ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY

ADDIS ABABA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Logic and critical thinking (PHIL 1011)

INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT
Instruction: WRITE THE DEFINITIONS OF THE MAIN TERMS
IN CHAPTERS 1,2,3AND 5.
PREPARED BY:
NAME: THOMS GEBEYEHU
ID NUMBER: UGR/1456/16
SECTION: 3
Submission date: sat, mar 16
Submitted to: DR. Abiy
 Chapter one
Introduction to philosophy
1. Philosophy: is a rational and critical enterprise that tries to formulate and
answer fundamental questions through an intensive application of reason
(an application that draws an analysis, comparison and evaluation)
2. Metaphysics: is the branch of philosophy that studies ultimate nature of
reality, God, freedom, soul, immortality, the mind-body problem, form, and
substance relationship and other related issues.
3. Cosmological aspect: study of theories about the origin nature and
development of universe as an orderly system.
4. Theological aspect: part of religious theory that deals about God
5. Anthropological aspect: deals with the study of human beings.
6. Ontology: study of ultimate nature of reality/ existence.
7. Epistemology: deals with nature, scope, meaning and possibility of
knowledge.
8. Empiricism: knowledge appears to be built into the very nature of human
experience.
9. Rationalism: is the view that reasoning, thought or logic is source of
knowledge.
10.Intuition: the direct apprehension of knowledge that is not derived from
conscious reasoning or immediate sense perception. It has been claimed
under varying circumstances as a source of both religious and secular
knowledge.
11.Revelation: knowledge has been of prime importance in the field of
religion.
12.Authority: accepted as true because it comes from the experts.
13.Axiology: is the philosophical study that deals about value/worth of
something
14.Ethics: philosophical study of principle used to judge human action as
good/ bad/ right/ wrong.
15.Normative ethics: refers to the ethical study and determine precisely the
moral rules , principles, standards and goals by which human beings might
evaluate and judge the moral values of their conduct.
16.Meta-ethics: is highly technical philosophical discipline that deals with
investigation of meaning of ethical terms, including a critical study of how
ethical statements can be verified.
17.Applied ethics: is a normative ethics that attempts to explain, justify, apply,
moral problems such as capital punishment, euthanasia, abortion, adultery,
animal right and so on.
18.Aesthetics: deals with beauty, art, enjoyment, sensory/ emotional values,
perception and matter of taste and sentiment.
19.Social/political philosophy: study about the value of judgements operating
in a civil societies.

Chapter two
Concepts of logic and argument

20.Logic: is the study or theory of principles of right reasoning. It deals with

formulating the right principles of reasoning and developing scientific
methods of evaluating the validity and soundness of argument.
21.Valid Deductive Argument: This type of reasoning ensures that the
conclusion necessarily follows from the given premises. If the premises are
true, the conclusion must also be true.

22.Invalid Deductive Argument: In this form of reasoning, the conclusion

does not necessarily follow from the premises, even if the premises are true.
Such arguments fail to establish a logical connection between the premises
and the conclusion.
23.Sound Argument: A sound argument has both a valid logical structure and
true premises. It logically follows that if the premises are accurate, the
conclusion must also be true. Sound arguments are reliable in establishing
the truth of their conclusions.
24.Unsound Argument: An unsound argument lacks either a valid logical
structure, contains false premises, or both. Consequently, the conclusion
may not logically follow from the given premises, rendering the argument
unreliable.
25.Strong Inductive Argument: This type of argument suggests that the
conclusion probably follows from the premises. The strength of an inductive
argument depends on how well the premises support the likelihood of the
conclusion being true.
26.Weak Inductive Argument: In weak inductive arguments, the connection
between the premises and the conclusion is not robust. The evidence
provided by the premises may be insufficient to reasonably support the
conclusion, making it unlikely to be true based on the given evidence.
27. Cogent argument: this is a type of inductive argument that is strong and
has all true premises. In other words, a cogent argument is both logically
strong (the conclusion probably follows from the premises) and
evidentially strong (the premises are true). Cogent arguments are
considered persuasive and reasonable, providing good support for their
conclusions.
28. Arguments based on mathematics: often involve using logical and
deductive reasoning to draw conclusions from mathematical principles
and relationships. Mathematical arguments are crucial for establishing
the validity and truth of mathematical statements, and they play a central
role in the development and advancement of mathematical knowledge.
29.Argument from Definition: is a type of argument that relies on the
meaning or definition of a term to support a conclusion. This argument
typically involves establishing a specific understanding or definition of a
key concept and then drawing conclusions based on that definition. It's
important to note that the strength of an Argument from Definition
depends on the clarity and appropriateness of the definition provided and
whether the application of that definition is reasonable in the given
context.
30. A categorical syllogism: is a specific form of deductive argument that
involves three categorical propositions to reach a conclusion. Each
proposition in a categorical syllogism makes a statement about the
relationship between two categories or classes.
31. Logic: is the systematic study of the principles of valid reasoning,
inference, and argumentation. It is a discipline that focuses on the
analysis and evaluation of arguments, aiming to establish the rules and
principles that govern correct reasoning. Logic is concerned with the
structure of arguments and the relationships between propositions,
providing a framework for distinguishing between valid and invalid
forms of reasoning.
32. Argument: can be defined in different contexts, but in the context of
logic and critical thinking, an argument refers to a set of statements or
propositions, where some statements (called premises) are intended to
provide support or evidence for another statement (called the conclusion).
33.Statement: is a declarative sentence that makes a claim, expresses a fact,
or presents an opinion. It is a linguistic expression that can be assessed as
either true or false. Statements convey information and are used to
convey propositions, assertions, or descriptions. They are a fundamental
concept in logic, philosophy, and various fields that involve reasoning
and analysis.
34.Truth value: refers to the property of a statement or proposition that
indicates whether it is true or false. In logic, each declarative sentence or
statement is assigned a truth value based on its correspondence with
reality.

35.Premise: A premise is a proposition or statement that forms the foundation

for an argument. In an argument, premises serve as the evidence or claims
put forward to support the conclusion. The strength of an argument depends
on the validity and truth of its premises1.
36.Conclusion: In the context of an argument, a conclusion is a proposition or
statement that the argument aims to establish or prove. It represents the
ultimate point or result derived from the premises. The reasoning presented
in the argument supports this claim1.
37.Conclusion Indicator: A conclusion indicator is a word or phrase that
signals the presence of the conclusion in a given statement. Recognizing
these indicators helps identify the main point or claim that the arguer
intends to establish. Examples of conclusion indicators include “thus,”
“therefore,” “hence,” “as a result,” and “ergo” 2.
38.Inference: An inference involves drawing a logical conclusion or making a
deduction based on available evidence or premises. It is a fundamental
element of reasoning and is employed in various contexts, including logical
arguments, scientific investigations, and everyday decision-making.
Inferences allow us to go beyond explicit information and uncover implicit
meanings or connections3.
39.Proposition: A proposition is a declarative statement expressing a complete
thought. It can be either true or false and serves as the basic unit of meaning
in logic. Propositions play a central role in logical reasoning across different
branches of logic1.
40.Syllogistic Logic: Syllogistic logic is a form of deductive reasoning. It
involves drawing conclusions from two premises that explicitly state a
relationship between two terms. Syllogisms consist of a major premise, a
minor premise, and a conclusion1.
41.Modal Logic: Modal logic deals with modalities, which express modes of
truth or necessity. Concepts like possibility, necessity, impossibility, and
 contingency fall within modal logic. It allows us to reason about different
levels of certainty and possibility1.
42.Explanation: A collection of statements or information that clarifies the
causes, reasons, or mechanisms behind a specific phenomenon or event. The
purpose of an explanation is to enhance understanding or shed light on why
something occurred.
43.Explanandum: The statement or phenomenon requiring an explanation. It
represents the fact or event we aim to understand or explain.
44.Explanans: The set of statements, principles, or reasons that form the
explanation for the explanandum. It encompasses the factors, laws, or
conditions that, when combined; provide a satisfactory account of why the
explanandum exists.
45.Antecedent: In a conditional statement (also known as an implication or if-
then statement), the part that follows “if.” It represents the condition or
proposition that, when true, leads to a specific consequence. The antecedent
establishes the context under which the statement applies.
46.Consequent: In the same conditional statement, the part that follows
“then.” It denotes the result or action that occurs when the antecedent is
satisfied or true. The consequent asserts a proposition as true based on the
specified condition in the antecedent.

47.Expository Writing: Expository passages aim to provide clear and

organized information, explain concepts, and describe topics. They are
commonly found in textbooks, essays, and articles.
48.Illustrations in Expository Writing: Illustrations within expository
passages are specific examples or case studies used to clarify points. They
make abstract ideas more relatable by providing real-life instances.
49.Arguments Based on Signs: These arguments rely on interpreting
observable signs or indicators to draw conclusions. They are common in
fields like forensic science and medicine.
50.Categorical Syllogism: A deductive reasoning form involving two premises
and a conclusion, expressed using categorical propositions (e.g., “All,”
“Some,” or “None”).

51.Particular Statement: A type of categorical proposition that asserts

something about at least some members of a class or category. There are
two subtypes: the particular affirmative (I-statement) and the particular
negative (O-statement).
52.Hypothetical Syllogism: A valid form of deductive reasoning involving
two conditional statements (if-then statements) and a conclusion derived
from them. It is commonly used in mathematics, logic, and problem-
solving.
53.Disjunctive Syllogism: A form of deductive reasoning where a major
premise presents mutually exclusive options, a minor premise eliminates
one option, and the conclusion affirms the other option. The key feature is
the presentation of alternatives, where the truth of one option implies the
falsity of the other.

Chapter three
Language, meaning and definition
54.Vagueness: Vagueness occurs when language lacks clarity or precision,
leading to uncertainty due to poorly defined boundaries or concepts.
55.Ambiguity: Ambiguity arises when a word, phrase, or statement has
multiple possible interpretations, often due to different senses of the word or
contextual factors.
56.Conceptual Meaning: Conceptual meaning refers to the fundamental
definition or core idea associated with a word or phrase.
57.Associative Meaning: Beyond its literal definition, associative meaning
includes secondary or additional connotations influenced by personal
experiences or cultural associations.
58.Connotative: meaning encompasses emotional or cultural associations
carried by a word, varying among individuals or groups.
59.Collocative: meaning relates to specific word combinations that naturally
occur together, revealing typical contexts or associations.
60.Social: Social meaning considers language within a social context,
reflecting identity, status, and group norms.
61.Affective: Affective meaning involves emotional responses evoked by
language. It includes feelings and attitudes associated with words or
communication. 🌟
62.Reflected Meaning: This refers to implied meanings conveyed indirectly
through language use, often inferred from the speaker’s tone, word choice,
or context.
63.Thematic Meaning: It encompasses the deeper themes or underlying
messages that emerge from a text or communication act, going beyond
surface content.
64.Idea Theories: These propose that a term’s meaning is tied to the mental
image or concept associated with it in the speaker’s or listener’s mind,
emphasizing mental representations.
65.Truth-Conditional Theories: These theories focus on the conditions under
which a sentence would be true or false, linking meaning to real-world
states of affairs.
66.Use Theories: They argue that meaning arises from how terms are
practically used in language, emphasizing communication function over
mental states.
67.Reference Theories: These theories highlight the relationship between
language and external entities, suggesting that meaning lies in a term’s
ability to refer to objects or concepts.
68.Verificationist Theories: Associated with logical positivism, they assert
that a sentence’s meaning depends on the method by which it can be
empirically verified or confirmed.
69.Pragmatist Theories: These theories focus on the practical consequences
of language use, emphasizing how language achieves specific goals or
outcomes.
70.Cognitive Meaning: This refers to the factual or informational content
conveyed by language, representing our cognitive understanding or
knowledge.
71.Emotive Meaning: Emotive meaning relates to the emotional or expressive
content conveyed by language, evoking feelings and attitudes.
72.Value Claim: A value claim expresses a judgment about the worth,
importance, or desirability of something, asserting a particular value or
normative stance.
73.Verbal Disputes: These occur when disagreements arise over the meanings
of terms or expressions, rather than substantive issues. They involve
semantic or linguistic disagreements.
74.Factual Disputes: Factual disputes involve conflicting beliefs or assertions
about empirical reality—what is true or false in the world.
75.Intensional Meaning: Intensional meaning refers to the specific properties
or characteristics associated with a term or concept, including necessary and
sufficient conditions.
76.Extensional Meaning: Extensional meaning pertains to the actual objects
or instances in the world to which a term applies.
77.Conventional Connotation: This refers to the culturally or socially
established associations or meanings that a word carries. These associations
are widely recognized within a linguistic community. For example, the word
“kid” has a slightly informal and somewhat disrespectful connotation
compared to “child.”
78.Empty Extension: When a term lacks referents or instances in the world, it
has an empty extension. Essentially, it may have a meaning or intension but
fails to pick out any actual objects or entities. Mythical creatures serve as an
example of terms with empty extension.
79.Increasing Intension: This process involves specifying or narrowing down
the properties associated with a term. By adding more specific attributes, we
enhance the meaning of the term. For instance, “fingerling potato” has
greater intension than simply “potato.”
80.Decreasing Intension: In contrast, decreasing intension broadens the
properties associated with a term. Specific attributes are removed, resulting
in a more general meaning. For example, “animal” has less intension than
“mammal.”
81.Increasing Extension: When we widen the scope or applicability of a term
to include more instances or referents, we achieve increasing extension. For
instance, “mammal” refers to a larger set of creatures than “zebra.”
82.Decreasing Extension: This process narrows the scope of a term to exclude
certain instances. It restricts the set of objects or entities to which the term
applies. An example would be specifying “currently living dinosaurs”
within the broader category of “dinosaurs.”
83.Stipulative Definitions: These assign new or specific meanings to terms for
discussion or clarification. They don’t necessarily reflect existing usage but
establish shared understanding in a particular context.
84.Lexical Definitions: These provide the standard or accepted meanings of
words as commonly understood or found in dictionaries. They capture the
everyday usage of terms in a language.
85.Précising Definitions: These aim to reduce vagueness by offering more
precise meanings for terms, clarifying their boundaries.
86.Theoretical Definitions: Used in scientific or academic contexts, they
establish precise meanings within specific frameworks.
87.Persuasive Definitions: Framed to influence opinions, they may use biased
language to support a viewpoint.
88.Demonstrative (Ostensive) Definitions: Point to specific examples to
illustrate a term’s meaning directly.
89.Enumerative Definitions: List individual instances falling under a concept,
creating a comprehensive catalog.
90.Definition by Subclass: Categorizes a term as a subtype or subset of a
broader category, highlighting distinguishing attributes.
91.Synonymous Definitions: Relate a term’s meaning to familiar synonyms or
equivalent expressions.
92.Etymological Definitions: Explore a term’s historical origins and
linguistic roots to understand its original context.
93. Operational definition: outlines the specific procedures or criteria
employed to measure or identify a concept or phenomenon. It provides
practical guidelines for how these terms are observed, measured, or
manipulated in empirical research.
94.Definition by genus and difference: assigns meaning to aterm by
identifying a genus term and one or more words that, when combined
convey the meaning of the term being defined.
95.Specific difference(difference): is attribute or attributes that distinguish
the various species with in genus.

Chapter Five
Informal Fallacy
96.Fallacy: A mistake in an argument resulting from defective reasoning or the
creation of an illusion that makes a bad argument appear good. There are
two types of fallacies.
97.Formal Fallacy: Identifiable by examining the form or structure of an
argument.
98.Informal Fallacies: Detectable only by examining the content of the
argument.
99.Fallacies of Relevance: These occur when arguments have premises that
are logically irrelevant to the conclusion.
100. Appeal to Force: When an arguer tells another person that harm will
come to them if they do not accept a certain conclusion.
101. Appeal to Pity Fallacy: An arguer attempts to support a conclusion by
evoking pity from the reader or listener.
102. Appeal to the People: Exploits desires for love, esteem, admiration, and
acceptance to persuade the reader or listener to accept a conclusion.
103. Argument Against the Person (Argumentum ad Hominem) : Involves
two arguers; one responds by directing attention to the first person rather
than their argument.
104. Accident Fallacy: Occurs when a general rule is mistakenly applied to a
specific case it was not intended to cover.
105. Straw Man Fallacy: An arguer distorts an opponent’s argument to more
easily attack it, then concludes that the opponent’s real argument has been
demolished.
106. Missing the Point (Ignoratio Elenchi): This occurs when an
argument’s premises support one conclusion, but a different, often loosely
related conclusion is drawn.
107. Red Herring: An arguer diverts attention by changing the subject to
something subtly related but not directly relevant.
108. Fallacies of Weak Induction: These happen when the connection
between premises and conclusion isn’t strong enough to support the
conclusion.
109. Appeal to Unqualified Authority (Argumentum ad Verecundiam) :
When a cited authority or witness lacks credibility.
110. Appeal to Ignorance (Argumentum ad Ignorantiam): Premises state
uncertainty, yet the conclusion assert something definitively.
111. Hasty Generalization (Converse Accident): Drawing conclusions
based on a sample that may not represent the entire group.
112. False Cause: Linking premises and conclusion through an imagined
causal connection that likely doesn’t exist.
113. Slippery Slope: The conclusion rests on an alleged chain reaction
without sufficient evidence.
114. Fallacy of Weak Analogy: Using an analogy that isn’t strong enough to
support the drawn conclusion.
115. Fallacies of Presumption: Premises assume what they aim to prove.
116. Begging the Question Fallacy: This occurs when an arguer gives the
illusion that inadequate premises sufficiently support a conclusion. They
might omit a shaky key premise, restate a possibly false premise as the
conclusion, or engage in circular reasoning.
117. Complex Question Fallacy: When multiple questions are disguised as a
single question, and a single answer is then provided for all of them.
118. Suppressed Evidence Fallacy: In an inductive argument, this fallacy
occurs when important evidence is ignored.
119. False Dichotomy Fallacy: An arguer presents two unlikely alternatives
as if they are the only options, eliminates the undesirable one, and leaves the
desirable one as the conclusion.
120. Equivocation Fallacy: The conclusion of an argument depends on a
word or phrase being used in different senses.
121. Amphiboly Fallacy: Arises when an arguer misinterprets an ambiguous
statement and draws a flawed conclusion.
122. Composition Fallacy: The conclusion depends on mistakenly
transferring an attribute from parts to the whole.
123. Division Fallacy: The conclusion depends on erroneously transferring
an attribute from a whole (or class) to its parts (or members).
124. Propositional Fallacy: An error related to compound propositions.
125. Fallacies of Grammatical Analogy: These occur when a defective
argument appears good due to grammatical similarity with a non-fallacious
argument.