Lecture 3

Basic Concepts in Logic and Deductive

Reasoning Part 1
UGED1111 LOGIC 2022/23 SUMMER TERM
DR. ARTHUR CHIN

1
 「可能」的不同意義
1)「他為世上所有人理髮。」

2)「他為世上所有及只有那些不為
自己理髮的人理髮。」

• 可能存在這樣的理髮師嗎？如不，
是什麼意義下的「不可能」？

2
Logical Relations Between Statements

3
 Consistency: 1
• A set of statement(s) is consistent ( 一致 ) =df There exists at least one
logically possible situation in which all its member(s) are true at the same
time.
Consistent Inconsistent
1) [Arthur is a married bachelor.]
1) [Arthur is a bachelor.] 2) [Arthur can run without
2) [Arthur can run faster than the moving any of his bodily part.]
speed of light.] 3) [All vegetables are healthy. All
3) [All students of CU are 2 m tall. healthy things are expensive.
All students of CU wear Some vegetables are cheap.]
glasses.]

4
 Consistency: 2
• Are the following consistency?

1) [Marilyn has never played basketball. But if she were to play basketball
today, she will beat LeBron James in 1-on-1.]

2) [No matter what is going to happen in the future, I will love you forever.]

5
 Negation
• Logical connective of negation ( 否定 ): “It is not the
case that…”

• Two questions in examining the logical relations

between 2 statements: (1) Possible to be both true
at the same time? (2) Possible to be both false at
the same time?
1) John Lee is the best CE of HK ever.
2) It is not the case that John Lee is the best CE of HK
ever.

6
 Contradictories
• Two statements are contradictories ( 互相矛盾句 ) =df it is logically
impossible for (1) both to be true at the same time and (2) both to be false
at the same time.
 “ 這門課很容易。這門課不是很容易。”

• Are these statements contradictories?

(1) I am your friend. (2) I am your enemy.

7
 自相矛盾？
• 《韓非子‧難一》：「楚人有鬻 • 1 和 2 是否構成矛盾句 ?
盾與矛者，譽之曰：『吾盾之堅，
莫之能陷也。』又譽其矛曰：
『吾矛之利，於物無不陷
也。』」
1) 「我的盾不會被任何矛刺穿。」
2) 「我的矛能刺穿任何盾。」

Class Exercise Q1-2 (UReply Q1.9)

8
 Contraries
• Two statements are contraries ( 不同真句 ) =df (1) it is logically impossible
for both to be true at the same time but (2) logically possible for both to be
false at the same time.
• (1) The car is all red. (2) The car is all white.
• (3) All students are clever. (4) Some students are stupid.

9
 Questions
• Possible for both to be true at the same time?
• Possible for both to be false at the same time?

1) John Lee is not a moral saint.

2) John Lee is not a cruel person.

10
 Subcontraries
• Two statements are subcontraries ( 不同假句 ) =df (1) it is logically possible
for both to be true at the same time, but (2) logically impossible for both to
be false at the same time.
(1) This car is not all black. (2) This car is not all white.
(3) John has murdered some people. (4) John has not murdered any Chinese.

11
 Logical Relations Between Statements
Possible to be both T Possible to be both F
X V Contraries
V X Subcontraries
X X Contradictories
V V None of the above

Class Exercise Q3.1-3.3 and Q4

12
Argument Analysis

13
 Logic and Argument Analysis
• Liberal political philosopher John Stuart Mill in his
Autobiography: “My own experience ultimately me to
appreciate…highly…the value of an early practical
familiarity with the school logic…The first intellectual
operation in which I arrived at…was dissecting a bad
argument, and finding in what part the fallacy lay… [This is]
a power which…many otherwise able men altogether lack;
and when they have to answer opponents, only endeavor,
by such arguments as they can command, to support the
opposite conclusion, scarcely even attempting to confute
the reasonings of their antagonists; and therefore, at the
utmost leaving the question, as far as it depends on
argument, a balanced one.”

14
 “Dissecting a bad argument”: 1
• “If one is fully vaccinated against COVID, then one won’t get infected. Peter
is not going to get infected. Therefore I am certain that Peter is fully
vaccinated against COVID.”

15
 “Dissecting a bad argument”: 2
P1: If one is fully vaccinated P2: Peter is not going to get
nging against COVID, then one won’t infected.
REMISES get infected.

Therefore, it must be the case that Peter is fully

vaccinated.

16
 “Dissecting a bad argument”: 3
P1: If one is fully vaccinated P2: Peter is not going to get
against COVID, then one won’t infected.
get infected.

allenging the LOGIC of the INFERENCE

Therefore, it must be the case that Peter is fully

vaccinated.

17
 Validity: 1
• Valid argument ( 對確論證 ) =df if all the premises are true, then its
conclusion must be true as a matter of logical necessity
 “All men are mortal. Putin is a man. Therefore Putin is mortal.”

• If an argument is valid, then

 the premises entail ( 邏輯蘊涵 ) the conclusion, and
 the conclusion is the logical consequence of premises.

Lau (2011): “Validity is [the] most important concept in critical thinking.” (p.75)

18
 Validity: 2
• Valid argument =df it is logically impossible for (i) all its premises to be true
while (ii) conclusion to be false at the same time

• Example
P1: All men are mortal.
P1 + P2 true: Putin is mortal.
P2: Putin is a man.
C: Putin is mortal. C false: Putin is not mortal.

19
 Validity: 3
• Is the following argument valid?

• Example
P1: Arthur’s head has been chopped off by a student.
_________________________________________
C: Arthur is dead and can teach no more.

20
 Invalidity: 1
• Invalid argument =df There exists at least one logically possible
situation in which (i) all premises are true and (ii) conclusion is
false at the same time)
• Example
P1: Most General Education courses are fun.
P2: “Logic” is a GE course.
C: “Logic” is fun.

21
 Invalidity: 2
• Two ways of explaining invalidity: (1) describe a concrete invalidating situation;
(2) attacking the argument’s form (i.e. give another argument with the same
form, but its conclusion is obviously false while the premises are obviously all
true).
• Example: “All politicians are corrupted. All rich people are corrupted. Therefore all
politicians are rich.”
 Method 1: All politicians are corrupted and poor. All rich people are corrupted and
barred from politics.
 Method 2:

Class Exercise Q5

22
a) P1: No humans can fly. e) P1: All students of UGED1111 are CU students.
P2: Arthur is a human. P2: Some CU students wear glasses.
C: Arthur cannot fly. C: Some students of UGED1111 wear glasses.

b) f) P1: All monkeys are mammals.

P2: All humans are mammals.
C: All monkeys are humans.

c) P1: All CU students are tall people. g) P1: All whales have wings.
P2: All tall people are mammals. P2: All creatures that live in water have wings.
C: All CU students are mammals. C: All whales are creatures that live in water.

d) P1: All CU students have wings. h) P1: All cats have long tails.
P2: All winged creatures need oxygen to live. P2: All things that can sing have long tails.
C: All CU students need oxygen to live. C: All cats are things that can sing.

02/28/2024 23
 Clarifying the Concept of Validity
• Validity is about the logical connection between premises and conclusion,
NOT about whether the premises or conclusion are actually true

• Valid argument can have false premises and/or false conclusion

• Invalid argument can have true premises and true conclusion

Class Exercise Q6

24
 Incomplete Argument: 1
• Enthymeme: argument with hidden premise and/or conclusion
 E.g.:“I am not allowed to sell you any alcohol since you are under 18.”
 E.g.: “Advertisement: Bigger hotdogs taste better. The hotdogs we sell are
bigger than others.”
• What is the hidden premise(s)?: What premise(s) the additional of which
would turn an originally invalid enthymeme into a valid argument (without
making it circular)?
 E.g.: “Homosexuality is wrong because it is unnatural.”

2021/1/25 25
 Incomplete Argument: 2
• Identify two hidden premises in the following enthymeme.

“Some people argue that the government should enforce a law prohibiting
the consumption of meat one day every week. I think the law proposed is
seriously unjust. This is because the law will be driving up the unemployment
rate in the meat industry. And any law that drives up the society’s
unemployment rate amounts to an intervention in the labor market.”

26
 Source: azquotes.com

Class Exercise Q7

2021/1/25 27
 Summary
1) Concepts in determining the logical relations between statements: (1)
(in)consistency; (2) contradictories; (3) Contraries; (4) Subcontraries

2) Two strategies for evaluating an argument: (i) truth of premises; (ii) logic of
the inference

3) Concept of validity and how to explain invalidity

28
 Reading
• Primary: Lau (2011): Chapter 9 “Valid and Sound Argument” Ex. 9.1-9.3
(pp.84-85)

• Optional: Hurley (2018): Sections 1.3 and 1.4 in Chapter 1 “Basic Concepts”
(pp.33-52; answers for selected questions on Blackboard)

29