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
