Philosophy 150: Logic I (Introduction to Logic)
Fall 2005
Some arguments you can tell are bad simply in virtue of their form or structure -- even if you don’t know whether the statements involved are true or false. Consider the following two arguments:
(A) 1. All mammals are humans (B) 1. All humans are mammals
2. My cat is a mammal 2. My cat is a mammal
________________________ ___________________________
3. Therefore, my cat is a human 3. Therefore, my cat is a human
Both of these are bad arguments in the sense that neither gives us any reason to believe the conclusion. But they are bad in different ways. Argument (A) relies on a false premise: "All mammals are human". One might say it has bad content. Argument (B) does not contain any false premises. Its problem is form. In particular, it is invalid: although its premises are true, the conclusion simply doesn't follow from them. Indeed, someone might come to recognize that (B) is a bad argument even though they know nothing about biology. Consider also the following sentences:
(C) Ottawa is the capital of Ontario.
(D) Either Ottawa is the capital of Ontario or Ottawa is not the capital of Ontario.
(E) Quine is both currently interested in mereology and not currently interested in mereology.
Notice that even if you have no idea whether (C) is true or not, you can be certain that (D) is true. And you can be sure that (E) is false even if you have never heard of Quine or ‘mereology’. (D) is said to be true in virtue of its form or logically true; (E) is said to be logically false. Generally speaking we can say that logic is concerned with the question of the strictly formal features of statements and arguments. In the second and third parts of the course we will learn how to translate ordinary arguments into two different symbolic languages, which will allow us to focus our attention strictly on form rather than content. But we begin with a more informal approach: learning to identify common sorts of formally bad arguments or fallacies that commonly occur in everyday life. In addition, we will (I hope) also have occasion to reflect on more broadly philosophical matters, such as the nature of truth and objectivity, and to examine a number of intriguing philosophical paradoxes. Since logic is the foundation of sound reasoning, you will undoubtedly find the study of logic highly valuable in your other inquiries, as well as interesting (and extremely pleasurable) in its own right.
Class meetings: MWF 10: 00 – 10:50 AM in HHH 101.
Instructor: Dr. Geoffrey Gorham
Email: gorhamga; Office: HHH 609; Office Phone: 836-2310
Office Hours: MW 2: 00 -- 3:00; F: 11 AM - Noon
TA: To be determined. Office hours for TA’s will be announced shortly.
Required Text: A Concise Introduction to Logic, Eighth Edition. Patrick Hurley.
On Reserve: (i) Study Guide for a Concise Introduction to Logic; (ii) Instructor’s Manual and Test Bank.
Course Requirements
I. Exams. Three in-class examinations. The first two will be held during our usual class time. The third will be held during the official final exam period on Thursday December 22 from 10 AM – 11: 50 AM.
2. Homework. Ten homework assignments. Assignments will be handed out at the end of class and will be due at the beginning of a subsequent class (typically the very next class). The days on which homework will be assigned will not be announced in advance. Students may pick up assignments only at the end of class. No assignments will be distributed or accepted late, without a valid, written excuse. Assignments are to be done by the student entirely on his/her own.
3. Reading. Students are expected to read all assigned chapter sections in advance of class meetings.
4. Attendance/Absence and Class Participation. Students are expected to attend all class meetings and participate in class discussions and problem solving. In "borderline" cases, class attendance and discussion may be considered, though they will in no case be used to lower a grade. Exams and homework are to be completed by the student entirely on his/her own.
5. Logic Labs. Periodic Friday “logic labs” will be held during regular class periods. These are intended to provide students with an opportunity to ask specific questions, obtain extra help, and practice in groups. Attendance is optional but strongly encouraged.
6. Paradox Fridays. Frequently on Fridays we will take to time examine and discuss a philosophical paradox.
Grading
First Exam: 40 points A = 187 - 200 pts C = 147 - 153 pts
Second Exam: 50 points A- = 180 - 186 pts C- = 140 - 146 pts
Third Exam: 60 points B+ = 174 - 179 pts D+ = 134 - 139 pts
Homework Assignments: 50 points B = 167 - 173 pts D = 127 - 133 pts
____________________________ B- = 160 - 166 pts D- = 120 - 126 pts
Total: 200 points C+ = 154 - 159 pts F = 0 - 119 pts
Baccalaureate Portfolio. This class addresses the following goals for the baccalaureate degree: (i) understanding of a liberal education; (ii) ability to inquire, think, analyze; (iii) understanding of numerical data; (iv) understanding of science and scientific methods. Relevant assignments and exams from this class may be used for your portfolio.
Disabilities. If you have a physical, emotional, or learning disability I am happy to make appropriate accommodations in order to facilitate your success in this class. Please let me know if I can help.
Academic Misconduct. The disciplinary procedures and penalties for academic misconduct are described in the UW-Eau Claire Student Services and Standards Handbook (http://www.uwec.edu/sdd/publications.htm) in the section titled, "Chapter UWS 14-Student Academic Disciplinary Procedures."
Course Schedule (subject to minor revision)
Wednesday, Sep 7: Introduction.
I. Informal Logic
Fri Sep 9: What is an argument? (Read 1.1-1.2)
Mon Sep 12: Deduction and Induction; (Read 1.3)
Wed Sep 14: Validity, Soundness, etc. (Read 1.4)
Fri Sep 16: Paradox Friday and Logic Lab
Mon Sep 19: Fallacies of Relevance (Read 3.1 – 3.2)
Wed Sep 21: Fallacies of Relevance (Read 3.1 – 3.2)
Fri Sep 23: Logic Lab and Paradox Friday
Mon Sep 26: Fallacies of Weak Induction (Read 3.3)
Wed Sep 28: Fallacies of Weak Induction (Read 3.3)
Fri Sep 30: Logic Lab and Paradox Friday
Mon Oct 3: First Exam
II. Propositional Logic
Wed Oct 5: Symbols and translations (Read 6.1)
Fri Oct 7: Symbols and translations (Read 6.1)
Mon Oct 10: Truth Functions (Read 6.2)
Wed Oct 12: Truth Functions (Read 6.2)
Fri Oct 14: Truth-Tables for Propositions (6.3)
Mon, Oct 17: Truth Tables for Arguments (6.4)
Wed, Oct 19: Truth Tables for Arguments (6.4)
Fri Oct 21: Paradox Friday and Logic Lab
Mon Oct 24: Rules of Implication I (Read 7.1)
Wed Oct 26: Rules of Implication II (Read 7.2)
Fri Oct 28: Rules of Implication II (Read 7.2)
Mon Oct 31: Rules of Replacement I (Read 7.3)
Wed Nov 2: Rules of Replacement II (read 7.4)
Fri Nov 4: Rules of Replacement II (Read 7.4)
Mon Nov 7: Conditional Proof (Read 7.5)
Wed Nov 9: Indirect Proof (Read 7.6)
Fri Nov 11: Logic Lab
Mon Nov 14: Second Exam
III. Predicate Logic
Wed Nov 16: Symbols and Translations (8.1)
Fri Nov 18: Symbols and Translations (8.1)
Mon Nov 21: Using the Rules of Inference (8.2)
Wed Nov 23: Using the Rules of Inference (8.2)
Fri Nov 25: No Class – Thanksgiving.
Mon Nov 28: Proof Strategies in Predicate Logic
Wed Nov 30: Proof Strategies in Predicate Logic
Fri Dec 2: Change of Quantifier Rules (8.3)
Mon Dec 5: Conditional and Indirect Proof (8.4)
Wed Dec 7: Conditional and Indirect Proof (8.4)
Fri Dec 9: Logic Lab and Paradox Friday
Mon Dec 12: Proof Strategies with CP and IP
Wed Dec 14: Review and Practice for Final Exam
Thurs Dec 22: Final Exam 10:00 - 11:50 AM