Logic The science of correct reasoning.

Reasoning The drawing of inferences or

conclusions from known or assumed facts.
When solving a problem, one must
understand the question, gather all
pertinent facts, analyze the problem i.e.
compare with previous problems

A type of logic in which one goes from a

general statement to a specific instance.

The classic example:

All men are mortal. (major premise)
Socrates is a man. (minor premise)
Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (conclusion)

The above is an example of a syllogism.

An argument composed of two statements or

premises (the major and minor premises),
followed by a conclusion.

For any given set of premises, if the conclusion is

guaranteed, the arguments is said to be valid.

If the conclusion is not guaranteed (at least one

instance in which the conclusion does not follow),
the argument is said to be invalid.

1.

Particular negative affirmative categorical

proposition (O)

2.

Particular affirmative categorical

proposition (I)

3.

Universal negative (E)

4.

Universal affirmative (A)

In this types of logic some object of one

class did not exist in other class

Example

In this types of logic some object of one

class exist in other class

Example

In this types of logic all object of one class

not exist in other class

Example
No Africans are white
All whites are European
So, no Africans are European.

In this types of logic all object of one class

exist in other class
Example
All humans are mortal
Osama is a human
Therefore Osama is a mortal

Avoid four terms

Distribute the middle term in at least one
premise
Any term distributed in conclusion must be
distributed in premises
Avoid two negative premises
If either premises is negative conclusion
must be negative

All cars have at least two doors and a Ford

Focus is a car, so the Ford Focus has at least
two doors.
All dolphins are mammals, all mammals have
kidneys; therefore all dolphins have kidneys.
To earn a masters degree, a student must
have 32 credits. Tim has 40 credits, so Tim
will earn a masters degree.
In mathematics, If A = B and B = C, then A =
C.

False cause

Hasty generalization

False dilemma

Slippery slope

Definitional dodge

Against the person

You too

Poisoning the well

A causes B (without real proof that this causal relationship actually

exists).

This causal relationship is often claimed when there is correlation

between A and B (that they vary together) or a relatively distant
causal connection.

Example

It is dark now, which makes it very dangerous.[It is not the dark

that causes danger].

Drinking fresh water will keep you well. [It may contribute, but it is
not the only or sufficient cause].

Money makes people arrogant. [Not all people, and not always just

money]

Ahasty generalizationis afallacyin which

aconclusionis notlogicallyjustified by
sufficient or unbiasedevidence.
Three congressional representatives have
had affairs. Therefore, members of Congree
are adulterers.
An environmental group illegally blocked
loggers and workers at a nuclear plant.
Therefore, environmentalists are radicals
who take the law into their own hands.

A limited number of options (usually two) is

given, while in reality there are more options.
A false dilemma is an illegitimate use of the
"or" operator.
Examples:Either you're for me or against me.
America: love it or leave it.
Either support Meech Lake or Quebec will
separate.
Every person is either wholly good or wholly
evil.

Ininformal logic,slippery slopeis afallacyin which a

course of action is objected to on the grounds that once
taken it will lead to additional actions until some
undesirable consequence results. Also known as
theslippery slope argumentand thedomino fallacy.
Examples
We have to stop the tuition increase! The next thing you
know, they'll be charging $40,000 a semester!"
"The US shouldn't get involved militarily in other countries.
Once the government sends in a few troops, it will then
send in thousands to die."
"You can never give anyone a break. If you do, they'll walk
all over you."

Attacking an oversimplified version of an

opponent's actual position.
Example:
Those who support gun control are wrong;
they believe that no one should has the
right to defend themselves in any situation.

Attacking the source of an argument instead of the

argument itself. This also comes in several varieties:
Abusive: Lynch says that we should spend more state
revenue on education because doing so would result in a
more productive workforce. But lynch is a bleeding-heart,
liberal Yankee from New York -- so you know that his opinion
is worthless.
Circumstantial: Lynch says that we should spend more
state revenue on education. But Lynch is a professor who
wants a better salary -- so you know that his opinion is
worthless.
From Hypocrisy: You've claimed that smoking is bad for
one's health; but you smoke too.

Applying a general rule to a case it was not

designed to cover.

Example:
Killing is bad: therefore, it was wrong
for us to go to war against the Nazi's.

To commit a preemptivead hominemattack

against an opponent. That is, to prime the
audience with adverse information about the
opponent from the start, in an attempt to make
your claim more acceptable, or discount the
credibility of your opponents claim.
Tim: Boss, you heard my side of the story why I
think Bill should be fired and not me. Now, I am
sure Bill is going to come to you with some
pathetic attempt to weasel out of this lie that he
has created.

Inductive Reasoning, involves going from a

series of specific cases to a general
statement. The conclusion in an inductive
argument is never guaranteed.
Example: What is the next number in the
sequence 6, 13, 20, 27,
There is more than one correct answer.

Heres the sequence again 6, 13, 20, 27,

Look at the difference of each term.
13 6 = 7, 20 13 = 7, 27 20 = 7
Thus the next term is 34, because 34 27 =
7.
However what if the sequence represents
the dates. Then the next number could be 3
(31 days in a month).
The next number could be 4 (30 day month)
Or it could be 5 (29 day month Feb. Leap
year)
Or even 6 (28 day month Feb.)

Jennifer leaves for school at 7:00 a.m.

Jennifer is always on time. Jennifer assumes,
then, that she will always be on time if she
leaves at 7:00 a.m.
The cost of goods was $1.00. The cost of
labor to manufacture the time was $.50.
The sales price of the item was $5.00; so,
the item always provides a good profit.
Every windstorm in this area comes from
the north. I can see a big cloud of dust
caused by a windstorm in the distance; so,
a new windstorm is coming from the north.

Bob is showing a big diamond ring to his friend Larry.

Bob has told Larry that he is going to marry Joan. Bob
has bought the diamond ring to give to Joan.
The chair in the living room is red. The chair in the
dining room is red. The chair in the bedrrom is red. All
chairs in the house are red.
Every time you eat peanuts, your throat sweels up
and you can't breath. So, you are allergic to peanuts.
All cats that you have observed purr. Therefore, every
cat must purr.
Two-thirds of the students at this college receive
student aid. Therefore, two-thirds of all college
students receive student aid.

Deduction

Moving from general to

Induction

specific

Moving from specific to

general

It has only one conclusion

Multiple conclusions

It has element of

It has element of

necessity-- Valid or
Invalid

Based on assumptions

Its scope is less than

inductive

probability

Based on facts, figures

and data

Its scope is higher than

deductive

It can be used research approaches

Helps in making valid arguments

Helps in decision making

Making inferences

Discovery and justifications

Enhance logical and critical thinking

INDUCTIVE:

Inductive teaching (also called

discovery teaching or inquiry teaching) is based
on the claim that knowledge is build primarily
from a learners experiences and interactions with
phenomena.
DEDUCTIVE
Deductive teaching (also called direct
instruction) is much less constructively and is
based on the idea that a highly structured
presentation of content creates optimal learning
for students.

Arguments based on laws, rules, or other

widely used principles are best expressed
deductively
Examples:

Since no things describable by science are

uncaused happenings, no mental decisions can be
uncaused happenings, as we know that all mental
decisions are things describable by science.
Jennifer leaves for school at 7:00 a.m. Jennifer is
always on time. Jennifer assumes, then, that she
will always be on time if she leaves at 7:00 a.m.

When it comes to make decision we have

alternatives

There can be multiple choices available

Choosing one best option for making a legit

decision depends on how well you are
logically evaluating each alternative

And this comes through knowing logic and

different kinds of it

Helps in thinking and reasoning

Example
Javeed did not see that owner of the hat was
highly intellectual; he saw that the hat was large,
and he inferred that the owner was highly
intellectual.

He came to conclusion by looking at the

size of the hat.

Discovery follows certain rules and

regulations

And these can be understood by deductive

logic

Justification between right and wrong facts

and figures can easily be established if one
is aware of logic