This argumentis also in valid becauseit’s pos sible fo r the pr emises to be tr ueand th e conclusionfalse. So anyonewho us es th is form of reas onin g—no matter what statem en ts they use in the place of p or q— has no t pr oventhei r poin
a lot of people use this when arguing for their point
The form of an ar gu ment can be repre sent ed in many dif fer entways , but on e of the most eff ec tive is to substit ute lett er s for the st atementscontai ned in the
similar to proofs in geometry
A st rong induc tive arg ument is one that would esta blish its concl usion wit h ahigh degree of probab ility if its pr e
does this mean you should have a deductive argument over an inductive one?
It’s possiblefor the premiseof this argumentto be tru e and the concl usionfalse
this makes sense because even though you are making a reasonable conclusion from observations, its still an assumption you are making which means there is a chance you can be wrong,
Ind ucti
inductive reasoning is making observations then drawing a conclusion
So dedu
deductive reasoning is the process of making a logical conclusion from a general theory so the definition of deductive arguments makes sense
ible.You don’t want to misr epre sent th
as someone making an argument, how can you avoid misinterpretations?
Everybodydoes it. If everyonedoes it, I sho uld be allow ed to do it. So Isho uld be allowedto do it, to
I don't feel like this is a strong enough argument.
good re
what make a good reason?
d ur es. Master ing thes erule s and procedureswi ll not only make yo u a bet te r th inker but also a morepers uasi ve speakerand writ
This is very important when in a pert of a discussion.
The Socratic Method
very similar to scientific method but used for completely different things
you were not explicit enough before when I put the question. What is holiness?
I feel like most people answer this way because they are recting back what they been told without truly analyzing why they answer this way.
Socrates claimed that only those who had considered such questions could lead a good life
Why?
Skeptics in the Western intellectual tradition usually don’t claim that our sense experience is illusory, only that it could be.
Research done on cognition and perception will support the idea that not everyone processes the sense of experience the same way. Depending on the environment where people grow up, they become more susceptible to different things which is how some people fall into imagery illusions and others don't; how some can distinguish more easy shades of a color and others cannot. Do these differences invalidate our dependence on our senses? Can we still trust what we experience?
As long as we did what we thought was right, we could do no wrong.
controversial bc leads to question how the justice system works and if its okay to convict someone if they believed their actions were correct.
Although Skinner believes that our behavior is determined primarily by how we are brought up, or nurtured, other scientists believe that it is deter-mined primarily by our genetic endowment, or nature.
the argument of nature versus nurture has long been argued in the psychology field. Recent research however will support that it is the interaction of the two that makes up who a person is.
Many working in the field of artificial intelligence believe that it’s only a matter of time before we produce a robot that is as intelligent as we are. Because computers evolve much more rapidly than we do, intelligent robots could quickly become much smarter than we. Of such robots, Marvin Minsky, cofounder of MIT’s artificial-intelligence laboratory, has reportedly said, “If we’re lucky, maybe they’ll want to keep us around as pets.”
While these advances are great for society, we must also taken into account the costs of this and the ethics.
‘You’re nothing but a pack of neurons.’”
I understand that but disagree that its that simple.We are not just a pack of neurons. A pack of neurons could be any living thing, what makes humans different?
problem of moral relativism
While some actions are relative to each individual and the belief/moral system, I think there are a couple ones that everyone universally agrees on.
So how can there be evil in a world created by such a being?
For there to be good, there must be bad. How can you know good if you don't know bad?
So how is it possible for a person to change and yet remain the same?
This is a very interesting question because it leads to asking what makes you you. If someone gets hurt and has brain damage are they still the same person? If they don't have memories or have a different personality? Is your idenity solely based on that? What if you change what you look like? In my opinion I think one's mind makes up more of a person than the body, however, one's body can influence who one is.
Whatisaperson?
Are you your mind, body or combination? When does something become a person?
Canthemindsurvivethedeathofthebody?
if one says yes then how do you explain brain death?
If we have not examined our philosophy, not only may the quality of our lives suffer, but so may our freedom
its very important to know where one stands on different topics. With everything going on today, its not okay to be neutral or not know what you opinion is on the topic
While everyone may have a right to an opinion, not every opinion is right.
very true.
The desire to know the truth—the love of wisdom—
is it love or madness to pursue for an unobtainable answers?
theory of knowledge.
is there a limit to our knowledge?
Some would say that that makes the answers unknowable.
Wouldn't say unknowable but up to different answers/interpretations. One cannot say another is wrong because there is no wrong or right with these questions.