enabling the
citizens to make well-informed, deliberate and
reasonable decisions.
4.) Empower the individuals by freeing them from
the unexamined assumptions and prejudices they
have been exposed to.
Critical Thinking and Logic
Critical thinking involves the application of the
methods and principles of logic. Logic provides us
with criteria for constructing good arguments and
critically evaluating the arguments of others.
Critical thinking does not simply mean thinking
deeply, slowly and carefully but such thinking must
be based on certain methods and principles that
lead to fair, objective and reasonable judgment.
Aside from providing us with certain methods and
principles, logic also includes the examination and
analysis of illogical yet deceptive arguments called
fallacies.
COMMON LOGICAL FALLACIES
- Illogical yet deceptive arguments
Fallacies
- arguments that sound convincing but are
essentially flawed; they usually stem from
careless thinking, or more often, from an
attempt to persuade through non-logical
means.
12 TYPES OF FALLACIES
★ Non Sequitur
This term means "it does not follow." A non sequitur
is an illogical statement, one that seems to draw a
conclusion not supported by the premises. All
fallacies are on the most elementary level non
sequiturs, but many can be related to some more
specific logical error.
Education is the only way to combat unemployment
(many educated people are unemployed)
★ Ad Hominem
This evades the task of addressing the question
and instead appeals to the feelings of the audience.
The link between the personal attack and the
matter at issue depends on the identification of the
logical validity of the argument with the moral
integrity of the speaker: a bad person cannot be
right.
"You have no idea what you're talking about; you've
only lived here for six months."
"It's hard to take your claims seriously because you
spend your days playing video games."
★ Appeal to Authority
(argumentum ad verecundiam)
Inappropriate appeals to authority are very popular
in advertising; they depend upon the substitution of
a famous name for a serious argument.
"Expert opinion"
"Citing Albert Einstein as an authority for a
determination on religion when his primary
expertise was in physics."
 ★ False Analogy
A false or over-extended analogy is an assertion
that because a similarity exists in one aspect, it
must also exist in other aspects. This trick uses
misleading comparisons to make the arguer seem
right.
"Cars cause more deaths than firearms do, so if we
are going to ban firearms, we should also ban cars
too."
★ Bandwagon Argument
(argumentum ad populum)
A bandwagon argument appeals to the beliefs or
prejudices of the crowd. Such arguments often
depend on popular generalizations and
associations and are widely used in advertising and
political campaigns.
“It must be a really good car because so many
people have bought one".
"Brand X is the leader in Europe, therefore their
products should be bought".
"Most people believe in life after death, therefore it
must exist".
★ Begging the Question
(petitio principii)
Begging the question, sometimes considered a
synonym for circular reasoning, treats matters
under debate as already established.
"I avoid those meetings; I don't want to be
brainwashed."
★ False Dichotomy
("either...or" fallacy)
This is the fallacious presentation of two
possibilities as the only possibilities. In many cases
there are only two possibilities: Everyone must
either consume nourishment or die; a battery
terminal is either negative or positive. Sometimes a
particular perspective is invoked
Either the government will silence dissenting this
ignores for instance, providing a voices or it will
face anarchy (this ignores providing forum for
debate)
I must pass Calculus, or my life will be ruined (this
bars second chances and new paths)
Citizens must choose between supporting gun
control and supporting murder. (this could conclude
an argument, and so be understood to be specially
qualified, but it does not itself comprise a fair
statement)
★ Hasty Generalization
Hasty generalizations make poor arguments
because they rely upon annon-exhaustive body of
evidence. Generalizations may well be right most of
the time, but they are also wrong some of the time.
Moreover, they are usually not supported by
specific information but by an appeal to common
sense or common experience.
Mary's husband beats her, men always oppress
women. (that this one case is true proves nothing
about all men)
People always offer the cruelest criticism they can.
(what could be the evidence for this?)
My Italian brother-in-law makes superb pasta, all
Italian men are great cooks. (your brother-in-law
may be unique)
.
★ Post hoc, ergo propter hoc
"after this, thus because of this,"
an error created by assuming that sequence
indicates causation. Many things happen in
succession without any direct connection.
Yesterday I had ice cream, and today I have a
terrible stomachache. I'm sure the ice cream
caused this.
★ Red Herring
A red herring (tinapa in Filipino context) is one that
has been salted, dried, and smoked; it has a
powerful and distinctive odor. As Brewer's
Dictionary of Phrase and Fable points out, a red
herring "drawn across a fox's path destroys the
scent and sets the dogs at fault." In argument, a red
herring describes a statement introducing an
unrelated point instead of addressing the question
under debate.
Loading students with hours of homework is
pointless when the world is about to be destroyed
by the greenhouse effect
(the assignment of homework is irrelevant to the
emission of greenhouse gasses)
The evaluation of instructors by their students is a
serious concern, but the quality of air in the
classrooms is a more pressing issue.
(the discussion of the quality of air is relevant to the
argument)
In spite of the good arguments for accepting more
refugees, the debate must be decided on the basis
of maintaining Christmas as a spiritual holiday.
(the shift to new matters is unjustified)

★ Argument from Ignorance

(argumentum ad ignorantiam)
Arguments from ignorance assume that because
something has not been proven false, it is therefore
true. Conversely, such an argument may assume
that because something hasn't been proven true, it
must therefore be false.

The US has not proved that Iraq has weapons of

mass destruction; therefore, Iraq has no such
weapons. (consider the reverse: Iraq has not
disproved that it has weapons of mass destruction;
therefore, it has such weapons)
Since we cannot prove that global warming is not
happening, it must be happening. (the lack of
negative proof is not the same as positive proof)

★ Emotionalism
Your capacity to recognize errors in logic has a
direct bearing on your capacity to write (and think)in
a logical fashion. You should always be on the
lookout for the major errors in logic, and also be
cautious of the feelings or ungrounded opinions
that can corrupt logic.

Paul is unpleasant; he should not be allowed to

attend this workshop. (not only is this illogical, it is a
bad tactic and possibly actionable)
I dislike modern poetry; it clearly is not literature.
(this is usually disguised as a more objective
statement e.g. "modern poetry is unpleasant and
author-centered"; such a feeling should prompt an
argument, not substitute for one)