Purchase Solution

# I need to get a DIRECT answers for my exercise logic philosophy.

Not what you're looking for?

I need to answer all this questions as soon as i can so i can prepare for my first mid-term. iam looking to get the answers so i can get more examples to get good grade on my mid-term.

******************************************************

1. Look, Jones is clearly not our man. If Jones committed the crime, then he wouldn't pass a "lie-detector" (i.e. polygraph) test. But, as a matter of fact, he did pass the test.

What is the question at issue?

What is the conclusion of the argument?

What is the Standard Form of the argument?

P1_____________________________________________

P2_____________________________________________

Conclusion_________________________________________

Is the argument valid or invalid? Why?

Why is the argument fallacious? (and it is!)

2. The following argument is valid but fallacious.

If most animal species are changing over time, then the theory of evolution is likely to be correct. And it is likely to be correct because it has been discovered that most animal species are changing over time.

What is the question at issue?

What is the conclusion of the argument?

What is the Standard Form of the argument?

P1_____________________________________________

P2_____________________________________________

Conclusion_________________________________________

Why is the argument valid?

Why is the argument fallacious? (and it is!)

3. Yes, I agree, advertising is often deliberately deceptive. But so what? Business is like poker: Both have their own rules, both are competitive, both involve profit and loss, and both require skill and strategy.
Furthermore, in poker deception is expected and allowed, witness bluffing. And if business is like poker, and poker allows deception, then, clearly Watson, deceptive business advertising should be expected and allowed.

What is the question at issue?

What is the Standard Form of the argument?

P1_____________________________________________

P2_____________________________________________

P3_____________________________________________

Conclusion_________________________________________

Is the argument valid or invalid? Why?

Is the argument deductive or inductive? Why?

Why is the argument fallacious? (and it is!)

4. Are gorillas vegetarians? Many people think so. Yes, they eat mostly
leaves, young stems and juicy fruits; but careful observation of gorillas in the wild has revealed their great delight when finding a snail to eat. If gorillas were vegetarians, they wouldn't relish snails. But they delightfully relish snails. Obviously, then, it is simple deduction, Watson: Gorillas are not vegetarians.

What is the Standard Form of the argument?

Is the argument valid or invalid? Why?

Is the argument deductive or inductive? Why?

What would make this argument reasonable?
(Note: I'm not saying it is un-reasonable)

5. Is the volcano about to explode? Definitely, there is no doubt about it, It's simple deduction. If there is a sudden and high increase in sulfuric acid emIssions, then a volcano is about to explode.
And this one is about to explode because there has been a sudden and high increase in sulfuric acid emissions.

What is the Standard Form of this argument.

Is the argument valid or invalid? Why?

In terms of necessary and sufficient conditions, why is this argument fallacious?

******************************************************

DIRECTIONS: #s 6-9

TRUE or FALSE AND Explain why! AND Give an example
if requested

6. An invalid argument can have a true conclusion. - Give an example!

7. A logically sound argument may be invalid.

8. Arguments with a false premise can be reasonable if the conclusion is true.

9. A strong argument may have all true premises and yet the conclusion might be false every once in a while. - Give an example!

##### Solution Preview

Logic is all about patience and deep thought. Let's begin at the beginning.
<br>
<br>1. The main question is: Is Jones the man who committed the crime?
<br> The conclusion is: Jones is clearly not the man who committed the crime.
<br> To find the standard form of the argument look at this website: http://www.propaganda101.com/LogicAndEpistemology/LogicalFallacies/logical.htm (I can't just give you ALL the answers!!)
<br>
<br> P1: If Jones committed the crime then he would not pass a lie detector test.
<br> P2: Jones pased the test.
<br> Con: Jones is clearly not the man who committed the crime.
<br>
<br>Invalid arguments are those whose formal structure is deficient: the conclusion does not follow from the premises.
<br>Valid arguments are structurally sufficient: the conclusion is logically forced by the premises?
<br>
<br>So, what do you think? Does the conclusion that Jones is not the man follow from the premises - i think it does. I say the argument is valid.
<br>
<br>But, it is fallacious nevertheless. You can check the standard form of the argument webpage to discover which fallacy it committs. It committs more than one (possibly) but I think the ...