Ip 03

UNIT # 3: The Value of Human Knowledge
Table of Contents
Introduction 3
Lesson # 1: Questioning Truth and Knowledge

Starting Out 5
Learn about It! 5
Check Your Understanding 7
Philosophy Applied 7
Who’s That Philosopher? 8
Lesson # 2: Our Logical Investigations

Starting Out 9
Learn about It! 9
Lesson # 3: Wisdom Towards Knowledge

Starting Out 13
Learn about It! 13
Lesson # 4: Fallacies: Why and Where?

Starting Out 17
Learn about It! 17
1
Lesson # 5: Fallacies: The Examples

Starting Out 21
Learn about It! 21
Be the Philosopher! 26
Philosophy and I: Check and Reflect 28
Wrap Up 28
Bibliography 29
Answers to Check your Understanding 30
Glossary 31
2
GRADE 11/12 | Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
UNIT # 3
The Value of Human Knowledge

In an evolutionary perspective, human beings are animals that are considered to be
apex predators. Although considering the fact that, in terms of physical strength or speed,
human beings will be classified as the weakest or the slowest. A small dog could easily outrun
us, a lion could effortlessly devour us. But, throughout millions of years of evolution, human
beings haven’t been extinct or endangered. It’s quite the opposite, rather – we propagated.
This is all thanks to our ability to think and know. We may not be the strongest nor the
fastest, we may not have special abilities like flying or to change our color to camouflage, but
the only thing we have is our ability to think, to be creative, to possess knowledge. In this
lesson, we will tackle the features of human knowledge that brought us to post-modern
advancements and accomplishments, in a philosophical point of view.
Philosophy in Our World

Many of us have had an experience of
dreaming while unconscious. We don’t
remember all our dreams. In fact, we tend to
forget them as soon as we regain
consciousness. However, some dreams may
have been recalled, and we tell its story to our
family or friends, no matter how absurd. Have
you experienced dreaming of a truly bad
situation? Like your mind is reminding you of
your fears, and you suddenly wake up with
tears in your eyes or sweat on your body. You
just realized that nothing of those is real. You
feel most relieved, grateful that you woke up.
However, while you were unconscious and
dreaming, you thought that everything that is happening around you is real. Even your own
senses seem to be deceiving you into believing that everything is true. The question is, how do
3
we know which is true from what is not? This is a matter of knowing about the human
knowledge, its limitations, and its relation to the Truth and Reality.
Learning Targets
In this unit, you should be able to:
● understand the difference between facts and opinion;
● separate factual situations from non-factual situations;
● discover the significance of philosophizing into finding the Truth; and
● determine the errors of reasoning, in order to realize the Truth.
4
Lesson 1: Questioning Truth and
Knowledge
In many rigorous debates, especially the ones that affect the society and the human
condition, people often claim certainty with their statements and present their own opinions
masked as truth. Some do it deliberately, while many others commit it without realizing that
they are. And some recipients of such statements accept it without second thoughts nor any
form of verification. In this lesson, we’ll find out the necessary conditions to accept a
statement as a true expression of knowledge, and admit what we truly “know”.
Starting Out
How can we differentiate an objective fact from a subjective opinion?
Learn about It!
In the study of Philosophy, the branch that inquires about the features, extent and limitations
of human knowledge is called Epistemology. It originated from two Greek words, episteme
which means ‘knowledge’, and logos which means ‘study’ or ‘discourse’. Epistemology, then,
translates to ‘the study of knowledge’. It is a study that attempts to answer the question, ‘How
do we truly know something?’. There are instances when we believe we know something – an
idea, event, situation, facts, skills, etc. but when asked or scrutinized, we eventually realize
that we may not truly know it. What are, then, the necessary conditions for us to accept that
we truly know something?
In Epistemology, there are three different kinds of knowledge: personal, practical, and
propositional knowledge. Personal Knowledge is the type of knowledge that we acquire as
we experience the world. Since the time we were born, we started to acquaint ourselves with
the way the world is – some refer to this as ‘common sense’ knowledge. An example of this is
the knowledge about gravity: if I jump in the air, I know that I’d certainly fall. This is the kind of
knowledge that we have worked around since our existence started. Secondly, Practical
5
Knowledge, also known as Procedural Knowledge, is a type of knowledge that is particular for
skills, like knowing how to cook, how to ride a bicycle, how to play the guitar. This is the type of
knowledge that you can practice, and usually involves motor function. The third one which is
Propositional Knowledge is the type of knowledge that makes a claim: it proposes
something to be true. For example, your classmate tells you that there is a ghost on the third
floor of the building. He is ‘proposing’, he is making a claim that there is a ghost on the third
floor of the building. A Propositional Knowledge declares that there is ‘truth’ in the statement,
it involves a whole certainty of the truth.
Propositional Knowledge is the focus of Epistemology.

Since statements that contain Propositional Knowledge
claim something to be true, the mission of Epistemology
is to seek questions and criteria of the extent of the truth
that Propositional Knowledge claims. With regards to the
example provided, the task Epistemology has is to
determine if your classmate’s claim about the ghost is
indeed true. How do we know that it wasn’t just a
mistake? How do we know that it was certainly a ghost?
He could have seen something, and it could be his opinion that it was a ghost. How do we
know that his claim is factual, and not merely an opinion?
There are three main criteria that must be met in order for a certain proposition or claim to be
considered as ‘knowledge’.
The first criteria is belief. When one makes a claim, he must have faith that his claim is true.
For example, your teacher promised your class that those who will get a score of at least 90 in
the project would be exempted from taking the final examination. In your case, you are quite
unsure whether your own project would get a score of at least 90 because you might not have
met the standards your teacher set. Since you are doubtful that you’d get a 90, this means you
do not have the belief that you will be exempted from the final examination. Hence, this
suggests that you do not know that you’ll get a 90. Without a belief on a certain claim, this
cannot be considered as knowledge.
The second criteria is truth. Belief is necessary for us to claim that we know something.
However, our beliefs may, sometimes, be wrong as well. You may believe that you will be
exempted from the final examination, but in reality, you won’t be. So, it is possible for our
beliefs to be mistaken and not meet with the truth. This means that even if you had the belief
6
that you will be exempted, but because your belief did not correspond to the truth, then you
did not know that you will be exempted.
Knowledge, then, requires a true belief. However, there is a need for a proof, or at least, a
reason for us to believe that a certain proposition is true. It is here where the last criteria
enters – justification. If your classmate proposes that
Rizal was a better hero than Bonifacio, he must provide
you a reason for you to accept his proposition. In one of
Plato’s dialogues, he proposed that to truly know means
having the ability to explain and reason about it. For one
cannot speak of or support any idea that his mind does not know. Hence, a valid justification
accompanied with strong evidence and/or proof is what separates an opinion from facts. It is
what completes the nature of knowledge itself.
Check Your Understanding

Give two propositions and provide an explanation for it. The explanation must express a
justified true belief.
1. Proposition:
Explanation:
2. Proposition:
Explanation:
Philosophy Applied
The notion of Knowledge as a justified true belief (JTB) can be utilized in many ways,
even minor ones. We can also see it everyday. For example, some people install CCTV cameras
in certain areas because if something bad happens, it will serve as their proof of the truth, it
serves as their justification. However, essentially, we can practice JTB in discussing matters of
importance with the people we come into contact with, or with our decision-making process.
If, for example, the government declares that it is necessary to impose martial law in a certain
city, how do we know that it was truly necessary? Or if one makes a statement about the
7
newly-imposed TRAIN tax, we can use the JTB criteria to determine if his statement is a matter
of objective fact, or a matter of a subjective opinion. And significantly, the notion of
Knowledge as a justified true belief encourages us to reexamine the ideas we think we already
know.
8
Lesson 2: Our Logical Investigations
Besides the ability to know and hold knowledge, the human mind can also boast of
another feature – the ability to connect these knowledge and ideas. Human beings cannot just
know and think, it can also think logically. Our logic and capacity to follow and make
arguments has allowed us to be more analytic and creative with our endeavors. In our daily
lives, we are also governed by logic, we utilize it to organize our lives and be as efficient as we
can. In this lesson, we would talk about how the mind works logically, how logic can help with
situations we find ourselves in, and how it aids us in analyzing the important matters in our
lives.
Starting Out
How should we think?
Learn about It!
Another branch of Philosophy that focuses on the

human mind is Logic. The traditional study of logic can
be traced back to the ancient Greek philosopher,
Aristotle, who is called the “Father of Logic”, for having
the first recorded study of the subject. For him, logic is an
organon which translates in English as “a tool” or an
instrument that the mind utilizes in order to arrive at the
Truth. For Aristotle, reason and logic should be the bases
of our acceptance of ideas. Some people appeal to
authority, to power, to pity, etc. But, those appeals are
invalid. One should accept an idea simple because it is valid, true, sound – because it is logical.
For example, you are walking around a park when you saw a man and a woman. The man’s
right arm is on the woman’s shoulder. Based on this fact, one can proceed to an opinion that
9
these two are a couple. However, upon a closer look, you have noticed that the man and the
woman share some physical aspects – they have the same eyes, the same complexion, and
some other physical similarities. Through further observation, and use of one’s logic, we can
now proceed closer to the Truth that these two may not be a couple, but siblings instead. Your
opinion, then, would be different through the use of your logical mind.
This mainly relates to our previous lesson especially on the part of justification. We are now
referring to a valid justification, and not just any kind. But, how do we know if our justification
is valid, sound, and logical?
The process of Aristotelian logic revolves around three step-by-step mental operations: Simple
Apprehension, Judgment, and Reasoning.
Simple Apprehension is the first logical process of the mind. It is the process of grasping an
idea into the mind. This means being able to hold a certain concept in one’s mind. If, for
example, you heard the word ‘tree’, there is a certain picture that flashes in your mind. This
means, your mind had apprehended the idea of a tree. However, if you heard the word
‘bracacy’ (which is not a word in the English language), there will not be an idea that will come
into your mind because your mind doesn’t hold the concept of a ‘bracacy’. Since Simple
Apprehension results into the mind holding an idea, these ideas become terms once we
express them in language and put a label on them.
The second logical process of the mind is called Judgment. The process of Judgment is to
connect one idea to another. It asserts whether a certain concept is related to another
concept. A Judgment results into a Proposition which is a claim of something to be true. An
example of a Proposition is this: All monkeys are brown. This statement contains two terms
(ideas) – monkey and brown, and it asserts that there is a connection between these two
terms – that brown is the color of all monkeys. Also, it is a Proposition because it claims
something to be true. It may not be true, but it is making a claim.
10
The third logical process of the mind is called Reasoning. Reasoning, then, collects and
connects Propositions in order to prove something to be true. It is usually composed of three
Propositions that contain a central topic which is called a Syllogism. This is an example of a
Syllogism:
All monkeys are brown.

Sulya is a monkey.
Hence, Sulya is brown.
A Syllogism, therefore, is a form of an argument that attempts to prove the claims of

Propositions.
Even with these processes, one cannot have the guarantee that he/she would become
infallible. However, we can minimize our mistakes in reasoning, and be more critical of the
statements that we encounter. These process, when carefully followed, could result to a more
analytical and a sharper mind.

With the sample syllogism below, give the three terms and three propositions.
Every bird can fly.

A chicken is a bird.
Hence, a chicken can fly.
Term 1:
Term 2:
Term 3:
Proposition 1:
Proposition 2:
Proposition 3:
11
Philosophy Applied
The use of logic can be applied in almost all areas of our lives, especially when we talk
with, or even have arguments with our peers, parents, teachers, etc. From organizing our bags
to arranging our schedule to making decisions in our lives, we use logic. There are also some
bigger issues that we can analyze in order to arrive at better choices, especially ones that
would affect our society. In the Philippines, the citizens seem to be divided in terms of political
ideas. There are Filipinos who support the current administration, while there are those who
oppose its policies and decisions. How can we know, then, which of them is right? How can we
determine that there is, indeed, an idea that is objectively correct, and is not just a matter of
opinion or preference? Of course the political situation of the Philippines, or of any country
has intricacies that need to be considered. There are facts, statistics, current situations that all
need to be reflected upon. But, one tool that we can practice in order to arrive at carefully
crafted ideas is our logical thinking.
12
Lesson 3: Wisdom Towards Knowledge
Having reached this part, we can arrive at a certain conclusion that the human mind is
both complex and amazing. It is like a heavy-duty processor of a computer that can handle a
lot of information. However, we can still reflect upon how much it can contribute to our goals
in living a fulfilling life, and why we need to sharpen it as much as we could. In this lesson, we’ll
discuss the significance of the philosophical method through Logic, and how it can lead us to
becoming better thinkers.
Starting Out
Why is it significant for me to ‘know’?
Learn about It!
Aristotle had a hierarchy of beings – a method of putting each creature on Earth in a

certain level. The lowest among all beings, accordingly, are minerals. That is due to them not
having any form of life. Above the minerals are plants that Aristotle called to be in a
vegetative state. They have life, they breathe, they produce, and they consume. Higher than
plants are animals because they are sentient beings,
they can sense, feel, and move. The highest, for Aristotle,
is man. Because man is not only in vegetation, not only
sentient, man is a rational being. Man has life, senses,
and reason. Reason, then, consequently, is what
separates man from beast. It is what makes us unique
from other creatures. Hence, we ought to spend our lives
in cultivating, sharpening, and enriching our minds.
Critical thinking also allows us a number of personal benefits in terms of our abilities. It can
improve our communication skills because we analyze the real meaning behind words and
statements, which, in turn, allows us to see errors and catch them on time. Critical and logical
13
thinking also provides us with a good sense of imagination and creativity because we push our
insights further and our ideas deeper, we stretch our limitations to find better solutions to our
problems.
At the last part of his book, The Problems of Philosophy, the philosopher and mathematician
Bertrand Russell wrote about the value and significance of philosophizing and logical thinking.
Russell posited that, the view on Philosophy to be futile
and worthless is a misunderstanding. Other subjects like
science, engineering, or business can contribute to
people even if they do not study it. However, the benefits
of philosophizing are personal. When one philosophizes,
it improves his own mind, his own life. When we think logically, we free our minds from our
own biases, and recognize other perspectives.
According to Russell, the goal of Philosophy, like many other subjects is knowledge. However,
it does not guarantee a provision of answers to its own questions. Instead, its use lies on
being critical of the practices and beliefs of every subject known to man. It’s mission is to
shake a previously held foundation of a study, in order to arrive at the true knowledge.
It is with this uncertainty that Philosophy truly becomes valuable. For Russell, someone who
doesn’t give an effort to be more analytical is locked in his own world, perceiving ideas that
are mere common sense. Thus, the methods of Philosophy must be utilized not for answers
to its questions, but for the effects the act of questioning brings to us – asking questions for
the sake of questions itself. Because of these questions, our minds open up to new horizons,
they enrich our intellect, stimulates us to be more creative, and brings us to further
knowledge, understanding, and appreciation of the world.

Answer the question below substantially.
1. Why is man considered as the highest in the hierarchy of beings?
2. What does it mean when it’s said, “asking questions for the sake of questions itself”?
3. How can the methods of Philosophy make us wiser?
14
Philosophy Applied
These days, many students look at education as an endeavor to gain more and more
knowledge in order to be used in the future. However, we must keep in mind that this
knowledge that is being imparted to us by our teachers and schools are for us to improve
ourselves and our society. After you graduate from college, how would you use the knowledge
that has been imparted unto you? When you are put in a difficult situation, how would you
behave? When you reach that bright future you’ve been dreaming, what else can you do? How
can the knowledge and the critical thinking skills you’ve acquired throughout your education
shape you and your world’s future? These questions need a certain amount of wisdom to be
answered. And the wisdom would come to you as you use your knowledge properly.
15
16
Lesson 4: Fallacies: Why and Where?
You may now have a great appreciation of the your capabilities as a human being.
However, we must be careful in crossing the line to being too proud. Although the human
mind is extraordinary, it also has its limitations. After all, we are not omniscient. In this lesson,
we are to discuss the possible errors that we can commit with our reasoning, so we can be
conscious of and avoid them as much as we can. It is also a reminder that, sometimes, we can
commit mistakes. But our fallibility, too, is natural.
Starting Out
What errors can the human mind commit?
Learn about It!
Upon further studies of Logic, one would realize that proper and strict valid reasoning
employs rules. The traditional Aristotelian Logic includes eight rules for the construction of a
valid Syllogism. Besides the eight rules, there are also
patterns and structure in constructing Propositions. Even
if we rely on the rules and follow them as much as we
could, they only govern the structure of an argument. We
may have an argument that is in conformity with the
rules, but may not be in conformity with reality. In other
words, it is possible for us to have correct but untrue
arguments. This means we have to check not only the
structure and the rules, but we also have to check the content and truthfulness of our
arguments. In terms of errors, we can commit them against both in the structure and the
content.
In Logic, errors or mistakes in reasoning are called fallacies. The term came from the Latin
17
word faller which means ‘deception’ or ‘false’. Hence, fallacies are false reasoning. One
important note to think about is that if a reasoning or argument committed a fallacy, it does
not necessarily mean that its conclusion is already false. The fallacies are committed in the
reasoning process itself. It usually follows that if the reasoning is false, then the conclusion is
also false. However, that is not always the case. Take this argument as an example:
Everything natural is good for the body.

Vegetable are natural.
Therefore, vegetables are good for the body.
In this example, the structure and form of the argument is correct. However, in terms of
content, it may be fallacious. The first line, “Everything natural is good for the body.”, is false
because if something is natural, it does not necessarily mean that it is already good for the
body. Hemlock is a plant, which means it is natural. However, it is actually poison. So, this
argument already committed a fallacy on its first line. Even so, it is still possible for the
conclusion (Therefore, vegetables are good
for the body.) to be correct.
There are hundreds, maybe even

thousands of fallacies out there. But, the
generally-accepted ones are classified into three: Irrelevance, Presumption, and Ambiguity.
The first classification, the Fallacies of Irrelevance are committed when the conclusion does
not have a connection or a ‘relevance’ to the premises of the argument. The claims of the
conclusion are not appropriately supported by the premises. Examples of these fallacies are
Argumentum ad Hominem, Argumentum ad Baculum, Argumentum ad Ignorantiam,
Argumentum ad Misericordiam, and Tu Quoque Fallacy.
The second classification, the Fallacies of Presumption are committed when our arguments
make a jump to a certain conclusion even without a strong evidence. As we know, the human
mind has its limitations. We do not possess knowledge about the things that had happened
before we were born, and we have no idea what will happen in the future. We, sometimes,
make presumptions in order to organize the affairs in our lives, but there is a tendency for us
to overdo it. We commit the Fallacies of Presumption when we speak with certainty, even if we
have no proof of it. Fallacies that fall under this classification are Fallacy of
Composition/Division, Fallacy of Complex Question, Slippery Slope Fallacy, False Cause Fallacy.
18
The last classification, the Fallacies of Ambiguity are fallacies that we commit due to our
limitations in language. The 20th philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein knew this limitations in
language, and thought in his concept of Logical Atomism that it is the task of philosophy to
rectify the mistakes we commit due to the limitations of our language. The Fallacies of
Ambiguity, hence, can also be called as Fallacies of Language. The way we convey our ideas
into language could, sometimes, result in ambiguous and vague statements that are open to
interpretation, and so we could proceed to a misunderstanding with the person we are
communicating with. Fallacies that fall under this classification are Fallacies of Equivocation,
Fallacies of Amphiboly, Fallacies of Accent.

Write the following fallacies into their proper classification.
Fallacy of Amphiboly Fallacy of Composition False Cause Fallacy

Argumentum ad Hominem Fallacy of Accent Argumentum ad Misericordiam
Fallacies of Irrelevance Fallacies of Presumption Fallacies of Language
Philosophy Applied
If you have been asked about your own views on a certain matter, how would you
answer? In some schools or universities of higher learning, there have been some debates
between the administration and the student councils whether uniforms should still be
required to be worn by the students. Most students argue for not wearing of uniform due to a
matter of preference. However, if you are placed into this debate, how would you defend your
position? We cannot just rely on our emotions or whichever we fancy because that would be
the instance when we’d commit fallacies. Hence, we need to be mindful of our own reasons.
19
20
Lesson 5: Fallacies: The Examples
Now that we’ve talked about fallacies, it is time to know them better through examples.
Note that there is a high probability that you’ve also done this. But let us bear in mind that we
are having this discussion for the purpose of bettering ourselves and the way we think.
Fallacies are natural to us, but there is no excuse for us to just accept them. In this
lesson, we will find the examples of different fallacies and how they present in an argument.
Starting Out
What does a fallacy look like?
Learn about It!
As what has been discussed in the previous lesson, there are three main classifications
of fallacies: Fallacies of Irrelevance, Presumption, and Ambiguity. We have provided the names
of some fallacies under these classifications, and we’ll further discuss them here.
Let’s start with the Fallacies of Irrelevance: Argumentum

ad Hominem, Argumentum ad Baculum, Argumentum ad
Ignorantiam, Argumentum ad Misericordiam, and Tu
Quoque Fallacy.
Argumentum ad Hominem is a Latin phrase that

translates to “an argument to the man” or “an attack to
the man”. In an argument, what we should address is the
argument itself. Argumentum ad Hominem consists of an
attack to the person who is speaking the argument
rather than to the argument itself. Here is an example:
21
Person A: Logic is an extremely important and useful subject.
Person B: You believe that because you're an idiot and you need logic.
Person B, instead of providing a reason why he thinks Person A is wrong, resorted to an attack
to the character of Person A through an insult.
Argumentum ad Baculum translates to “an appeal to the stick”. The stick is used as an
instrument to punish a child in order to force him to behave in ways his parents want him to.
Hence, this fallacy appeals to force or authority – whether physical or economical. Here is an
example:
Richard: Anna, you have to tell the board that my proposal is the best one. Else, I will fire you.
Note here that Richard is forcing Anna to do as he wishes and threatens her as an appeal to
punishment.
Argumentum ad Ignorantiam or “an appeal to ignorance” is a fallacy being used to argue the
non-existence of something due to a lack of knowledge. Here is an example:
Richard: I did not see Anna’s e-mail in my inbox. Therefore, she did not send it.
In this example, Richard equates his not seeing Anna’s e-mail to a conclusion that she did not
send it. Although it is possible that it went to a different folder in his e-mail and a number of
other possibilities.
Argumentum ad Misericordiam is “an appeal to misery”. This is usually in a form of verbal

and/or physical crying. It appeals to one’s emotion so the person will be convinced. Here is an
example:
Person A: You can't have a cigarette now. The hospital has a rule against smoking when you're
in an oxygen tent.
Person B: You've just got to let me have one. You can't believe what those doctors have done
to me. My life the last three days has been a living nightmare.
Tu Quoque Fallacy or “an appeal to hypocrisy” is a fallacy we commit by justifying our wrong
actions because somebody has done it as well. Here is an example:
22
Person A: You can’t cut classes today, we have a big exam later.
Person B: Oh come on, you’ve no right to lecture me, you have also cut classes last week.
In this example, Person B seems to be appealing to Person’s A hypocrisy that he cannot give
him a lecture to do the right action.
Let us proceed to examples of Fallacies of Presumption: Fallacies of Composition/Division,

Fallacy of Complex Question, Slippery Slope Fallacy, False Cause Fallacy.
Fallacies of Composition/Division is about the relation between parts and whole. Fallacy of
Composition happens when we mistakenly assume that what is true for the parts must also
be true for the whole. For Fallacy of Division, it is the other way around – we mistakenly
assume that what is true for the whole must also be true for the parts. Here is an example:
Fallacy of Composition: The dog’s tail is brown, his eyes are brown, his ears are brown. So, the
dog is brown.
Fallacy of Division: The dog is white. So, his tail is white, his eyes are white, his paws are white.
Fallacy of Complex Question happens when we raise a major questions that has implicit
minor questions. And when the major question is answer, the implied questions is also
answered. Here is an example:
Person A: Richard, how many bottles of rum did you finish last night?
Person A’s question assumes that Richard drank last night, and that his drink was rum.
Slippery Slope Fallacy consists of a sequence of claims that will cause another event which
will cause another event and so on. It is also known as a “domino theory”. Here is an example:
If I had a flat tire, I won’t be able to get to work, which would lead for me to have a sanction,
which is bad in my records. Hence, I won’t be able to get promotion due to a flat tire.
False Cause Fallacy is committed when two following events occur and we jump to the
conclusion that the first event caused the second event although no connection between
them can be found. Here is an example:
23
Event 1: Richard enters Anna’s hospital room to visit her.
Event 2: Anna gets a migraine.
Person A: You shouldn’t have visited her, Richard, you’re the cause of her migraines.
Person A here committed False Cause Fallacy because he does not have an evidence of his
claim that Richard, indeed, caused Anna’s migraine.
Let’s proceed, then, to Fallacies of Ambiguity: Fallacy of Equivocation, Fallacy of Amphiboly,

and Fallacy of Accent.
The Fallacy of Equivocation happens when we use a single term with two or more meanings
(an equivocal term) in our argument, and end up in a confusing manner. Here’s an example:
A ruler has 12 inches. G.M.A is a ruler. Hence, G.M.A has 12 inches.
In this example, the term ruler connotes as both a measuring instrument and a leader.
The Fallacy of Amphiboly, on the other hand, happens when our whole sentence, instead of
just a term, has two or more meanings. Here is an example:
The ancient Greek king Croesus wanted to attack the Persian empire. Before he did, he sent
for the Oracle to get an advice. The Oracle said, “If Croesus goes to war, he will destroy an
empire.” With this advice, Croesus went to war and lost.
The Oracle’s statement committed the Fallacy of Amphiboly because it was open for at least
two interpretations. The first is that Croesus would win and destroy the Persian empire, and
the second is that Croesus would lose and destroy his own empire.
The Fallacy of Accent is committed when our statements differs on meaning once we put
emphasis on certain words. Here is an
example:
I did not pass the exam last year.
If you put the accent or emphasis on the

word pass, this means he did something
24
else with the exam. If you put the accent or emphasis on the word exam, this means he may
have passed a different exam. . If you put the accent or emphasis on the phrase last year, this
means he passed it on a different time or year.
There are still so much more fallacies that we can commit. There are even philosophers whose
works have been dedicated to some fallacies itself like G.E. Moore’s naturalistic fallacy, in
which he said that the most basic terms in its most natural state like the term good is
indefinable and any attempt to do otherwise would be futile. Moore’s logical atomism is
similar to Wittgenstein’s which also focused on language.

Determine the fallacies committed in the following statements:
1. No one has ever seen an alien. Hence, there isn’t any.
2. I’ve never seen this flower in this room until she visited. This means she brought it.
3. How many times did you fire the gun to the victim?
4. You see, my parents will be disappointed and sad if I fail in your subject. So, please pass me.
5. Mom said to get water from the pitcher, so I went to Bob because he’s the team’s pitcher.
Philosophy Applied
These discussed fallacies serve as a way for us to check ourselves when reasoning out
with the people around us. Perhaps, we could even feel guilty in committing these fallacies.
You may have appealed to pity to your parents when they were pushing you to do your
chores. Perhaps, you have appealed to force to your siblings in order to get them do what you
wanted. You could have committed fallacies in language which led you to a misunderstanding
with your friends. Whatever the situation, we could easily commit errors in our reasoning, and
we have to be vigilant of our own mind. But, these are only minor situations. When you finish
college and start contributing to your society, you’ll be more involved in and affected by bigger
problems like the taxes you have to pay, or the public servant you’ll vote. But the point is that
we ought to act on these matters based on correct reasons, well-founded arguments, and
in-depth reflection.
25
Be the Philosopher!
Suggested Learning Tasks
Task: Formal debate: Divide your class into groups with at least six members in each group.
Each group will then be assigned a certain topic by your teacher. Each group will also be
divided further into two. The first is the Pros, and the other is the Cons. You will have to do
26
some research on the topic provided by your teacher about the pros or cons of that topic.
After being given the sufficient time to research, you will proceed to have a formal debate
wherein you will have to defend your position through the knowledge you have acquired
about the topic, valid justifications of your views, and minimizing errors in your reasoning
process.
Criteria Beginning Developing Accomplished Score
(0-12 points) (13-16 points) (17-20 points)
Content The ideas are The The

unoriginal, presentation presentation
unclear, expressed good expressed a lot
poorly and on-point of good ideas,
researched, a ideas, well-researched
mere sufficiently , with duly
presentation researched, supported
of opinions, showed justifications,
and well-founded and committed
committed knowledge, and almost nil
many committed only fallacies
fallacies. a few fallacies.
Organization The flow of The flow of the The flow of the

the presentation is presentation
presentation organized, can be
cannot be although there understood well
understood are some points and is very
and needs that needed organized.
improvement. clarification. There is clear
The ideas and smooth
needed more transition from
organization. one point to
another.
Conventions The writers The writers The writers

did not follow followed some complied to all
the of the the instructions
instructions, instructions but provided, and
and seems also did not the task was
unprepared adhere to the well-presented.
27
for the others.
presentation.
Total Score:
Philosophy & I: Check and Reflect

Mark the appropriate boxes that define your understanding of the lessons.
I think I need more I have a minimal I am confident that I

Skills understanding of it. can do this with ease.
time and assistance.
I can define the

terms and ideas used
in the lessons.
I can differentiate a
statement of opinion
from truth.
I can evaluate the
validity or invalidity
of an argument.
28
Wrap Up
● Epistemology is the branch of Philosophy that is concerned with the nature, scope, and
limitations of human knowledge.
● We can distinguish an objective truth from a subjective opinion by looking for a justified
true belief in one’s statement of propositions.
belief truth justification knowledge
● Another branch of Philosophy, Logic, is concerned with how we should formulate our
arguments. In traditional Aristotelian Logic, the creation of arguments in the human
mind occur in three step-by-step process.
● Simple Apprehension (Terms)
Judgment (Propositions)
Reasoning (Syllogisms)
● Aristotle’s hierarchy of beings in which man is at the top reminds us that it is important
for us to harness our mind and thinking skills because our rationality makes us human
and renders us unique from other beings.
● The value of wisdom acquired through philosophizing is on how it pushes and liberates
our minds from our own limiting prejudices.
● Although the human mind is wonderful, it can still commit mistakes in the form of
fallacies with three classifications: Irrelevance, Presumption, and Ambiguity. These
fallacies are a reminder that we ought to be carefully examine our thoughts to arrive a
valid and true conclusions.
29
Bibliography
Agapay, R. 2003. Logic: The Essentials of Deductive Reasoning. Manila: National Bookstore
Freeman, R. 2007. Logical Reasoning. 2005 University Quality Software
Gould, James A. and Mulvaney, Robert J. 2007. Classic Philosophical Questions, 12th ed. New
Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, Inc.
Russell, B. “The Value of Philosophy.” The Problems of Philosophy. The Skeptic’s Dictionary,
accessed January 27, 2018, http://skepdic.com/russell.html.
Wittgenstein, L. 1922. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, 2003 ed. New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc.
Glossary
1. Epistemology - the study of knowledge
2. fallacy - an error in reasoning
3. Judgment - the process of the mind that connects two ideas
4. Logic - the study of correct reasoning
5. logical atomism - a 20th century concept that brings language to its atomistic state to
be analyzed
6. naturalistic fallacy - a fallacy committed when the atomistic terms are attempted to be
defined
7. Propositions - the verbal expression of a judgment
8. rational - a characteristic of a being that can think and reason out
9. Reasoning - the process of the mind that uses propositions to create arguments
10.sentient - a characteristic of a being that can sense
11.Simple Apprehension - the process of the mind in grasping a concept / idea
12.Syllogisms - the verbal expression of reasoning
13.Terms - the verbal expression of an idea
14.vegetative - a state of being that is limited to producing and consuming
30
Answers to Check Your Understanding
Lesson 1: Questioning Truth and Knowledge
(Answers to Check Your Understanding in Lesson 1 depend on the examples to be given

by the students)
Lesson 2: Our Logical Investigations
Every bird can fly.

A chicken is a bird.
Hence, a chicken can fly.
Term 1: bird
Term 2: fly
Term 3: chicken
Proposition 1: Every bird can fly.

Proposition 2: A chicken is a bird.
Proposition 3: Hence, a chicken can fly.
Lesson 3: Wisdom Towards Knowledge
1. Why is man considered as the highest in the hierarchy of beings?
Man is considered as the highest in the hierarchy of beings because of his unique ability to
know and think. Minerals do not have life, plants only have life, animals have life and can
sense, but human beings have life, senses, and reason.
2. What does it mean when it’s said, “asking questions for the sake of questions itself”?
This means that the purpose of asking questions is not to have answers to it, but the effect
it has on a person’s way of thinking. When a person asks questions for the sake of
questions, he feeds his curiosity and excites his wonder which leads to a bigger
perspective.
31
3. How can the methods of Philosophy make us wiser?
The method of Philosophy frees the mind to look upon new horizons it never perceived
before. It makes us wiser and better decision-makers because we get to see different
points of view other than our own and take them into consideration in our process.
Lesson 4: Fallacies: Why and Where?
Fallacies of Irrelevance Fallacies of Presumption Fallacies of Language
Argumentum ad
Hominem Fallacy of Composition Fallacy of Amphiboly
Argumentum ad False Cause Fallacy Fallacy of Accent
Misericordiam
Lesson 5: Fallacies: The Examples
1. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam
2. False Cause Fallacy
3. Fallacy of Complex Question
4. Argumentum ad Misericordiam
5. Fallacy of Equivocation
32
LESSON 1: Questioning Truth and Knowledge
*PART 1:
I. Knowledge [Items 1-3. Simple recall of information presented]
1 – 3. Question Multiple Choice An Explanation
s
Which of the following are the A. truth X A justified true belief is what
criteria for knowledge? constitutes knowledge.
B. acceptance
C. belief X
D. justification X
II. Process [Items 4-7. Comprehension

4. Question Single Choice Explanation
What type of knowledge is A. Personal Knowing how to paint is a skill.
knowing how to paint? Hence, it is an example of a
B. Practical X
Practical/Procedural Knowledge.
C.
Propositional
D. Pivotal
What type of knowledge is A. Personal Since the statement is making a
this: “We can observe only 5% claim, this is an example of
B. Practical
of the universe.”? Propositional Knowledge.
C. X
Propositional
D. Pivotal
What type of knowledge is A. Personal Although the statement refers to
this: “Chi Minh is a great the skill of Chi Minh, this is
B. Practical
gymnast.” Propositional Knowledge because
33
C. X the focus of the speaker is the claim
Propositional that Chi Minh is great as a gymnast.
D. Pivotal
Part III: Application and HOTS questions

7. Question Single Choice Ans Explanation
.
What type of A. Personal X The statement is an example of Personal
knowledge is this: B. Practical Knowledge because this fact is learned as
“People experience one gets acquainted into the world.
some physical C. Propositional
changes as they D. Pivotal
age.”?
8. Question Categorizing Explanation
Consider the story A. truth Since it was his initial assessment, then it
below and was his belief.
B. acceptance
categorize the
statements in each C. belief X
number to belief, D. justification
truth, or
justification.
Mr. Brown is a
farmer who owns
Tent Farm. One
night, he saw
flashing lights on
the field and he
thinks it’s a UFO.
Little did he know
that it was a group
of campers playing
with their camp
lights by creating
different images
34
with its shadows.
Upon further
observation, Mr.
Brown concluded
that it’s not a UFO
because he went
out into the field,
found nothing
extra-terrestrial,
and asked the
campers what they
were doing.
8. He thinks it’s a
UFO.
Consider the story A. truth X This is the true situation as to why there are
above: flashing lights in Mr. Brown’s field.
B. acceptance
It was a group of C. belief
campers playing D. justification
with their camp
lights.
Consider the story A. truth This is the reasoning and the validation of
above: why Mr. Brown changed his initial belief.
He went out into

the field, found
nothing
extra-terrestrial,
and asked the
campers what they
were doing.
B. acceptance
C. belief
D. justification X
35
LESSON 2: Our Logical Investigations
*PART 1:
1. Question Single Choice An Explanation
s
Who is the “Father of Logic”? A. Socrates The first recorded study of Logic is
Aristotle’s.
B. Plato
C. Aristotle X
D. Pythagoras
What does Organon mean in A. tool X Accordingly, Logic is an Organon, a
English? tool we can utilize to arrive at the
B. use
Truth.
C. resource
D. capital
How many mental operations A. one The three mental operations are a
does the traditional logic has step-by-step process.
B. two
in its process?
C. three X
E. four

4-6. Question Sequencing Ans. Explanation
Which is the A. Propositions 2 Terms should come first which are
correct sequence? products of Simple Apprehension, then
B. Syllogisms 3
Propositions which are products of
C. Terms 1 Judgment, and Syllogisms which are
products of Reasoning.
7. Question Single Choice
36
“Records” – what is A. Term X “Records” is a term because it corresponds
this an example to a certain idea.
B. Proposition
of?
C. Syllogism
D. Symbol

8-9. Question Fill in the blanks Ans Explanation
.
Some students are 8. girls The term girls should be the subject, and
wearing uniform. 9. wearing wearing uniform should be the predicate in
All students are uniform the third line in order to make sense of the
whole syllogism.
girls.
Hence, some
8.______ are 9.______.
“All students are A. Term It is a statement that proposes or claims
girls.” – what is this something to be true.
B. Proposition X
an example of?
C. Syllogism
D. Symbol
LESSON 3: Wisdom Towards Knowledge
*PART 1:
1-4. Question Sequencing An Explanation
s
Arrange the choices according A. animals 3 Minerals are the lowest because
to the correct sequence in they do not have life, while man is
B. plants 2
accordance to Aristotle’s the highest because he has reason.
C. man 4
37
hierarchy of beings with 1 as D. minerals 1
the lowest.

5-6. Question Multiple Choice Ans. Explanation
Which of the A. animals X Animals have both senses and life, while
following beings man has senses, life, and reason. Plants
B. plants
have senses and only have life, and minerals do not have
C. man X any but form.
life?
D. minerals
7. Question Fill in the blank
According to misunderstandi It is due to the fact that the merits of
Russell, the view ng philosophizing are limited to those who
that philosophizing study and practice it.
is unimportant is a
_____.

8. Question Fill in the blank Ans Explanation
.
Bertrand Russell mathematician Russell mainly studied Mathematics and
has major Philosophy, so his major contributions are
contributions in in the area of analytic Philosophy and Logic.
Logic because he is
both a philosopher
and a _____.
9-10. Question Multiple Choice Explanation
Which among the A. economic The study of Philosophy and Logic directly
following are direct advancement trains the mind which results to personal
benefits of the virtues.
38
study of Philosophy B. critical X
and Logic? thinking skills
C. X
open-mindedne
ss
D. social
advancement
LESSON 4: Fallacies: Why and Where?
*PART 1:
s
What is the Latin word where A. fally The word faller means ‘false’, which
‘Fallacies’ originated from? corresponds to fallacies being
B. fallyer
mistakes in reasoning.
C. fallis
D. faller X
s
How many rules are there for A. two In the traditional Aristotelian logic,
the construction of a valid there are eight rules.
B. four
syllogism?
C. six
D. eight X
s
The Fallacy of Amphiboly is A. Irrelevance The Fallacy of Amphiboly is a fallacy
under which classification of of Language, which is another term
fallacies? for the Fallacies of Ambiguity.
B.
Presumption
C. Ambiguity X
D. Form
39
4-6. Question Multiple Choice Explanation
What are the three main A. Fallacies of X These classifications are according
classifications of fallacies? Irrelevance to the main errors in reasoning that
B. Fallacies of X we can commit.
Language
C. Fallacies of
Misinterpretati
on
D. Fallacies of X
Presumption
7. Question Fill in the blank Explanation
The Fallacies of Ambiguity are limitations Due to these limitations, arguments
committed because of our may result in misunderstanding.
_____ in language.

.
The Fallacies of A. certainty ‘Presumption’ happens when the conclusion
Presumption are B. confidence needs more evidence in order to be
committed due to a considered valid.
lack of what? C. evidence X
D. clarity
What classification A. Irrelevance X The Fallacies of Irrelevance are committed
of fallacies is due to the lack of connection between the
B. Presumption
committed when conclusion and premises.
40
the claim in the C. Ambiguity
conclusion is not D. Form
related to the
premises?
Where are fallacies A. in the X Fallacies are errors in reasoning itself.
committed? reasoning However, this does not automatically mean
process that the conclusion is also erroneous.
B. in the
conclusion of
the argument
C. in the rules of
the syllogism
D. in each
proposition
LESSON 5: Fallacies: The Examples
*PART 1:
s
It is a fallacy that translates to A. It is the fallacy that appeals to force
“an appeal to the stick”. Argumentum or punishment.
ad Hominem
B. X
Argumentum
ad Baculum
C.
Argumentum
ad
Ignorantiam
D. Tu Quoque
Fallacy
41
s
It is a fallacy that translates to A. It is the fallacy that appeals to one’s
“an appeal to ignorance”. Argumentum lack of knowledge.
ad Hominem
B.
Argumentum
ad Baculum
C. X
Argumentum
ad
Ignorantiam
D. Tu Quoque
Fallacy
s
Which fallacy is also called as A. Slippery X The Slippery Slope Fallacy is
“Domino Theory”? Slope Fallacy committed when there is a series of
causal claims which is similar to a
domino effect.
B. False Cause
Fallacy
C. Fallacy of
Composition
D. Fallacy of
Division

4-7. Question Categorizing Explanation
Categorize the following into A. Accent Am Division and Complex Question are
either Presumption or big examples of Fallacies of
Ambiguity. uit Presumption because they make
y assumptions in their conclusion.
42
B. Division Pre Accent and Equivocation are under
su the Fallacies of Ambiguity because
mp they commit mistakes in language.
tio
n
C. Complex Pre
Question su
mp
tio
n
D. Am
Equivocation big
uit
y

.
Which fallacy was A. False Cause The speaker is appealing to his ignorance by
committed in this Fallacy making a certain conclusion.
statement: “I don’t B. Argumentum
remember the last ad
time my sister treat Misericordiam
me to dinner. Thus,
she never did.”? C. Fallacy of
Amphiboly
D. Argumentum X
ad Ignorantiam
Which fallacy was A. Fallacy of X The statement differs in meaning
committed in this Accent depending on the emphasized word. When
statement: “Do not emphasis is put on the word your, this
B. Argumentum
means one can use another person’s
use your ad Baculum
cellphone. When emphasis is put on the
cellphone.”? C. Fallacy of word cellphone, then it is possible for one to
Complex use other gadgets.
Question
D. Argumentum
43
ad Hominem
Which fallacy was Argumentum ad The statement starts with the characteristic
committed in this Hominem (kills fire) of the whole (water), and proceeds
statement: “Water that its part (oxygen) also has the same
characteristic.
kills fire, oxygen is a
part of water. Thus,
oxygen kills fire.”
B. Fallacy of
Equivocation
C. Fallacy of X
Division
D. Fallacy of
Composition
44

Ip 03

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ip 03

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIT # 3: The Value of Human Knowledge

Lesson # 1: Questioning Truth and Knowledge

Lesson # 2: Our Logical Investigations

Lesson # 3: Wisdom Towards Knowledge

Lesson # 4: Fallacies: Why and Where?

Lesson # 5: Fallacies: The Examples

The Value of Human Knowledge

Philosophy in Our World

How can we differentiate an objective fact from a subjective opinion?

Learn about It!

Propositional Knowledge is the focus of Epistemology.

Check Your Understanding

How should we think?

Learn about It!

Another branch of Philosophy that focuses on the

All monkeys are brown.

A Syllogism, therefore, is a form of an argument that attempts to prove the claims of

Check Your Understanding

Every bird can fly.

Why is it significant for me to ‘know’?

Learn about It!

Aristotle had a hierarchy of beings – a method of putting each creature on Earth in a

Check Your Understanding

What errors can the human mind commit?

Learn about It!

Everything natural is good for the body.

There are hundreds, maybe even

Check Your Understanding

Fallacy of Amphiboly Fallacy of Composition False Cause Fallacy

Fallacies of Irrelevance Fallacies of Presumption Fallacies of Language

What does a fallacy look like?

Learn about It!

Let’s start with the Fallacies of Irrelevance: Argumentum

Argumentum ad Hominem is a Latin phrase that

Argumentum ad Misericordiam is “an appeal to misery”. This is usually in a form of verbal

Let us proceed to examples of Fallacies of Presumption: Fallacies of Composition/Division,

Let’s proceed, then, to Fallacies of Ambiguity: Fallacy of Equivocation, Fallacy of Amphiboly,

A ruler has 12 inches. G.M.A is a ruler. Hence, G.M.A has 12 inches.

I did not pass the exam last year.

If you put the accent or emphasis on the

Check Your Understanding

Suggested Learning Tasks

Criteria Beginning Developing Accomplished Score

(0-12 points) (13-16 points) (17-20 points)

Content The ideas are The The

Organization The flow of The flow of the The flow of the

Conventions The writers The writers The writers

Philosophy & I: Check and Reflect

I think I need more I have a minimal I am confident that I

I can define the

belief truth justification knowledge

Freeman, R. 2007. Logical Reasoning. 2005 University Quality Software

(Answers to Check Your Understanding in Lesson 1 depend on the examples to be given

Lesson 2: Our Logical Investigations

Every bird can fly.

Proposition 1: Every bird can fly.

Lesson 3: Wisdom Towards Knowledge

1. Why is man considered as the highest in the hierarchy of beings?

Lesson 4: Fallacies: Why and Where?

Fallacies of Irrelevance Fallacies of Presumption Fallacies of Language

Lesson 5: Fallacies: The Examples

II. Process [Items 4-7. Comprehension

Part III: Application and HOTS questions