PHIL M01 Midterm PART 1

Socrates' doctrine of recollection (anamnesis)

"The unexamined life is not worth living" "The wise man knows he is not wise"

abusive

An attack directed at a person Their character/them personally

Argument from ignorance

Because we do not know something exists, it must not exist Because something exists, cannot be proven not to exist, therefore it exists

circumstantial

Genetic fallacy Attacking a person's background/race/socioeconomic status/family/where they came from, etc. Assumes where a person comes from can/will undermine their argument

Tu Quogue

Latin for "you too" Accusing a person of being a hypocrite as your main argument

Complex question

Loaded question Circular reasoning applied to a question

Philosophy

Logical thinking Questioning Debate and discussion Thinking deeper about "deeper" topics Foundation of science Literal Led to astronomy

Straw man

Misrepresenting the argument of your opponent as a weaker version of itself so that it's easier to defeat Make them weak to make yourself look stronger

False Cause fallacy

Post Hoc Noncausa pro causa What is not the cause is taken as the cause After x, therefore because of x

Begging the question/circular reasoning

The conclusion is also one of its premises "Petito principii"

False dilemma

Ultimatums either/or no other choices Assuming that only two possibilities are present and forcing a logical choice between those possibilities

Equivocation

Words that have more than one meaning Often slightly different

Mythology

symbolic/stories Morals traditional/comfort/purpose Explanations of natural phenomena or origin/origin stories Transcends reality goes beyond Absolute do not question Way of looking at the world pre-philosophy

Modus Ponens

the rule of logic stating that if a conditional statement ("if p then q ") is accepted, and the antecedent ( p ) holds, then the consequent ( q ) may be inferred. "If it is a car, then it has wheels. It is a car. Therefore, it has wheels."

Modus Tollens

the rule of logic stating that if a conditional statement ("if p then q ") is accepted, and the consequent does not hold ( not-q ), then the negation of the antecedent ( not-p ) can be inferred. "If it is a car, then it has wheels. It does not have wheels. Therefore, it is not a car."

Ad Hominem

three types; abusive, circumstantial, and to Quogue