Differences Between Informal Logic, And Theoretical...

Differences Between Informal Logic, And Theoretical...
Introduction
Philosophy is commonly divide to theoretical and practical.Theoretical philosophy is sometimes
confused with analytic philosophy, but the second is a philosophical movement, embracing certain
ideas and methods but dealing with all philosophical subject matters, while theoretical philosophy is
a way of sorting philosophical questions into two different categories in the context of a
curriculum.The topics included in theoretical philosophy are metaphysics/ontology, philosophy of
language, epistemology, philosophy of mind, and logic.
Through studies in theoretical philosophy, it provides an introduction to human reasoning and the
knowledge relating to it, and its different fields support each other. The studies will gain systematic
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Natural language here means a language that is spoken, written or signed by humans for general–
purpose communication, as distinguished from formal languages (such as computer–programming
languages) or constructed languages (such as Esperanto).
It focuses on the reasoning and argument one finds in personal exchange, advertising, political
debate, legal argument, and the social commentary that characterizes newspapers, television, the
Internet and other forms of mass media
Symbolic Logic
Symbolic Logic is the study of symbolic abstractions that capture the formal features of logical
inference. It explains and deals with the relations of symbols to each other, often using complex
mathematical calculus, in an attempt to solve difficult problems traditional formal logic is not able
to address.Symbolic logic is often divided into two sub–branches:
Predicate Logic
Predicate Logic allows sentences to be analysed into subject and argument in several different ways.
Predicate Logic is also able to give an account of quantifiers general enough to express all
arguments occurring in natural language, thus allowing the solution of the problem of multiple
generality that had perplexed medieval
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Importance Of Leach Protocol
3.4.1 .LEACH Protocol
Low Energy adjustive clump Hierarchy(LEACH) protocol [2],[ 3] is class–conscious protocols
during which cluster heads are at random elective . The operation in LEACH consists of the set–up
part and steady state part. The set–up state part contains of cluster heads (CHs) choice and cluster
formation.The steady state part contains of sensing and transmission of the perceived data to the
bottom station &(BS) through CHs. In each spherical, at the beginning the set–up part, every
sensing element node generates a random range between zero and one to choose whether or not it
will become a CH or not for the present spherical. If the quantity generated by sensing element node
is a smaller amount than the edge price ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
3.4.3. CHEF Protocol
The cluster head election mechanism victimization mathematical logic (CHEF) protocol [9] uses a
mathematical logic approach to prolong the network lifespan of WSNs. It's the same as the Gupta
fuzzy protocol [8] however it doesn't want the bottom station to gather info from all sensing element
nodes. The operation in cook protocol is part into rounds, in each circular, each node picks an
irregular range in the vicinity of zero and one. On the off chance that the arbitrary range is a littler
sum than the predefined limit, at that point that node turns into a tentative CH.
There are two fuzzy parameters that are employed in CH selection: residual energy of every sensing
element node and native distance that is that the total of distances that sensing element node has
with alternative sensing element nodes in radius r. Tentative CHs calculate their probabilities price
to be associate degree actual CH victimization these FIS. If the possibility price of a tentative CH is
bigger than the opposite tentative CHs' probabilities price in radius r, then that tentative CH
becomes CH for current spherical. Then, it sends a CH advert message to the nodes in its proximity.
The sensing element nodes that aren't elite as CH be a part of the highest CH, too. Therefore, it's
potential that CHs aren't well distributed within the space. Consequently, some sensing element

Francis Bacon and Rene Descartes
| Connections and Contrasts of Francis Bacon and Rene Descartes | | | |
The Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One's Reason and of Seeking Truth in the
Sciences is one of the most influential works in the history of modern philosophy, and important to
the evolution of natural sciences. In this work, Descartes tackles the problem of skepticism.
Descartes modified it to account for a truth he found to be incontrovertible. Descartes started his line
of reasoning by doubting everything, so as to assess the world from a fresh perspective, clear of any
preconceived notions. Whereas Francis Bacon's Scientific Method wanted to replace the deductive
reasoning by inductive reasoning. The important concept in this reformed ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
It is still practiced in some universities and will be practiced up until the 18th century at least. Three
fundamental changes have occurred during the Renaissance; Aristotle portrayed the understanding
of the universe, Galen described the importance of medicine and to understand astronomy Ptolemy
described it.
In 200 years there has been a revolutionary change, Rene Descartes and Isaac Newton have replaced
Ptolemy in astronomy. Galileo has replaced Aristotle in physics. Harvey has replaced Galen in
medicine. The three ancient authorities have been over thrown.
In Rene Descartes' Discourse on Method he expresses his disappointment with traditional
philosophy and with the limitations of theology; only logic, geometry and algebra hold his respect,
because of the utter certainty which they can offer us. Unfortunately, because they depend on
hypotheses, they cannot tell us what is real, i.e. what the world is really like. Therefore Descartes
suggests a method of thought combining the consistency of mathematics but based on natural truths
about what is real, basic knowledge which could not be wrong (like the axioms of geometry). He
calls into question everything that he thinks he has learned through his senses but rests his entire
system on the one truth that he cannot doubt, namely, the reality of his own mind and the radical
difference between the mental and the physical aspects of the world.
What is crucial to Descartes is

Heidegger And The Logic Of Categorical Syllogisms
Heidegger and the Logic of Categorical Syllogisms
According to traditional syllogistic logic, which has its roots in Aristotle, there are four types of
propositions: the A proposition ("All S are P"), the E proposition ("No S are P"), the I proposition
("Some S are P"), and the O proposition ("Some S are not P"). These propositional types represent
all of the possible combinations of the dichotomies of affirmative/negative and universal/particular.
Each makes a claim that a certain essent (the particular I and O propositions) or an entire class of
essents (the universal A and E propositions), the subject or subject–class, relates in some way
(belongs or does not belong) to a class of essents designated by the predicate of the ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
For Heidegger, the meaning of a word can never be completely divorced from its etymology;
Steiner, in his work on Heidegger, quotes and then translates Heidegger, saying, "`Das Wort
"Philosophie" spricht jetzt griechisch.' This means, literally, that the word itself, if we hear it rightly,
speaks Greek." (Steiner 22) Steiner later summarizes Heidegger's attempt to find an explanation for
Being [Sein] by tracing the etymological roots of the German word. Heidegger, according to Steiner,
finds three roots for different forms of the German verb Sein. The German ist comes from the Indo–
European es, and is translated by Heidegger as "life itself" and "the integral." The German bin and
bist derive from the Indo–European bheu, which is translated by Heidegger as "that which declares
itself as a phenomenon." Finally, the German Wesen is derived from the Sanskrit vasami, which is
translated roughly as "to belong to and in." (Steiner 46)
Does this etymological study bear any relationship to formal logic, or have we wandered far afield?
As it turns out, this examination has important bearings on the theory and evaluation of categorical
syllogisms. Various forms of the English verb "to be" have differing etymologies, as well. The
English "is" has the same etymological root as the German ist, which means that it also (at least for
Heidegger) carries the meanings of "life itself" and "the integral." The

Jack Whitehead 's Living Educational Theory Approach
Jack whitehead's living educational theory approach
Jack Whitehead has been dedicated to an action research approach, "living educational theory", for
the past 30 years. Whitehead believes that education is a value–laden activity and refers to values as
these qualities, which provide meaning and purpose to our personal and professional lives. He
proposes that in asking questions such as "how do I improve what I am doing?" (Whitehead, 1989,
2005), practitioners could create their own theories by communicating their educational values in
their practice. He doesn't see the educational theory the educational theory as established by the
disciplines of sociology, psychology, philosophy, and history of education. Instead, Whitehead
believes that the purpose of the educational research is essentially concerned with the creation and
testing of educational theories: "Because I see educational theory as an account of the educational
influence of educational and social formations that include learning to live values more fully, I
attach great importance to those values that appear to carry hope for the future of humanity"
(Whitehead, 2004, p.2). In the process of developing a living educational approach, Whitehead
offered the following five ideas:
a) The individual should include 'I' as a living contradiction in educational enquiries such as "How
do I improve my practice?"
b) The individual should develop systematic types of action enquiry including "I" as a living
contradiction.
c)

Induction Vs Inductive Reasoning
The problem with induction lies within its logical validity. In inductive reasoning, we make
seemingly justified assumptions about future events based on past observations. The premises of our
claim are assumed to be true; however, they do not guarantee the truth of the conclusion (135)
Instead, induction uses the observable evidence as strength to infer the probability of the new claim
being true. Inductive reasoning is therefore, logically invalid. These repeated observations, no
matter how prevalent, fail to ensure that the conclusion is true. They merely states that the truth is
probable. A valid, logical argument requires that if the premises are true, then the conclusion must
be true, as well.
Invalid structures of reasoning state that, even if the premises were true, the conclusion could have
been either true or false: which is the case with induction. By not ensuring the truth ... Show more
(161) Popper goes on to insist that induction cannot even be attempted to justify, due to its core
premise being completely invalid, and therefore unjustifiable by default. Popper believes that
induction is in no way factual or a necessary thought process. He explains that the entire idea of
induction is an illusion, one that we are mistaking for the actual practice of trial and error (161)
Particularly regarding scientific knowledge, and the notion that knowledge requires a validity that is
established by repeated empirical testing. (162) Popper denies the idea that scientific knowledge is
induction, and instead explains knowledge in terms of hypotheticals, and tests for falsifiability. (162)
Popper states that while these hypotheticals, or theories, cannot be supported, they can be rigorously
tested to show the possibility of being proven false. The ability to refute something logically, allows
for a counter–instance that ensures a logical opposite.

Is Google Making Us Stupid?
American writer, Nicholas G. Carr, in The Atlantic July/ August 2008 Issue titled "Is Google
Making Us Stupid?" argues that the amount of time we spend online, especially google, has caused
us to lose our minds by "tinkering" with our brains, "reprograming our memory," and changing the
way in which we process information. Carr's purpose is to contribute to the idea that "Google" along
with other online tools, is programing us to be less attentive and to the inhibition of our critical
thinking skills. Guided by personal experiences, subjectivity, presumptions, Carr concludes that our
reliance on google and other online apparatuses has caused us to become "machinelike," claiming
that the understanding we have of the world and is "mediated" by computers, flattening our
intelligence and converting it into artificial intelligence with no value. Carr's theory is un–logical
because it is based on presumptions that overgeneralize the role that online tools like google play on
our lives, based on the experiences and opinions of a few. By ignoring the complexities of these
tools and the numerous features they have to offer which help enable us to expand our way of
thinking and analyzing information, Carr incorrectly assumes that because the amount of
information we are gathering and attaining from online apparatuses like google, that we are
becoming hollow computer like entities with little to no intelligence. Carr's use of personal
anecdotes reveals that his arguments do not have

Famous Thinkers Essay Dr. King and Bertrand Russell
Famous Thinkers
PHL/458
March 19, 2012
Creative ideas are the foundation of the creative process (Goodman & Fritchie, 2011). To
change the way a person thinks about an issue, or to find a solution to the problem is what many of
the ideas revolve around. The level of greatness that each thinker is famous for is acquired
throughout their life. There are a few things that all famous thinkers have similarities in that allow
them to hold the position a "famous thinker." Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (January 15, 1929–April 3,
1929) and Bertrand Russell (May 18, 1872–February 2, 1970) are two famous thinkers that are
discussed in this paper. Each of these men changed the way people viewed the issues of the day
through the creative ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This meant appealing to the principle of democracy and making the political system accountable.
Mr. Russell's problem he wanted to solve is the use of a logical analytical approach to determine the
truth about common claims based on inference. This implies that every truth or claim should be the
foundation of the logical constructions versus inferred entities.
In order to offset the immoral acts of racism and segregation Dr. King's resolution to the problem
was advocating civil disobedience among African Americans. His philosophy maintained that it is
the responsibility of each individual to disobey unjust laws (Ware, 2009). He had faith that
integration was the solution to gaining equality, and he upheld a non–violent policy to achieve his
goal. His non–violent policy was based on the belief that the battle against segregation should be
fought in a courtroom instead of the street (Ware, 2009).
Introducing a distinction between two unlike styles of knowledge of truth was Russell's solution to
his problem. Being direct, infallible, and certain is the first truth style and the second is open to
error, indirect, and uncertain. He gave a good explanation for his position by proving that it is
essential that indirect knowledge stand up to more fundamental or direct knowledge. Basically
stating that theory alone does not show facts and you must have provable facts or direct knowledge.
Dr. King's

God Is Omnipotent And Can Not Make Evil Good
1. "If God is omnipotent, then God will be able to make evil good." Do you agree with this
statement? Give reasons for your answer.
My opinion to this statement does not come immediately. For this reason I plan to briefly investigate
the arguments for four main sub–premises that either support or reject the statement "If God is
omnipotent, then God will be able to make evil good". These premise's are:
(A) God is not omnipotent and cannot make evil good
(B) God is omnipotent, but cannot make evil good
(i) God is omnipotent and chooses not to make evil good
(C) God is omnipotent and can make evil good.
Arguments that support Premise (i) deny statement A of any truth. If reasoning behind statement (i)
provide sufficient evidence to support premise (i) then I will be disagree with statement A.
Arguments for Premise (ii and iii) ascribe partial truth to statement A but distinguish between God's
ability to possess the potential to make evil good v.s. God possessing this ability and wanting to
make evil good. This distinction supports premise A in similar ways for both premise (ii and iii)
raise a paradoxical puzzle into what disposition God takes as one who is supposedly omnipotent,
omnibenevolent and omnipresent.
Reasoning for premise (iv) defends theism and the traditional form God is ascribed to have.
The reason I have separated Statement Z into four sub–premises is because how these four sub–
premises are defended and countered works to serve the validity of

Categorical Proposition, Categorical, And Categorical...
Categorical Proposition
A categorical proposition, or categorical statement, is a proposition that declares or denies that all or
particular of the members of one type (the subject term) are comprised in another (the establish
term). The study of opinions consuming categorical statements (i.e., syllogisms) forms a significant
branch of deductive reasoning that initiated with the Ancient Greeks. The Ancient Greeks such as
Aristotle recognized four primary distinct kinds of Categorical Proposition and provided them
standard forms (now regularly termed A, E, I, and O), formerly deduced mathematically by John
Venn and George Boole in the nineteenth era.
What do affirmative propositions have in common?
Affirmative propositions say All S is P. It is general because it talks about each associate of S. It is
affirmative because it says that each member of S is involved in P. A true sample of a universal
affirmative proposition is "Entirely dogs are animals." We curtail this proposition and cry it the "A"
proposition (Agresti, 2012).
All ministers are fibbers.
All teenagers are worldly.
All guys have what it takes to end up a productive sales representative
All mutts go to paradise.
The widespread affirmative as indicated by Aristotle is not two–way. Reflect, for the specimen, case
1 overhead. It doesn't imply that altogether fibbers are ministers. In case 2, we are not expressing
that every single common thing is teenagers. (This "inverse" of the one of a kind
All S is

The Tragic Language In Vonnegut
Through the use of humour and chaotic chronological patterns that subvert traditional literary
boundaries and contrast the tragic elements of the novel, Vonnegut makes a point about the
irrationality and absurdity of war. Any attempt to search for meaning or reason in war is thus
rendered futile for there is none.
When the narrative situation itself appears to demand the reader's strict attention, Vonnegut's use of
humorous language diverts our attention to the novel's language instead. His use of bizarre, funny–
sounding words that are incongruous with the seriousness of the situations they describe such as
"flibbertigibbet" (29) during Billy's confrontation with his daughter and describing Billy's rescuers
(for the plane crash) as "golliwogs" ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Chaos is introduced in chapter one where the narrator acknowledges the "jumbled and jangled" (19)
nature of the book. By anticipating the novel's end–"Poo–tee–weet" (22)–even before the story truly
begins, Vonnegut collapses the distinction between 'end' and 'beginning' that govern the notion of
'order'. Order has failed from the start and any subsequent attempts to search for order is thus
doomed to fail. However, despite acknowledging the illogicality of war and the futility of seeking
any meaning, the structure of the novel is such that the reader is still continually reminded of the
massacre that took place in Dresden. By mentioning it in the opening paragraph of the book and
constantly reminding the readers of it throughout the novel, Vonnegut forces the reader to regard the
atrocities of the war as a mental 'present', instead of 'past'. This technique reinforces Vonnegut's
message about the horrors and senselessness of war and also makes the point that war, despite being
irrational, is not to be

Rhetoric and Argument Essays
ENG122: Composition II An Introduction to Argument English 122: Composition II An Introduction
to Argument Argument and Rhetoric An argument can take many forms. It is, at its root, a method
for communicating a singular position with evidence, logic, and persuasion. There are essential
elements to all valid arguments, though they may take different forms. 1. Claim 2. Evidence 3.
Counterargument 4. Rebuttal A successful argument depends upon the delicate balance between
these elements. Imagine a teeter–totter at the playground. The claim is the basis of the argument,
much like the base of the teeter–totter. A big opposing viewpoint, called the counterargument, is
constantly pushing down on one side or the other. Balance can only be ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Section One: Introduction and Thesis–Your introduction should describe the rhetorical situation and
give a clear forecast of the material you will cover in your essay. Your thesis statement should make
a clear, limited, descriptive assertion and explain why your stance matters. Example: Failure to pass
the recent gun law is a bad move for public safety because inexperienced, mentally ill, and unethical
people will continue to have access to firearms. Section Two: Present the position that you most
agree with. Then, give ample evidence to support why you hold this view. (Do not use first–person.
Use third–person narrative). Section Three: Present the position that you most disagree with. Then,
validate the perspective with a circumstance or situation in which that viewpoint could or might be
correct. Section Four: While remaining non–offensive in language and style, provide a rebuttal of
the opposition's stance by pointing out its fallacies or lack of logos and ethos. Section Five:
Conclusion–Provide a sound but brief explanation of your argument and further direction for your
reader. Page |2 ENG122: Composition II An Introduction to Argument Consensual (Rogerian)
Argument The consensual or Rogerian method is based on the

Analysis Of De Sade 's ' The Misfortunes Of Virtue '
Whether or not you accede with the themes in Marquis De Sade's "Misfortunes of Virtue", there is
no doubt his works are some of the most inciting to have ever been constructed. Although Marquis
debates several beliefs in his works, he focuses on one in "The Misfortunes of Virtue" that seems
shaky. The theory of Vice versus Virtue in the words of De Sade has no logical aspect to it, at least
to a "down to earth human being". De Sade once said," In order to know virtue, we must first
acquaint ourselves with vice." De Sade's conception of vice and virtue is nowhere near what we
perceive it to be. Though, through the utilization of multiple characters, his neutral stance and
erroneous logic, we as readers can sift through the differences and visually perceive the authentic
meaning of vice and virtue by using common day human logic and experiences to construct a more
up to date version of De Sade's "Vice and Virtue". Throughout De Sade's "Misfortunes of Virtue" his
writing is meant to have a neutral stance and come off in a way that De Sade lives vicariously
through the characters in order to display his beliefs. With his characters, De Sade argues the theory
of Vice versus Virtue and attempts to make the example that there simply is no difference between
the two. De Sade believes "There is only human kind's selfish goal of self–preservation and seeking
pleasure". According to Webster's dictionary, virtue is defined as: the moral excellence of a person.
A morally excellent

Rhetorical Analysis Of Agility Key In Future Workplaces
Creating a stand–out literary piece as a writer is challenging even to brilliant writers. Many minute
details affect literary pieces, but it is imperative that the author utilize rhetorical devices to make
their statements meaningful and persuasive. An article titled "Agility Key in Future Workplaces,
with Robot Bosses" by Rex W. Huppke employs rhetorical devices effectively to prove points. The
article focuses on future trends in business, and the type of future worker companies are going to be
looking to hire. Huppke explains that the future will involve agile workers who, instead of working
at companies for extended periods of time, will be freelancers that are hired for short periods of time
to complete projects. In the article by Rex Huppke ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Huppke describes an email conversation with Professor Thomas Chamorro–Premuzic of University
College London. The professor exclaims that "'First, most people switch, from traditional
employment to self–employment to avoid having a boss, yet that doesn't mean they are able to
manage themselves'" (Huppke 3). The professor further explains how "'AI bosses will always be
much cheaper than having a human boss'" (Huppke 3). This conversation with the professor views
Huppke utilizing artistic proofs that appeal to the readers reasoning and common sense. By
providing a rationale for this trend, such as lower financial costs for businesses, Huppke is
effectively able to display the logic behind this trend and satisfy questions skeptical readers have.
Overall, Huppke was able to illustrate sound reasoning for why AI are becoming a part of the

An Alternative Form Of Implication
Implication is known to be a conditional statement that can be read as, "for P, it must be the case if
and only if Q" Implication, within the sense of classical logic, we can derive the statement q from p,
or namely p implies q. And as such, implication can be seen in classical logic within the format of
antecedent,horseshoe,consequent or antecedent,arrow,consequent (P ⊃ Q (P –> Q). I will delve into
the following topics in regards to whether it is necessary for an alternative form of implication,
namely strict implication. Such as, the properties of strict implication and its uses within modal
logic, other logics and how they interact, and attempt of a resolution for strict implication as a
whole,whether it is worth the transition to strict implication regardless of its problems. The
properties of strict implication and its uses within modal logic. Strict conditionals were introduced
by Lewis as an alternative to the traditional sense of implication. He used A fishbook B to represent
Box (A ⊃ B), reading as it is necessary that if A then B. Personally, I do not like this rule, as
although we have A, saying that it implies B to be axiomatic means that there is never a situation
that breaks this. But, given general knowledge this axiom may not apply to all worlds. Or in a case
where A has no relevance or correlation to B then we cannot get the necessary truth
Furthermore, in strict implication there is an issue with the paradoxes, the example looked at by
Graham Priest is:

The Process Of Deduction Logic
In social research, traditional and non–traditional methods are used to explore and examine research
queries and relate methods of data collection and observation. One conventionally accepted method
is through deductive logic. Deductive logic is research that begins with a theory and arrives at a
specific expectation through a series of scientific steps. Both explanatory and exploratory techniques
can be used in deductive. In contrast, inductive methods, in which researchers examine specific data
sets and detect general patterns, are considered non–traditional. In inductive logic, "the
identification of empirical patterns result in a generalization about some social process" (Schutt,
2012, p. 45).
The process of deduction logic begins with statements, also known as 'premises ', that are assumed
to be true. A determination is made regarding additional factors that must be true if the premises are
true. A special logical structure, known as modus ponens, is a rule asserting that a "hypothetical
proposition according to which if the antecedent be affirmed, the consequent is affirmed" (Merriam–
Webster, 2015). The form of any argument having the structure of modus ponens is as follows:
Given P, if P then Q, so, Q. Using this structure, any argument is stated as the major premise, the
minor premise, and the conclusion. In this way, the statements are evaluated in terms of validity and
soundness.
The strength of deductive reasoning is its consideration of validity and

Postmodernism And Modernism
Intro:
"I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are meaningless, a chasing after
the wind." Meaningless is what our postmodern world has become. As a consequence of excessive
political correctness and the removal of certainty and discernment, postmodernism has caused the
deterioration of the western world and its values. The absolutes of pre–modernism and the
traditional logic of modernism are tossed aside for postmodernism's relative truth and feelings based
logic.
Paragraph one, reason one:
"You do you" says postmodernist. "There is no absolute truth, truth is relative or subjective and is
different for everyone. " Postmodernism seeks to remove all absolutes so that the only absolute that
there is: that there are no absolutes. There is no definition of postmodernism as any set definition of
it, would be an absolute. When there is no certainty, no absolute truth, why do we continue? Why do
we continue to live and hold onto any ideas or morality? If truth is subjective we have no meaning
and no purpose. You may believe your meaning is to have as much fun as you can, make millions of
dollars or to have many friends. So what? Does that make you fulfilled and why do you need to be
fulfilled? There must be absolute truth for without it, "enjoyment" in life, is meaningless. Through
the pre–modernism era, the western world and our laws were formed and built upon the absolute
truth of the christian God. With modernism and now postmodernism, the

The Concept Of Abductive Methodology
Methodology
The concept of abductive methodology was originally introduced by Aristotle (Jan Svennevig),
however it was Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914) an American philosopher who developed it into
the theory of inference (Jan Svennevig). Charlse Peirce proposed that the traditional modes of
inference (induction and deduction) should be harmonized with a third mode (abduction) which he
said was qualitatively different from the other two (Jan Svennevig). Fisher considered significance
testing as inductive inference. He also argued that this approach (inductive inference) is the source
of all knowledge (As cited in Chong Ho Yu, 2005). Meanwhile Neyman was of the view that that
only deductive inference was appropriate in statistics as shown in his school of hypothesis testing
tradition (As cited in Chong Ho Yu, 2005). Both deductive and inductive methodologies have been
criticized for various limits such as their predisposition to explain details that should be better
understood, and their incompetence of creating new knowledge (Chong Ho Yu, 2005).
The hypothesis of the Peircean logical system viewed that one may say the logic of abduction and
deduction add to our conceptual understanding of a phenomena (Chong Ho Yu, 2005), while the
logic of induction provides empirical backing to conceptual knowledge (Chong Ho Yu, 2005). "In
other words, abduction, deduction, and induction work together to explore, refine and substantiate
research questions" (Chong Ho Yu, 2005). Some

Everyday Decisions Essay
Everyday Decisions
In this paper, I will argue that if a person is exposed to the methods and principles of logic they will
benefit in their daily lives. The sooner one correctly applies these methods and principles the more
efficient their mind will become. Hence, you will be better equipped to make daily decisions
through reasoning (processing information). Logic is a roadmap of the mind that holds true for every
human.
All those who are able to apply logic in their daily lives understand how the mind processes
information. All those who pass a logic course are able to apply logic in their daily lives. Therefore,
all those who pass logic course understand how the mind processes information.
Logic is a necessary to learn ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In a well–formed syllogism there are two premises and a conclusion. Modern logic covers a far
greater range of possible arguments than those that can be cast into syllogistic form. This modern
logic introduced new symbols like "or," "and" and "If…then…", "either…or",
and "if–and–only–if"".
With the combination of Aristotelian logic and Prepositional logic one is able to understand
reasoning. What is reasoning? Reasoning is the instance of the use of reason and reason is the power
of comprehending, inferring, or processing information especially in organized rational ways.
Therefore, when we think rationally we reason and process information. When I claim that someone
passes a logic course they must have comprehended the methods and principles of logic hence
displaying that they are able to process information. When one passes a series of tests in logic they
demonstrate to themselves and others that they understand the structures of logic.
When one is able to reason through his or her thoughts the conclusion of their thoughts have been
processed as well as their consequences. Many children spend more time figuring out right or wrong
because they can't see a clear logical conclusion to their premises. As a child, I had limited
reasoning ability because I was not able to

Mackie's Argument : Evil And Omnipotence
Priya Patel
Phil 104 Fall 2017
October 2, 2017
Paper 1: On Mackie's Argument In J. L. Mackie's "Evil and Omnipotence," the author presents an
argument detailing why belief in a both omnipotent and wholly good God is contradictory to a God
who allows evil to exist. He utilizes this philosophy to show that God doesn't exist due to the
problem of evil. As Mackie's delineates in his first paragraph, "I think, however, that a more telling
criticism can be made by way of the traditional problem of evil. Here it can be shown, not only that
religious beliefs lack rational support, but that they are positively irrational, that the several parts of
the essential theological doctrine are inconsistent with one another." (p. 100) Mackie discusses ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
2. If God is both omnipotent and wholly good, then He would make men freely choose good on
every occasion.
3. It is not true that God makes men freely choose good on every occasion.
4. Therefore, it is not the case that God is an omnipotent and wholly good being.
In the following paragraphs, I will elucidate Mackie's belief in this argument and offer a critical
evaluation of the former. To begin with, take a justification of the first premise. This says that God
has a choice available to him that contains two things. One would be to make humans, in their free
will, choose good occasionally over evil. The other would be to make humans, in their free will,
choose good on every occasion over evil. Mackie states "If there is no logical impossibility in a man
's freely choosing the good on one, or on several, occasions, there cannot be a logical impossibility
in his freely choosing the good on every occasion." (p. 105) Mackie believes that God is presented
with this choice.
Moving on to the second premise: in order for God to be classified as both omnipotent and wholly
good, He would take the option to always make men choose good in their free will. Mackie's
thought process in believing this is linked with the definitions of omnipotent and wholly good in
theism itself. These indicate that in order to be omnipotent, one must have no limit to what one can
do, and in order to be wholly good, one would eliminate evil. What Mackie is

Logic And Logic Of Computer Science And Computers
1. Introduction
The purpose of this report is to give information on the subject known as Logical reasoning and its
use in Computer Science and computers in general. A historical background behind logic and
Logical reasoning is firstly given, followed by an overview of the modern subject and the types it's
divided into. The types are then explained. The overlap between the field of logic and that of
computer science is also given an explanation. The report ends with a brief overview on the subject
and its tie to computer science and computing.
2. History of Logic and Reasoning
2.1 Logic in Greece and Europe
The term "Logic" hails from the ancient Greek word logike and is a discipline which utilizes and
studies valid reasoning. It is heavily relied upon in a number of subjects such as mathematics,
philosophy and computer science, its roots being traced to ancient civilizations including Greece,
India, China and Persia.
In Europe logic was first employed by Aristotle, his so called Aristotelian logic was widely used in
science and mathematics until the early 19th century. During the Middle and High middle ages
people went to great lengths to show that his ideas were compatible with the Cristian faith, by that
time logic had become the main focus of philosophers. 2.2 Logic in India
In India logic went under the name of Nyaya, it underwent dynamic changes from its founding in
ancient times up to the early 18th century. According to some people Indian logic contains "...the

The Real World During Quantum-Mechanical Experiments
We've already discussed some of the experimental phenomena that inspire competing interpretations
or theories of what's going on in the real world during quantum–mechanical experiments. (In brief:
Observing microscopic particles seems to either: cause them to randomly take one result or the
other; create a branching world for every possible outcome; or require hidden variables and allow
for faster–than–light, nonlocal communication. Particles seem not to take one path, not the other, not
both, and not neither, and even act as if they "know" when we're observing them.)
In this final installment of a three–article series, we'll look in very broad strokes at some of the
philosophical implications of these views of quantum mechanics.
I. Logic
Standard logic is two–valued. That just means that each sentence in the logic is true or false, not
both, and not neither. 'My cat's breath smells like cat food' is either true or false; it can't both smell
that way and not smell that way at the same time to the same person, and surely it either does or it
doesn't. But as we've seen, some interpretations of quantum mechanics might suggest adding in a
new value.1 Perhaps Copenhagen–style interpretations indicate that we should have a value of
neither–a truth–value "gap"–and Copenhagen and many–worlds interpretations indicate that we
should have a value of both: a truth–value "glut."2 As it happens, there are independent
philosophical reasons to explore three– or four–valued logics (and

Homosexuality In Toulmin's Argument
Based on the argument presented the writer wishes to highlight that homosexuals were not just born
that way but individuals who actually struggles with their sexuality. After critically analyzing the
argument, it was evident that the argumentation employed was written using the Toulmin's argument
model. Such as the argument was grounded using Toulmin's three primary components: claim,
grounds (support) and warrant. According to Keefer (1996) the first element is the claim. The claim
of the argument is the conclusion that someone is trying to justify in the argument. The second
element is the grounds. The grounds of an argument are the facts on which the argument is based
and the third element of the argument is the warrant. The warrant of the argument assesses whether
or not the claim is legitimate based on the grounds. In outline form, the argument presented looks
like this: Claim: Don't tell me that homosexuals are normal people who just happen to be born with
a sex deviance! Grounds: Let's look at the facts. I'm a psychiatrist. I have had a wide practice for 25
years Warrant: I can tell you that almost a quarter of my most severely ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Fallacies can be either illegitimate arguments or irrelevant points, and are often identified because
they lack evidence that supports their claims. However, based on the argument presented no fallacies
were detected as the arguments had evidence to support its claim. The argument presented was
introduced using a claim of value. According to Rottenberg and Winchell (2012) claims of value
attempt to prove that some things are more or less desirable than others. They express approval or
disapproval of standards of taste and morality. Advertisements and reviews of cultural events are
one common source of value claims, but such claims emerge whenever people argue about what is
good or bad, beautiful or

A Book Analysis of “Is Jesus the Only Savior” Essay
Liberty University
A Book Analysis of "Is Jesus the Only Savior"
AN ANALYSIS PAPER SUBMITTED TO
Dr. Daniel Light, PhD
IN COMPLETION OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
Theology 313
BY
Gabriel Lopez
Lynchburg, Virginia
June 18, 2012
Introduction
The title of Nash's book is fitting for the content in which it contains. One will not find the
traditional arguments that come with Soteriology. Initially, the author thought that he would be
reading a book that covers a topic that had been written numerous times and so pleasantly surprised
with its content. Nash begins his book with an introduction to three main philosophical views when
it comes to the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. Nash does a great job in succinctly ... Show more
Now whether this is true or not, Hick has a logical argument at this point. Nash points out that
Hick's convictions for a pluralistic philosophical view are because he believes that God is a loving
being. His argument has just become non sequitor and as a result exploited by Nash as well as other
scholars.
Although it seems that over the years Kick's arguments for a pluralistic system have grown stronger
in content, they reveal just as many problems as the first system. Hick moves his system from
centering on the character of God to his own definition of salvation. Hick's hoped this would resolve
his inconsistencies with the character of God, but he ends up doing the exact same thing he did in

His first system.
Nash enlightens us to the fact that now Hick's system has set up criteria to judge certain religions to
see if they are indeed authentic and would therefore accomplish this salvation. Nash does a fine job
once again at pointing out the logical problems in this supposedly better view of pluralism. He cites
the logical laws of the excluded middle and non–contradiction as examples of two such problems.
Even to non–Christians with little knowledge of philosophy or logic could clearly see that Hick's
views don't even make good common sense. The conclusion to chapter 3 sums up the system really
well. Nash states, "His distinction between the phenomenal gods and the noumenal God only serves
to plunge him

Examples Of Manliness In Okonkwo
2. Reread pages 52–54 and copy down quotations that help us understand Okonkwo's view of
"manhood" or "manliness". After each quotation, write down your analysis of it.
One quotation that expresses Okonkwo's view of manliness states Okonkwo "was always happy
when he heard [Nwoye] grumbling about women. That showed that in time he would be able to
control his womenfolk" (53). This quotation shows that Oknonkwo feels pleasure when his son
displays signs of power, such as the control of the perceived weaker gender. Ergo, Okonkwo views
the subordination of others by his son as an example of "masculinity." This idea is further supported
by the quotation: "No matter how prosperous a man was, if he was unable to rule his women and his
children... he was not really a man" (53). Oknonkwo clearly considers utter authority of one's
nuclear family as a prerequisite to meet "manhood." He literally states that a man without patriarchy
in his family is not a man. Therefore, when Nwoye displays the early signs of this dominance, like
the grumbling about his subordinate women's issues, Okonkwo is finally considering his son
"masculine" as shown by his happiness.
Okonkwo's view is further developed when he "encouraged [Nwoye and Ikemefuna] to sit with him
in his obi, and he told them stories of the land– masculine stories of violence and bloodshed" (53).
This quote shows that Okonkwo believes gory subjects to be suitable and honestly necessary for
men entering "manhood." He takes these two

The Analysis : The Quantifier Essay
The quantifier is the first part of the sentence, and tells you how much of the subject that is talked
about. Quantifiers include words such as "all", "some," or "no". The quantifier in the first premise of
the example is "all." The second term the subject term. The subject refers to what is being discussed
in the sentence. In the first premise, the subject is the term "souls." The next term is the copula, and
the copula links the subject and predicate together. The copula can be either "is" or "are," or "is not"
or "are not." In the case of the example, the copula in the first premise is "are." The last term is the
predicate term. The predicate refers to the other category that is being talked about in the sentence.
In the example from above, the predicate in the first term in "immaterial things." When all four parts
of the sentence are put together properly, you have a correctly translated categorical proposition
Square of Opposition: The Square of Opposition is shown above. Each proposition form is in the
corner of the square and the lines show the relationship between each other. Since the first premise
is in the A form, the contradictory would be O. The contradictory of the first premise would translate
to "some souls are not immaterial things." Since both the second premise and conclusion, are in the
O form, the contradictory to these would be in the A form. The second premise's contradictory
would be "All immaterial things are immortal," and the

Pros And Cons Of Offline Dating
A. Provide a brief overview of your topic.
i. What is the premise or premises for the argument?
How the Pros and cons of online and offline dating effect whether you find your partner through the
internet or going about it the traditional way. The article shows you that by using both in the best
methods that fits your needs to better your chances in finding love.
ii. Why is the topic being discussed?
As we grow as a society so does our technology and today everyone wants to stay with the trend.
Also, online dating helps you find someone not having to walk up to someone with a corny line to
get their attention. Plus, your able to see people that live outside your local area that you might not
have ever crossed paths or even go to, so it opens the doors to many opportunities that you wouldn't
have with offline dating.
iii. What is the conclusion?
When opening your horizons to do online dating you open up many opportunities of meeting
someone that you wouldn't have if the internet wasn't invented or you feel you should only find love
if it finds you. In the end using both methods is the only way to be able to find your next partner or
your forever partner cause with online dating your only talking so you eventually have to go out and
meet these people face to face to see if they are the person they were over the internet and that you
have that good vibe about each other to continue the relationship.
B. Describe any personal connection that you may have to the topic.

Teaching Argument Evaluation in An Introductory...
Teaching Argument Evaluation in An Introductory Philosophy Course
ABSTRACT: One of the greatest challenges in teaching an introductory philosophy course is
convincing students that there are, indeed, reliable standards for the evaluation of arguments. Too
often introductory students criticize an argument simply by contesting the truth of one of its claims.
And far too often, the only claim in an argument that meets serious objections is its conclusion. For
many students, the idea that an argument displays a structure which can be evaluated on its own
terms is not very difficult to grasp. Unfortunately, the idea is grasped only in an abstract way, with
insufficient appreciation of how structural problems manifest themselves in concrete ... Show more
The introductory philosophy student's inability to recognize argument structure presents us with a
problem that cannot be addressed simply by "teaching logic." The problem that confronts us
addresses a fundamental pedagogical concern: Our task is to instill in the student the habit of clear
thinking. When we send our students out into the world, we have to make sure that they're prepared
for it. This is not simply a matter of providing them with "tools." We've looked at logic that way –
and we've approached teaching logic that way – for far too long. Certainly logic may be employed
as a tool; it can serve as an incredibly powerful tool, as we who teach it know full well. But it's not
logic per se that we should be concerned with in our introductory courses. We want to teach our
students how to think clearly and responsibly. There is certainly a moral edge to this view of the
situation, and the manner in which we approach our pedagogical concern will not be without further
philosophical prejudice. Ours is Aristotelian. We have found that giving our students the basics of
term logic serves our purpose well. We do not introduce it as a tool for argument analysis – a strong
case can easily be made for the superiority of truth–functional logic in that respect – we present it,
rather, in the way that a kindergarten teacher brings toys into the classroom. And we make it clear
that term logic has limitations – it's not an all–purpose tool.

The Times They Are A Changing
Flowers are Red The sage bard, Bob Dylan, on the rapidly rising waters of vicissitude: Come gather
'round people wherever you roam And admit that the waters around you have grown And accept it
that soon you'll be drenched to the bone If your time to you is worth savin' Then you better start
swimmin' or you'll sink like a stone For the times they are a–changin'. Dylan was hardly a grown
man when he groaned the initial verse of his 1964 album's title track, "The Times they are A–
Changing" (1964). A masterpiece which would continue to ring in the ears of every new generation
of upcoming adults for nearly half a century. Dylan depicts two conflicting mindsets in his anthem
of progress: Those who resist change, otherwise known as, the first who will later be last; and those
who rally for change, the slow that'll later be fast. Respectively, lionized author and classical Ivy
League educator Timothy D. Snyder's, "Why Laptops in Class Are Distracting America's Future
Workforce," published by Christian Science Monitor in 2011, documents the decline of his students'
attentiveness and well–being due to technology infiltrating his lecture hall. Alternatively,
internationally renowned author, journalist, reporter, and fellow Ivy League scholar, Thomas L.
Friedman, writes of why the time has come for technological change in education in, "Come the
Revolution," which was published by The New York Times in 2012. Despite the increasingly large
divide that separates the two's

Classes On The Study Of Logic In American Colleges Today
Classes on the study of logic in American colleges today are useful tools for students to develop a
clear sense of how arguments are formed and function, so it is no wonder that so many college
campuses include these courses in their curriculum. Because of the widespread effort to educate
students in the area of logic, it can be useful to examine how different logic classes are structured. A
closer inspection of these classes can reveal the benefits or disadvantages each class might have and
the improvements that can be implemented to make them more effective. In order to do this, it
would be most convenient to compare and contrast the syllabi of 3 college classes including the
Philosophy 103–Introduction to Logic: Argument and Evidence ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The syllabus has just as many redeeming qualities as it does minor issues. The syllabus for
philosophy 215 has some interesting characteristics that if compared to philosophy 103, might
actually be more beneficial to students. The first of these beneficial characteristics is a list of options
in regards to the necessary class materials. For many students, it can be difficult to obtain a specific
textbook usually due to financial reasons. Giving students different options creates a more equal
learning environment in which all students are presented with alternative ways to access the
information they need. On the other hand, the syllabus for Philosophy 103 is not as flexible and
requires all students to gain access to a single textbook that can cost above eighty dollars. Another
positive point is the grading system. Philosophy 215 relies on the traditional hundred point system
which is arguably the easiest for students to comprehend. Although Philosophy 103's grading system
is based on a system of earning points rather than "messing up" a perfect one hundred percent, this
system can be a bit too complex for students to understand. It is not ideal to have students confused
about their progress in the class because it can create misunderstandings about how well they are
learning the material. Aside from those two positive points, a helpful element in both syllabi is the
clear course schedule. Both syllabi neatly provide

Essay on Benefits of a Tax on High Fat Foods
Descartes In this essay, I will explain Descartes' central method of doubt to investigate the truth of
things, in which he wanted to be critical and generated four rules that he would use as guidance.
With his method, he suspends judgment and prejudices to obtain better results. Descartes argues that
despite syllogisms has truth in logic, it still has something defective, which is predominantly the
multiplicity of rules. These rules might bring immorality and confusion, thus prevent him for
arriving at the knowledge of things because it might bring more doubt than truth.
At the beginning of the creation of his method, Descartes looks for a method of reason that would be
free of the defects of logic, however, he still sought his method ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Following this model, he develops his method based on his reason alone without the interference
from others or his prejudices that could affect his reasoning. He claims that the interference of more
than one person, in the creation of something causes a less perfect and less organized thing compare
to things done by only one person. For instance, he exemplifies this with his education; he considers
his education has a deficiency because all the sciences taught to him were from different men from
different eras.
Moreover, in order for Descartes' method to discover a great way for seeking the truth of things, he
based his method on the geometrical style, which entails clarity and certainty of things. In geometry,
Descartes finds the notion of clear and distinct ideas, which are considered clear and distinct
because they are simple and unquestionable truths, and also they could be easy understood. In
addition to it, he finds this method to be promising because he comprehends geometrical figures to
be absolutely evident, not probabilistic. The fact that Descartes was looking for a method that will
help him to find the truth of things encourages him to look for a method with the properties of logic,
mathematics and geometry, but obviously excluding their defects. He just set out four rules rather
than a large number of rules: 1) to never accept anything as true unless it is so clear and distinctly,
meaning there is no minimum doubt; 2) to reduce every single complex

Analysis Of The Article ' Digibabble, Fairy Dust And The...
In the essay "Digibabble, Fairy Dust and the Human Anthill," Tom Wolfe presents a compelling
argument about the way convergence is present in many different forms in our lives.The main idea
of his argument is of convergence, which is basically defined as the constant change needed to adapt
to one 's environment. He manages to connect each aspect of his essay with every idea that he
presents, making his argument not only sound but valid as well. Wolfe uses evolution as a visual
example of the continuous changes occurring in the world. It makes one think about what influences
the changes in our world today. Not only does Wolfe use sound logic to make his argument strong,
but he also invokes emotion to draw the reader hoping to open up their mind. Overall, Wolfe
presents a very valid and supported argument, though there are some doubts due to the age gap
between the audiences his argument still remains valid. In the first example, Wolfe uses the
American artists in the Japanese museum The artists were surprised to see that their work was
considered to be from the "Manual Age". The Japanese students and the digital artwork of that time
had surpassed the traditional drawings from the artists. This is a prime example of our world being
ever–changing, especially in the area of technological advances. [H]undreds of young Japanese
staring at them from the auditorium seats saw them not as visionaries on the cutting edge . . . but as
wooly old mammoths who had

The Epistemic Closure Principle By Edmund Gettier
Alexander Jerde Phil 312 10/20/2014
The Epistemic Closure Principle The Epistemic closure principle explains that knowledge can be
gained by the logically implied inferences between a predicate, based on past experience, and a
conclusion. By definition epistemic closure purports that we are justified in believing that our
logical inferences are true. Therefore, we can conclude that our past experience (predicate) is a
reason to believe a proposition. This principle has been used as the basis of various forms of
skeptical arguments against the traditional analysis and inductive/deductive reasoning. Such an
example was presented by Edmund Gettier, whose arguments question if we are justified in
believing our beliefs as knowledge. Also, Hume questioned if we can really trust
inductive/deductive reasoning. In the following I will argue that even though, Gettier's arguments
hold some truth, we are still caused to conclude that the epistemic closure is a logical necessity and
true. The epistemic closure principle states that knowledge can be gained by acceptance of
predicates logically implied relationship with their conclusions. Epistemic closure entails that,
deductive and logical reasoning are sound principles of reaching knowledge. Also that, a conclusion
(proposition) can be known then by understanding that a necessary logical or deductive inference
between a predicate and a conclusion exist. Epistemic closure also entails that we are justified

Critique Of Immanuel Kant
Immanuel Kant was born on April 22, 1724 in Königsberg, Prussia where he stayed all of his life
(which is now Kaliningrad, Russia). Immanuel Kant was one of the most influential philosophers in
the history of Western Philosophy. His contributions to metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and
aesthetics have brought an impact on most philosophical movement that followed him.
He was the fourth oldest of 9 children in a family of artisans. He was originally named "Emmanuel"
but, after learning Hebrew he changed his name to "Immanuel". In his youth, Kant was a solid,
unspectacular student. The family belonged to the Protestant sect of the Pietists, and Kant went to a
Pietist school. The emphasis on reason in Kant's philosophy is sometimes interpreted as a reaction
against his religious education.
Kant was only 5 feet tall, and very thin when reached old age which he attributed to his strict daily
routine. He got up at 5 o'clock every day and spent the next hour drinking tea, smoking his pipe and
meditating. From 6 to 7 o'clock, he prepared for lectures he gave at home until 9 o'clock. He then
worked in his study room until 1 o'clock and spent the next three hours dining, usually with his
friends. After his ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Critique of Practical Reason, linked human freedom, to the moral law while attempting to
reconstruct the most beloved ideas of traditional metaphysical belief. The Critique of the Power of
Judgment brought the different topics of aesthetic and teleological judgment into Kant's system but
also struggling to refine and even substantially revise some of Kant's most basic ideas about
theoretical and practical reason and the relation between them. The critical philosophy was soon
being taught in every important German–speaking university, and young men flocked to Königsberg
as a shrine of

history of philosophy
History of philosophy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see History of Philosophy (disambiguation).
This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling.You can assist
by editing it. (April 2013)
Philosophy
Philosophers
Aestheticians
Epistemologists
Ethicists
Logicians
Metaphysicians
Social and political philosophers
Traditions
Analytic
Continental
Eastern
Islamic
Platonic
Scholastic
Periods
Ancient
Medieval
Modern
Contemporary
Literature
Aesthetics
Epistemology
Ethics
Logic
Metaphysics
Political philosophy

Branches
Aesthetics
Epistemology
Ethics
Logic
Metaphysics
Political philosophy
Social philosophy
Lists
Index
Outline
Years
Problems ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is said that following a visit to the Oracle of Delphi he spent much of his life questioning anyone
in Athens who would engage him, in order to disprove the oracular prophecy that there would be no
man wiser than Socrates. Through these live dialogues, he examined common but critical concepts
that lacked clear or concrete definitions, such as beauty and truth, and the virtues of piety, wisdom,
temperance, courage, and justice. Socrates' awareness of his own ignorance allowed him to discover
his errors as well as the errors of those who claimed knowledge based upon falsifiable or unclear
precepts and beliefs. He wrote nothing, but inspired many disciples, including many sons of
prominent Athenian citizens (including Plato), which led to his trial and executionin 399 B.C. on the
charge that his philosophy and sophistry were undermining the youth, piety, and moral fiber of the
city. He was offered a chance to flee from his fate but chose to remain in Athens, abide by his
principles, and drink the poison hemlock.
Socrates' most important student was Plato, who founded the Academy of Athens and wrote a
number of dialogues, which applied theSocratic method of inquiry to examine philosophical
problems. Some central ideas of Plato's dialogues are the Theory of Forms, i.e., that the mind is
imbued with an innate capacity to understand and contemplate concepts from a higher order
preeminent world, concepts more real, permanent, and universal than or representative of the things

Euthyphro's Argument
Socrates, on his way to court, happens upon an old friend Euthyphro. Socrates was being prosecuted
by a young lawyer named Meletus for corrupting the youth; while Euthyphro was in the process of
trying his father for the murder of a laborer. Socrates soon begins a conversation with Euthyphro
which leads into a discussion on piety and what it entails. Euthyphro cites the gods as the
determiners of what is pious, which leads to the deconstruction of the definition by Socrates who
proves the premises of the argument invalid. The investigation into piety proves difficult, as
Euthyphro's definitions are considered inadequate by Socrates. Piety on the basic level of simple
apprehension, can be imagined as either an action or mental state. However; in order to get past the
simple apprehension or conceptualization of piety, Euthyphro attempts to form an advanced level
definition of the concept. He soon settles on a definition in ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
The main rejection for the definition stems from the unanimous nature of Euthyphro's argument in
relation to the temperament of the gods. The predicate of Euthyphro's argument is too broad and
does not take into account the different views and interests found among the gods. Socrates finds
fault with the subject of piety as the universal affirmative found in Euthyphro's definition due to the
fact that "the gods are in a state of discord," (Five Dialogues, 7b). There are many opinions and
differing levels of moral designation between the gods which causes disunity and conflict. Not all
the gods get along with one another, for wars have been raged among their racks all through the ages
of mythology. This first premise of Socrates' syllogism shows the lack of unity and ideology found
among the gods, which in turn leads into the second premise of Socrates'

The Philosopher And The Filmmaker Michael Moore
At every point in history there are individuals who disagree with the norms of his or her society and
who advocate for social and political change. These individuals are referred to as agitators. While
these agitators come from across different historical time periods and locations some of them have
quite a bit in common. Even from as early as 399 BC to 2002, from as far as Athens, Greece to the
United States, there are agitators that had similar motivations and ways of achieving them. An
example would be the philosopher Socrates and the filmmaker Michael Moore. Despite some small
differences in approach, these two have many significant similarities as agitators. The most obvious
similarity between Socrates and Moore is that they are agitators, but it is more than them just
advocating social and political change. It 's the methods in which they did so that were so similar.
Both of them seemed to address issues or put forth information that generated a lot of discomfort
from the people around them as well as criticism. For example, Moore has a part in his film that
displays instances of America supporting or creating corruption in other countries which leads to
high levels of violence (Moore). This among many of the other topics he discussed in the
documentary caused a lot of discomfort which led to harsh criticism such as an article entitled
Bowling For Columbine: Documentary or Fiction by David T. Hardy. He states that "Bowling for
Columbine is dishonest. It is

Confinement equals Licentious Essay
The article "Hookups starve the soul" by Laura Vanderkam opens with a scene where she talked
with a friend that hooked up with a guy after a party. In the article, Vanderkam talked about how
unintentional sexual relations are increasing on college campuses. Vanderkam emphasized how
parents put limitations on their children lives that could one day force them into promiscuous
activities. She clearly states that "hooking up" is happening but does not always mean having sex.
Hookups are defined by alcohol, physical attraction, and a lack of expectations the next morning.
Many people blame co–ed dorms, sexual revolution, or alcohol, Vanderkam blames none of these
aspects but blames it all on the way an individual is raised. She uses her own ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
For example, if your childhood was very structured, consisting of athletic practices, school, piano or
dance lessons, along with the many rules your parents made, that you are expected to follow, which
limited your personal freedom, when off to college and you get the first taste of freedom, you are
more likely to take it for granted and experience everything you were kept from your entire life. She
is somewhat indifferent throughout the article, she feels that these structured childhoods will either
help or hurt a college bound individual. Although the points she observed makes the article
interesting, it confuses readers on what side she is really taking. As a result she implies that it is too
late to bring back dormitory mothers, curfews and traditional morals that forces courtships in the
past time. I like the way she tells it that way it really is, the truth is surfaced form point one. Also,
Vanderkam's straightforward approach makes the reader focus even more. The logic behind Laura
Vanderkam's article stands out. One of the first things she does to establish logic is talk about how
the parents in the process of getting the perfect child through controlled activities, they exploit the
growth of their children's souls. Also, When discussing how overachieving parents provides too
much supervision she tried using a phrase "Organization Kid" from the April's Atlantic Monthly by
author David Brooks to back

rhetorical analysis Essay
Rhetorical Analysis A college education is valuable and its quality is of the highest importance to
most Americans. In his essay, "On the Uses of a Liberal Education: As Lite Entertainment for Bored
College Students," Mark Edmundson utilizes ethos, pathos, and logos to effectively deliver his
argument that the current educational system, especially in college, revolves around consumerism
which in turn has negatively impacted students, teachers, and universities in general. However,
although Edmundson presents an overall logically sound argument, there are few instances
throughout the article that may hinder the reliability of his claims to the audience. Throughout the
essay, Edmundson establishes credibility for himself ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The idea of a genius becoming a silly, outmoded idea, although not likely, causes the readers to
think about a world without intelligent people and how intelligence is necessary in order for the
population and world to move forward and make improvements. The emotion brought out in the
previous statement creates a willingness in the audience to learn more about how this may be
possible and more importantly how it can be corrected. To further anger the audience about current
college education, Edmundson explains that for many professors of English and History classes like
himself "one of the ways we have tried to stay attractive is by loosening up. We grade much more
softly..." (329). The fact that professors are giving easier grades means that students are not working
as hard and therefore are not learning and improving to the level that people have in the past. With
college being so expensive any audience of people students or parents would be angered by the fact
that the students are not getting as good of an education as they could be. Edmundson asserts that he
will not take the easy route and prevent students from their potential he is willing to "aim and shoot"
(333) and is not afraid of getting bad evaluations from students for being too difficult. In this way,
he convinces the audience to side with him emotionally. Edmundson is trying to prevent such a

Differences Between Informal Logic, And Theoretical...

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Differences Between Informal Logic, And Theoretical...

Similar to Differences Between Informal Logic, And Theoretical... (14)

More from Claudia Brown

More from Claudia Brown (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Differences Between Informal Logic, And Theoretical...