Logic and Philosophy 2.4: Argument Forms: Proving Invalidity

preview_player
Показать описание

  1. onemorebrown
Рекомендации по теме
How to Argue 0:09:43

How to Argue - Philosophical Reasoning: Crash Course Philosophy #2

Logical Arguments - 0:08:44

Logical Arguments - Modus Ponens & Modus Tollens

Logic and Philosophy 0:23:43

Logic and Philosophy 2.2: Identifying Arguments

Logical Reasoning (Sound, 0:06:50

Logical Reasoning (Sound, Valid & Invalid arguments - Deductive, Inductive, Abductive Logic)

The most famous 0:00:32

The most famous argument in Philosophy #philosophy #logic

Valid and Invalid 0:06:27

Valid and Invalid Arguments in Logic using truth tables part 2

Intro to Logic 0:04:47

Intro to Logic Part 4: Arguments vs Explanations

A Very Basic 0:12:43

A Very Basic Introduction to Logic and Syllogistic Logic

Philosophizing Hammerly: A 1:18:23

Philosophizing Hammerly: A Wholistic Guide to Friedrich Nietzsche

How To Argue 0:11:35

How To Argue With Someone Who Doesn't Use Logic

Chapter 1.1: Introduction 0:08:56

Chapter 1.1: Introduction to logic

Symbolic Logic 02, 0:28:50

Symbolic Logic 02, Test Argument Form Validity Or Invalidity By Truth Tables 1

Basic Logic, Propositions 0:05:27

Basic Logic, Propositions and Syllogisms (Aristotle's Logic)

Logical Fallacies 0:03:35

Logical Fallacies

Pro-Choicer Defeated By 0:01:00

Pro-Choicer Defeated By Simple Logic | Kristan Hawkins | UTSA

A common logical 0:00:42

A common logical fallacy #logic #philosophy

Is this argument 0:00:13

Is this argument valid? #logic

Logic: Argument And 0:01:01

Logic: Argument And Argument Form

Introduction to Philosophy 0:08:20

Introduction to Philosophy and Logic

An introduction to 0:16:26

An introduction to Logic | Arguments | Validity l Soundness l Philosophy Simplified

A logical fallacy 0:00:50

A logical fallacy from politics #philosophy #logic

A mind boggling 0:00:42

A mind boggling paradox #logic #philosophy

The most common 0:00:46

The most common online logical fallacy #philosophy #logic

Conditional Statements: if 0:07:09

Conditional Statements: if p then q

Комментарии
Автор

Hey, I have a question. It's about Humes Induction, I know its off topic but I'm hoping to get an answer.
Ive been eating bread for the last 30years, so how do i know my next sandwich will "sustain" me? This is the problem of induction. What if some said, "But in the 21st century we know how the nutrients of bread interact with the human body and the cells".

Would this still be a circular argument? Because we are assuming that these chemical reactions (laws) will always produce the same effect. So would it still be circular?

Thanks, ive subscribed and watched some old videos and they are great.

Lifeistransitory
Автор

'hi', Dr. Brown! What if one were to say: all cats are animals ; all dogs are animals ; therefore, 'all cats are cats', or, 'all dogs are dogs'? that would allow for validity 'as well' as soundness, because 'all cats are cats' and 'all dogs are dogs' do indeed meet the standards and requirements of the 'first law of identity', namely: 'whatever is IS'...in this case, all dogs are dogs 'and' all cats are cats ( all d's are d's ; all c's are c's ). in my opinion, this is a 'necessary' truth, because, if not, then Aristotle's entire theory of categorical, deductive-logic falls completely on it's face, namely: a conclusion can be sound 'only' if both-premises are true 'and' the argument is valid. thank-you, sir! b.t.w., i really enjoy your videos and insight! thanks, again! sincerely, brian filley!

Mrdavidt