| Affirming the consequent | An invalid form of argument: "If A, then B; B; so, A," 64-65, 508
|  | | | | Analogy | A comparison of things that are claimed to be similar in some respect, 70, 175, 323, 423
| | | | | Argument | A claim defended with reasons. More precisely, an argument is a set of statements, one of which (called the conclusion) is claimed or intended to be supported by the others (called the premises), 25, 50; cogent, 82--83, 222--223, 310, 312; complex, 32--33; deductive, 52--67, 83; explanation and, 42--43; inductive, 52--62, 67, 71, 83, 305--350; invalid, 74--78, 83; not a fight, 407--409; simple, 32--33; sound, 78, 83, 222--223, 310; strong, 78, 83, 222, 305, 312; uncogent, 82--83, 312; unsound, 78, 83; valid, 74--78, 83, 222, 276, 286; weak, 79-83, 305, 312
| | | | | Argument based on mathematics | An argument in which the conclusion is claimed to depend largely or entirely on some mathematical calculation or measurement, 66
| | | | | Argument by elimination | An argument that seeks to logically rule out various possibilities until only a single possibility remains, 65--66
| | | | | Argument from analogy | An argument in which the conclusion is claimed to depend on an analogy (i.e., a comparison or similarity) between two or more things, 70-71, 323-333; constructing, 332-333; evaluating, 325-329; in law, 330; in ethics, 330
| | | | | Argument from definition | An argument in which the conclusion is presented as being true by definition, 66--67
| | | | | Categorical syllogism | A three-line argument in which all three statements are categorical statements, 65, 256--257, 269
| | | | | Causal argument | An argument that asserts or denies that something causes, has caused, or will cause something else, 69, 334--340
| | | | | Chain argument | A deductive argument of the form "If A, then B; if B, then C, so, if A, then C," 63
| | | | | Cogent argument | An inductive argument that is strong and has all true premises, 82--83, 310, 312
| | | | | Common pattern test | A test in which characteristic patterns of deductive or inductive reasoning are used to determine whether an argument is deductive or inductive, 56, 58--59
| | | | | Counterexample method of proving invalidity | A method for proving invalidity that consists in constructing a formally identical argument having true premises and an obviously false conclusion, 89--93
| | | | | Deductive argument | An argument in which the conclusion is claimed or intended to follow necessarily from the premises, 52--67, 83; common patterns of, 62--67
| | | | | Denying the antecedent | An invalid form of argument: "If A, then B; not A; so, not B," 64--65
| | | | | Disjunctive syllogism | A three-line deductive argument having a disjunctive statement (i.e., an "either/or" statement) for one or both of its premises, 543 n. 13
| | | | | Generalization | A statement that asserts that all or most things of a certain kind have a certain property or characteristic. Also, in statistics, a statement of the form "A certain percentage of all A's are B's," 67, 172
| | | | | General statement | A statement of the form "All A's are B's" or "Most A's are B's," 543 n. 5. See also Generalization
| | | | | Hypothetical syllogism | A three-line argument in which at least one of the premises is an "if . . . then" statement, 62--65
| | | | | Indicator word test | A test in which indicator words (words such as "therefore," "hence," and "because") are used to determine whether an argument is deductive or inductive, 56-57
| | | | | Inductive argument | An argument in which the conclusion is claimed or intended to follow probably from the premises, 52-62, 67-71, 83, 94, 305; common patterns of, 67-71
| | | | | Inductive generalization | An argument that uses evidence about a limited number of people or things of a certain type to make a claim about a larger group of people or things of that type, 67--68, 71, 306--317; evaluating, 309--312; and opinion polls, 313--317
| | | | | Invalid argument | A deductive argument in which the conclusion does not follow necessarily from the premises, 76--78, 83
| | | | | Modus ponens | A valid argument form: "If A then B; A; therefore, B," 59, 63--65
| | | | | Modus tollens | A valid argument form: "If A then B; not B; therefore, not A," 63--65, 507
| | | | | Particular statement | A statement that refers to a particular person, place, or thing, 543 n. 5
| | | | | Prediction | A statement about what may or will happen in the future, 68
| | | | | Predictive argument | An argument in which a prediction is defended with reasons, 68
| | | | | Principle of charity | A principle of interpretation that requires that unclear passages or arguments be interpreted in the way most favorable the speaker or writer, 41--42, 59-60, 203--204, 206, 291
| | | | | Principle of charity test | A test for determining whether an argument is deductive or inductive. According to the principle of charity test, if it is unclear whether an argument is deductive or inductive, the argument should be interpreted in whatever way is most favorable to the arguer, 56, 59--60
| | | | | Sound argument | A deductive argument that is valid and has all true premises, 78, 83, 95, 310
| | | | | Statistical argument | An argument that argues from premises regarding a percentage of a population to a conclusion about an individual member of that population or some part of that population, 67, 70--71, 317--321
| | | | | Strict necessity test | A test for determining whether an argument is deductive or inductive. According to the strict necessity test, if the conclusion of an argument follows from the premises with strict logical necessity, then the argument should be regarded as deductive, 56--58, 305; exceptions to, 61, 94
| | | | | Strong argument | An inductive argument in which the conclusion follows probably from the premises, 78--83, 95, 305
| | | | | Syllogism | A three-line argument that consists of two premises and a conclusion, 62. More narrowly, a three-line deductive argument, 256
| | | | | Uncogent argument | An inductive argument that is weak or has at least one false premise, or both, 82-83, 310, 312
| | | | | Unsound argument | A deductive argument that is invalid or has at least one false premise, or both, 78, 83, 310, 312
| | | | | Valid argument | A deductive argument in which the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises, 74--78, 83, 276
| | | | | Weak argument | An inductive argument in which the conclusion does not follow probably from the premises, 79, 83, 305, 312
|
|
2002 McGraw-Hill Higher Education