Evaluating Arguments and Truth Claims

Re: Evaluating Arguments and Truth Claims

de MONTERO ESCOBAR PRISCILA ALEJANDRA -
Número de respuestas: 1
A good argument is one that has true, relevant, and sufficient premises to support a logical conclusion. For example, "All mammals have hearts; dogs are mammals; therefore, dogs have hearts" is a categorically valid categorical syllogism because its structure follows the rules of categorical logic. A premise is reasonable when it comes from a reliable source, is well-supported, and does not contradict known facts; for example, that "water boils at 100°C sea level" is reasonable because it is supported by science. For example, "if a person does not go to college, he will fail in life"; The example here is given by mentioning successful people who did not go to college, such as Steve Jobs, which shows that the premise is too general and unfair. Regarding propositional logic, for example the conjunctions ("P and Q", as in "I study and work"), disjunction ("P or Q", as in "I study or work, but not both"), and conditionals ("If I contemplate, I pass"), which allow us to construct arguments more precisely using truth tables. These logical forms help us evaluate whether conclusions actually follow from premises, regardless of their content, which is necessary for critical thinking and coherence.