Ugr150 Combined Slides

UGRC 150
CRITICAL THINKING &

PRACTICAL REASONING
Session 2 – THOUGHTS AS OBJECTS OF SCRUTINY
Instructor: Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Dept. of Philosophy & Classics, UG
Contact Information: rkwesi@ug.edu.gh
College of Education
School of Continuing and Distance Education
2020-2021 Academic Year
Session Overview
Humans are thinking beings and they very often express their
thoughts in the form of language. This session seeks to get
students to understand how to treat thoughts as objects of study,
that is, to understand the study of the contents of our thoughts
which are expressed through language.
We use sentences to express our thoughts, and the sentences we
use can be categorized into statements, interrogatives, imperatives,
among others.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 2

Goals and Objectives
• At the end of the session, the student will

• Be able to tell what a sentence is.
• Be able to identify the subject and predicate of a sentence.
• Be able to tell how a sentence differs from a statement.
• Be able to tell why some interrogatives are imperatives.
• Understand declarative sentence.
• Be able to contrast factual sentence with imperative.
• Understand the difference between sentence fragment and
emotive expressions.

Required Reading
• Students are to read UNIT 1 of the Required Text book: UGRC
150 Critical Thinking and Practical Reasoning

Introduction
• Sentence-shape thought refers to the different forms of

sentences that express the different thoughts of human
beings.
• Some sentences serve to ask questions to gain
information while others issue a directive or request to
get something done. Some sentences also convey
information.
• The types of sentence-shape thought are Interrogative,
imperative, and declarative sentences.
• The types of sentence shape thought are complete
sentences. The subject and the predicate are present.
What is a sentence?
• A sentence is a group of words that has a subject and predicate,

independent on its own, and makes meaning or complete thought
• •SUBJECT- the person or thing that the sentence talks about.
Reference class
• •PREDICATE- The part of the sentence that talks about the subject.
Attribute Class
• Examples:
1. Joan is a student.
2. Mathematics is an interesting subject.
3. You are great!

Subject vs Predicate
• SUBJECT
3. You are great!
• PREDICATE
3. You are great!

What is a statement?
. A statement is a sentence that says something which is either
true or false.
Examples:
1. Socrates is a man.
2. A triangle has three sides.
3. Madrid is the capital of Spain.
4. UGRC I50 is a compulsory course for all students in University of
Ghana.
. However NOT all sentences are statements.
Examples,
"Who are you?"
"Run!"
"Greenness perambulates"
NB: Statements are Truth Bearers.
Types of Sentences

INTERROGATIVES
• Interrogatives also called questions are sentences expressed to
seek for information. If the correct answers are provided then
they are successful.
• Examples:
1.Did you take your vitamin this morning?
2.Do you want coffee, tea, or soda?
3.Where do you live?
4.Who is playing in the Super Bowl?
5.There’s a game on today, isn’t there?
NB. Interrogatives are not Truth Bearers;
They are not true or false sentences
IMPERATIVES
• Imperatives are sentences expressed to get someone

to perform an action. They are also called directives,
commands, and requests.
• Examples: commands-
1.Take that chewing gum out of your mouth.
2.Stand up straight.
3.Give me the details.
• Examples: directives-
1.Open your book.

IMPERATIVES....
2.Take two tablets every evening.
3.Take a left and then a right.
• Examples: request-
1.Please, close the door.
2.Please, can you help me cross the street?
3.Can you open the window?
• However, when an imperative is made in a polite
manner, it turns to have an explicit and implicit
meaning at the same time.
• NB Imperatives are also not truth bearers.
DECLARATIVES
• Sentences that convey information of different kinds are called

declarative sentences. They can be true or false(TRUTH
BEARERS) Thus, they are also called statements or propositions.
• Examples:
1.There are five million people at risk.
2. London is the capital of England.
3. She asked whether I liked her dress.
4. It’s a nice day for a walk along the beach.
5. I think you should wear the blue shirt with the khaki pants.
6. We’re going to the movies later this evening.

TYPES OF DECLARATIVE SENTENCES
• There are three different types of declarative sentence. These
are factual statements, definitions, and value judgments.
• FACTUAL STATEMENTS: They are sentences that describe the
way the world is.
• Examples.
• 1.“The current temperature is above 0° Fahrenheit.”,
• 2. “My car's battery must be dead since the car will not start and the
lights and horn do not work either.”
• 3.“It is raining outside.”
They are usually found to be true or false by the use of our senses.
NB: Factual statements are not the same as Facts
TYPES OF DECLARATIVES ...DEFINITIONS
• DEFINITIONS: They are sentences that conveys the

correct meaning of words. These statements are true
in virtue of their meanings alone.
• Examples.
1. Even number is any number that is divisible by two without a
remainder”
2. Widow is a woman whose husband is dead.
3. Bank is a place where moneys are kept or borrowed.
• NB if the meaning of the word is correct then it is
true. But if the meaning is incorrect then it is false.
TYPES OF DECLARATIVES ...VALUE JUDGEMENTS
• VALUE JUDGMENTS: They are sentences that prescribe or

evaluates the way something should be or how someone
in the world ought to behave. Examples.
1. He should not leave the car door open.
2. It is not appropriate to insult your wife.
3. The knife that I used to cut the meat has a really good edge
4. Abortion is committing murder and should not be legalized.
• NB: value judgments do NOT state facts or realities but
rather interpret facts or realities to express an opinion.

TYPES OF VALUE JUDGEMENTS
• Value judgments come in two forms.
1. Moral Value Judgments
(a) It is not appropriate to insult your wife.
(b) Abortion is committing murder and should not
be legalized.
2. Non-Moral Value Judgments
(c) The knife that I used to cut the meat has a really
good edge.
(d) He should not slam the car door.

IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT MEANING
 normative principles—indicate how things must be or how
they should be
 empirical generalizations—report how things are in fact.
 statements can contain implicit and explicit meanings
 In many cases, we state explicitly what we think to be the

case and implicitly what we say reflects what we believe
should be the case. Such statements convey both a fact
and a value judgment
 E.g. “Without IMF policies imposed on the Ghanaian
population, Sahel girls would never learn to read.”
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
IMPLICIT AND EXPLICIT MEANING......
 Factual statement about rights but expressing a
covert value judgment
- E.g. The government has no right to impose any restriction
upon my progeny (a bill to render illegal a stipulated excess
number of children borne by a couple)
 Factual statement followed by implicit value
judgment
- Eg. In california during the 1980s there were more African
American males of college age incarcerated in prison than
were enrolled in universities. When Schwarzenegger
became governor of the state, he did nothing to correct this
situation but continued to devote more state taxes to the
horrendous operation of building more prisons than to
provide scholarships or support to state school system.
METAPHORS
• Metaphors are also another way of expressing a value
judgment.
• Examples.
1.Sampson is a lion. ( Sampson is courageous or brave)
2.Mothers are jewels. ( Mothers are precious)
3.Bukom Banku is Mohammed Ali. ( Bukom banku is a
good boxer)
NB: Since metaphorical meanings are often indeterminate
and that metaphors have meanings beyond what they
literally express, they are not the locus for logical analysis
or critical thinking
SENTENCE FRAGMENTS
• SENTENCE FRAGMENTS are sentences that do not express
Complete thought because they do not have either a subject, a verb
or a predicate. They are incomplete sentences.
Examples of sentence fragments.
1. Because his car was in the shop(What did he do?)
2. After the rain stops(What then?)
3. If you want to go with me (What should you do?)
4. When you finally take the test (What will happen?)
NB. Since fragments are incomplete sentences, they are not

regarded as truth bearer expressions

EMOTIVE EXPRESSIONS
• Emotive expressions are sentences that express strong
feelings sometimes by the use of an exclamation(!). They
show a vast range of emotions……love, anger, happiness,
confusion, elation or any other typed of exuberant
emotion.
• Examples of emotive expressions
1. What exceptional children these are!(astonished)
2. Fantastic, we closed the deal! (elation)
3. I simply adore you! (love)

EMOTIVE EXPRESSIONS.....
4. My life will never be the same without you! (sorrow)

5. Our team won the championship! (happiness)
6. Oh, I didn’t see you come in! (surprise)
7. Wow!, Brilliant!, Awesome!, Ouch!, Bravo!. ETC
NB: Emotive expressions are subjective and have no

basis for rational evaluation. They are also not truth
bearers.

NO NEAT LINES DRAWN...
Sentences can fulfil more than one purpose on a single occasion
1. A question can be overtly a request for information and covertly a
request to get something done.
2. A sentence can be a statement expressing information but implicitly
giving a directive
3. A statement can express both a fact and a definition at the same time
4. A statement can express a fact (explicitly) and a value judgment
(implicitly) at the same time
5. A statement can express a value judgment and an imperative at the
same time

END OF SESSION 2
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

UGRC 150
CRITICAL THINKING &
PRACTICAL REASONING
Session 3 - DEFINITIONS

Contact Information: ugrc150ct@gmail.com
Session Overview
• Contrary to what many students might suppose before their

exposure to this course, there are different types of definition. The
type of definition found in the dictionary which is also the one with
which students are familiar, is just one of the six definitions that
will be discussed. In this session, a distinction will be made between
connotation and denotation of a word, after which the different
types of definitions will be discussed. The session will end by
identifying some problems with definitions

At the end the session, students should
1. Understand when the connotation or denotation of a word is
implied in a definition
2. Be able to write good examples of connation and denotation of a
word.
3. Be able to identify the different types of definitions
4. Be able to recognize when a definition is vague, circular, too narrow
and too broad.

Outline and Reading
The key topics to be covered in the session are as follows:
• What are Definitions?
• Connotation and Denotation of a word
• Types Of Definitions:
(a) lexical definition
(b) Ostensive definition
(c) Operational definition
(d) theoretical definition
(e) stipulative definition.
(f) real definition.
• Diagnosing problems with Definitions
READ UNIT 2 OF THE TEXTBOOK
What is a Definition?
• A Definition is a declarative sentence that conveys or presents the

meaning of a word.
• Examples:
remainder.
2. Culture is the way of life of a people, their norms, values, music,
and beliefs that are transmitted from one generation to the
other.
3. Bank is a place where money is kept or borrowed.

Why Definitions?
1. To achieve Clarity and relevance of concepts and terms

2. To Avoid obscurity
3. So that our statements and arguments are not misconstrued
4. To avoid ambiguity and equivocation
5. To Avoid verbal disputes

Parts of a Definition
• Every standard definition must have two parts: the

definiendum and the definiens.
• DEFINIENDUM:- The word to be defined which is the

subject of the definition(statement)
Examples:
1 Even number is any number that is divisible by two
without a remainder.
2.Triangle is a plane figure with three sides and has all the
interior angles summing up to 180 degrees.
Parts of a Definition...
• DEFINIENS:- The rest of the definition that conveys

the meaning of the word. It gives the word’s
connotation.
• Example:
1. Even number is any number that is divisible by
two without a remainder.
2.Triangle is a plane figure with three side and has
all the interior angles summing up to 180 degrees.
3. Widow is a woman whose husband is dead.

Parts of a Definition...

Connotation and Denotation
• In conveying the meaning of a word, there are two ways
that we can do that. We can either convey the meaning of a
word by its CONNOTATION or DENOTATION.
• CONNOTATION:- This is when the meaning of a word gives
a description of the features or attributes or properties of
range of objects in the world to which the word may be
applied.
• Examples. ( head, mobile phone, )
1. Head is the upper part of a human body or an animal’s
body that contains the brain and the face.
2. Mobile phone is an electronic device for receiving and making
calls. Slide 10
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Connotation and Denotation....
• DENOTATION: (also called the extension of the word) This
refers to the collection of all the things in the world that
are correctly picked out by a word’s connotation. It refers
to the definition that conveys the meaning of a word by
giving examples.
• Examples:
• The meaning of mobile phone for example are Samsung phone,
Nokia lumia phone, Motorola phone, LG Phone.
• The meaning of even number for example are 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, .
• NB: It is the connotation of a word that is spelt out as its
definition


• The relationship that exists between the connotation and the
denotation is that, given the connotation of word, we can
identify or determine it’s denotation.
• For instance;
If the word ‘Head’ is defined as “the upper part of the
human body or an animal’s body that contains the brain and
the face”, then its denotations will be the head of every
human being on earth as well as that of any animal.

• But the same word ‘Head’ can also be defined as referring to
“someone who is in charge of an operation or institution.” In this
instance the denotations will be all persons that are in charge of
specific operations or particular institutions.
• Thus depending on the connotation of a word we will be able to

determine its denotations.
• NB. IF a word has several connotations, each connotation will

have their respective denotations.

TYPES OF DEFINITIONS
• When we talk about the “types of definitions” we mean the
different sources of, and methods for, creating or deriving
definitions or meaning of words.
• In this course we will be discussing only six different types of
definition.
• The Six Types Are As Follows.
1. LEXICAL DEFINITION
2. OSTENSIVE DEFINITION
3. OPERATIONAL DEFINITION
4. THEORETICAL DEFINITION
5. STIPULATIVE DEFINITION
6. REAL DEFINITION
1. LEXICAL DEFINITION
• LEXICAL DEFINITION is also called dictionary definition. It refers to
the definition of words that are taken from the dictionary. Dictionary
definitions mostly describe the connotation of words.
• Merit: It describes the connotations of a word as it is understood in
everyday or popular discourse within a language community
• Demerit: It may be vague for particular purposes, or too narrow or
too broad, or it may be flawed or inadequate

2. OSTENSIVE DEFINITION
• Sometimes it becomes difficult to use words to convey the
meaning of certain words such that it becomes more appropriate
to show or point to an object to convey the meaning of the word.
Thus ostensive definition is when you give an example or point to
an object or demonstrate it to convey the meaning of a word.
• Examples:
1. Using blood to covey what color red is.
2. listing the set of numbers to convey what an even number is.
3. Pointing to someone dancing an azonto to show a friend who does not know
what dance is AZONTO.
Demerit: Not all words can be demonstrated, e.g. eternity, democracy
NB: Ostensive definition gives us the denotation of a word.
3. OPERATIONAL DEFINITION
• Operational definition is when a series of step by step procedure is
required to be followed in order to arrive at the meaning of a word.
Following the instructions in the definition will let you understand
what the word means.
• Examples:
1. To understand what an even number is, do the following: Take any number between 1
and 10, divide that number by two. Then check to see for a remainder . If there is no
remainder then that number is an even number.
2. ‘water soluble’: 1. Take a clean beaker 2. Add 50cc of unsaturated water at room
temperature 3. Add ¼ teaspoon of the substance to the beaker 4. Stir five to ten times 5. If
the substance dissolves, then it is called water soluble
• This type of definition is helpful when meaning of words need to
be made precise and exact. However, there are many words where
operational definition is impossible
4. THEORETICAL DEFINITION
• Theoretical definition refers to the meaning of words that come
from theories that have gained acceptance in specific fields of
scientific knowledge, social studies, and the humanities.
• Examples:
1. ‘Water is H2O’. (To understand this definition you must have been
thought chemistry or be a chemist.)
2. The Higgs boson is an elementary particle in the Standard
Model of particle physics; It is the quantum excitation of the Higgs
field, a fundamental field of crucial importance to particle
physics theory first suspected to exist in the 1960s.
3. In microeconomic theory, the opportunity cost, also known
as alternative cost, is the value (not a benefit) of the choice of a best
alternative cost while making a decision.
5. STIPULATIVE DEFINITION
• When the meaning of a word is agreed on for the purposes of a
debate or a discussion or a project then we say a stipulative
definition has been established.
• A definition in which a new or currently-existing term is given a new
meaning for the purposes of argument or discussion in a given
context.
• A declaration of a meaning that is intended to be attached by the
speaker to a word, expression, or symbol and that usually does not
already have an established use in the sense intended
• Examples:
1.Suppose some one says that to love someone is to be willing to die for that person.
2. Take "human" to mean any member of the species Homo sapiens.
3. "MBA" to mean married but available.
6. REAL DEFINITION
• This is also called ideal, or eliminative, or essential definition
achieved by fixing the conditions that are both necessary and
sufficient in the correct use of a word
• A real definition is a definition that provides the core meaning or
the essential meaning of a word. That is to say a definition of what
a word appropriately stands for.
• Such a definition provides all the features and only those features
that appropriately belong to a word.
• Example:
remainder.
6. REAL DEFINITION....
• Real definition is a well-defined definition
• When a term is well-defined, it means that the definition

makes it completely clear all the things or objects in the
world that are correctly called or picked out by the word.

• For any eliminative definition, the definiendum could be
eliminated and replaced by the definiens in every context
where the word which is being defined is used. This is because
the definition provides the necessary and sufficient conditions
for using the word correctly.
• Illustration:
• Lets consider the definition of an even number as an
eliminative definition.
• Even number is any whole number that is divisible by two

• Definiendum – even number

• Definiens – any whole number divisible by two
Now lets consider the statement “all multiples of two
are even numbers” for the illustration.
1.All multiples of two are even numbers.
Results are 2, 4, 6, 8, 10,………..
2. All multiples of two are whole numbers divisible by
two without any remainders.
Results are 2, 4, 6, 8, 10………..
• We can see from the above illustration that when the
definiendum was replaced with the definiens, the same
meaning was obtained from the statement. The truth of the
statement “all multiples of two are even numbers” remains
the same.
• This is what it means to say a definition is eliminative.
• NB: achieving the essential meaning of words enables us to

avoid vagueness and ambiguity in the construction of the
meanings of words.

WELL-DEFINED TERM VERSUS
OPEN-TEXTURED WORD
• A term or word is said to be a well-defined term if we can
successfully achieve its essential definition. That is if we
can provide a definition that makes it completely clear
devoid of vagueness and ambiguity which objects or
individuals or properties are correctly called by that word.
• Examples of terms whose definitions are well- defined are
terms from the field of mathematics and pure science.
Words like even number, Set, Square, Triangle etc are all
well defined terms. Their definitions are ideal or real or
essential definitions.

OPEN-TEXTURED WORD
• The definition of an even number says that for any number to
be called an even number then that number must be divisible
by two without a remainder. So with this definition one would
be able to perform the necessary operation to determine
which numbers are even and which are not.
• The same goes for triangle, circle, a set, and all the other
terms in mathematics.
• NB. WELL-DEFINED TERMS HAVE ONLY ONE MEANING.

OPEN-TEXTURED WORD
• However, a term is said to be an open class concept when it is
difficult for the core meaning or the essential meaning to be
achieved. Thus in an attempt to derive the essential meaning
or real meaning we end up with many interpretations for such
a word.
• Open class concepts are concepts that are open to several
interpretations. They are also called essentially contestable
concepts or open textured words.
• Subject areas like Psychology, History and Economics contain
many key terms that are open class concepts(that is, cannot
be well defined).

OPEN-TEXTURED WORD
• Examples of open class concepts are;
• Family , justice, intelligence, equality, democratic

process, life, love, wisdom, modernity, fidelity etc.
• THESE WORDS HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT MEANINGS
OR INTERPRETATIONS BY DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

PROBLEMS OF DEFINITIONS
• In this final part of the session on definitions, we look at the
problems that can be identified in the definitions we provide for
words. The purpose is to warn ourselves against such problems
and to avoid making them in our essays and projects as well as in
our speeches.
• The problems or flaws arising with definitions: Definitions can be…
1. Too narrow
2. Too broad
3. Vague
4. Circular (also called begging the question)
5. Pseudo-Definition
6. Multiply-flawed Definition (flawed in more ways than one)
1. TOO NARROW
• A definition is too narrow when the definiens does not cover all
the things in the world that correctly belong in the denotation
of the word. In other words, the definition does not cover all
the denotations of the word.
• Examples:
1.Chair is wooden object for one person to sit on with a back
support and has only four legs. This means that benches, wheel
chairs, sofas and other examples of chairs will not be called
chairs. The definition leaves them out of the things correctly
called chairs.
2. A watch is a device that is worn on the wrist for telling time.
Clocks, and other time telling devices are left out and only those
worn on wrists are included Slide 32
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
2. TOO BROAD
• A definition is too broad when the definiens covers things
that do not belong in the denotations of the word. That is,
the definition covers things that are not correctly called by
that word.
• Example:
1. Student is an individual in uniform. Thus police, nurses,
doctors, cooks, and other professions that wear uniforms are
all students.( The definition is can also too narrow, and hence
multiply-flawed)
2. Antelope is an animal with four legs that lives in the forest.
Tigers, elephants, lions, and zebras will all be called antelopes

3. VAGUE
• A definition is vague when the definiens does not specify
adequately to determine what belongs to the word’s
denotation. That is the definition is not clear or precise enough
for one to be able to identify the things or objects or individuals
in the world that the word refers to.
• Example:
1. A factual statement is a statement that describes. The
question then is what does it describe. Toys? numbers? human
beings? insects? Ghosts?
2. A president is the head of a country. The next question is
what does “head of a country” mean?

ARE THESE ALL ‘BALD’?
What does it mean to be bald?

4. CIRCULAR OR BEGGING THE QUESTION
• A definition is circular or begs the question when the

definiens repeats or restates the definiendum. Or, when it
contains words that are just as obscure as the one being
defined.
• Examples:
1. Computer is an electronic device for computing.
2. Humility is being humble.
3. A driver is someone who knows how to drive and drives.

5. PSEUDO-DEFINITION
• A good definition is supposed to be devoid of our personal
feelings or judgements. A definition is a pseudo-definition
(not a definition or a false definition) when the definiens
convey an emotive expression or a value judgement.
• Examples:
1. ‘homosexuality’ is the evil act where two people of the
same sex have sex
2. ‘abortion’ is the sinful practice where a mother kills her baby
before it is born and which automatically makes the mother a
candidate of hell.

6. MULTIPLY-FLAWED DEFINITION
• This is the case where a definition is flawed in more than one of
the mistakes identified above; that is, for instance, the definition
can be both too narrow and too broad, or too broad and vague, or
vague and circular, etc.
• Example:
• ‘Spirituality’ is a characteristic exhibited by a person who attends

with sincerity and faithfulness some form of church service on a
regular basis.
• This definition is too narrow because some spiritual people go to mosques; it is
too broad because it makes almost every church goer spiritual; it is vague
because it is not clear what is meant by attendance with ‘sincerity and
faithfulness’
END OF SESSION
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

UGRC 150
CRITICAL THINKING &
PRACTICAL
REASONING
Session 4 – CONTRASTING TYPES OF
DISCOURSE
Session Overview
• In Sessions 2 and 3 you were introduced to techniques for
studying the meaning and different uses of individual sentences.
• But most of the time when we gather information we do not think
about individual sentences one at a time in isolation from each
other. In this Session you will apply these same techniques to
scrutinise batches of sentences working together—in written
passages and spoken conversations, where sentences are ordered
in distinct ways for different purposes
• Sentences usually convey more than single bit of information or a
single level of meaning at a time. We need to assess what is
communicated both implicitly and explicitly, indirectly as well as
overtly, in order to make correct evaluations and to draw correct
conclusions from what we hear and read as critical thinkers and
good practical reasoners.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Upon completion of this Session you will see where logical
analysis belongs because you will be able to:
• distinguish between a verbal dispute and a substantive
disagreement
• appreciate the deviations from literal interpretation required by
metaphor, allegory and proverbial discourse
• recognise when ambiguity, vagueness, and equivocation
require correction
• identify when a passage contains an argument rather than a
narrative, a set of instructions, or self-asserting rhetorical
polemic
REQUIRED READING: UNIT 3 of the Textbook

TYPES OF DISPUTES
VERBAL DISPUTES VS SUBSTANTIVE DISAGREEMENTS

Verbal Disputes and Substantive
Disagreements
• To discover how correcting inconsistencies in the use of
words can help to fix a disagreement that is steeped in
confusion.
• Correcting a confusion does not always mean we can
wipe away a disagreement by resolving people’s
conflicting views.
• Correcting confusion may involve instead forwarding the
discussion to a productive level, either making clearer
what the disagreement is about, or reaching a deeper,
wider, or more complicated level of the disagreement.
• Sometimes disagreement is a good thing.

What is a dispute?
• A dispute may be defined as a disagreement or a controversy or
difference of opinion between two or more people. Or Basically an
argument between two or more people.
• For instance, if I say my grand mother was a good woman and you
say she was a horrible woman then we can say there is a dispute in
opinion about my grand mother.
• We will be contrasting these two types of disputes or

disagreements.
1.Verbal disputes
2.Substantive disagreements

Verbal Disputes
• A verbal dispute is a disagreement which occurs as a result of
difference in opinion about the meaning of a word and the dispute can
be resolved easily when the meaning is clarified. That is, when two
parties to a dispute are interpreting a particular word differently and
that is what causes them to disagree with each other.
 A verbal dispute is therefore a disagreement which rests upon an
inconsistency in the way the disputants are using the same words.
 Once the meanings of key words are clarified so that both sides of the
dispute are relying upon the same meanings, then either it becomes
clear that there is no real difference of opinion, or it becomes clear
instead what is the nature and quality of their disagreement.

Verbal Disputes
Example 1:
•Liz: Kpanlogo is a traditional folkloric dance that our Ga ancestors used to
dance only at funerals for hundreds of years.
•Rich: NO! Kpanlogo is a neo-traditional popular dance that the dance-
band Otoo Lincoln and his group created in Bukom Square, Accra, around
1962. He relied on the old funeral dirges to build up a versatile form of
popular dance which suits every occasion nowadays, including funerals.
•This is a verbal dispute because the dance “kpanlogo” is what is causing
them to disagree.

Verbal Disputes
Example 2:
Liz: Kwame has new laptop.
Rich: No, he does not. His brother gave him his old computer
which he upgraded, and that computer is at least five years
old.
So does Kwame have a “new” laptop? This depends on how one
defines “new”. So this is also a verbal dispute.
• Verbal disputes can be dissolved by means of a stipulative

definition where the parties to the dispute finally settle on a
common usage or meaning of the word causing them to
disagree in the first place.
Substantive Disagreement
• On the other hand if the disagreement or dispute is about the
expression of different opinions about facts or subscription to
contrasting values then the dispute in question is considered as a
substantive dispute or disagreement.
• Substantive disagreements can be pursued fruitfully on logical
grounds.
• Example:
Liz: The US army personnel are helping Iraqi citizens because their
presence maintains a peaceful and secure environment.
Rich: No, these US soldiers are imposing martial law and have orders
to target civilians so they pose a threat to Iraqi citizens.
This is a substantive dispute since the only way we can know who is
telling the truth is to check the facts on the ground.
Distinguishing between Verbal and Substantive
Disagreements
1. Will the disagreement be resolved by all parties
accepting a stipulative definition? If so, then the
participants in the argument were engaged in a
verbal dispute.
2. Is the proposal of a stipulative definition likely to
be resisted by one or more of the parties in the
dispute? If so, then there may be a substantive
disagreement between the participants.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Distinguishing between Verbal and Substantive
Disagreements
3. Once agreement is reached about the use of key words,
is there still unfinished business and unresolved conflict
of opinion? Do the participants have good logical
reasons for their different viewpoints? If so, then again
we say they are engaged in a substantive disagreement
4. If people are still having a disagreement which cannot
be resolved by improving their access to the facts, or by
making more explicit the meaning of their words by
appeal to a dictionary, or by appeal to a relevant theory,
or by a stipulative or ostensive definition, then we call
their dispute a substantive disagreement
EXERCISE: Determine whether the following disputes
are Verbal or Substantive
1. Juror #3: It’s these kids—the way they are nowadays. When I was
a kid I used to call my father, “Sir”. That’s right . . . “Sir.” You ever
hear a kid call his father that anymore?
Juror #8: Fathers don’t seem to think it’s important anymore.
(From the movie 12 Angry Men)
2. Liz: I don’t think, I know.
Rich: I don’t think you know, either.
3. Rich: Don’t ask her whether you should take the job or not—
make your own decision.
Liz: I am making my own decision—I have decided to ask her
what I should do.
4. Liz: The capital city of Korea is Seoul.
Rich:You are wrong. The capital city of Korea is Pyongyang
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
5. Rich: Humans were created in the image of God.
Liz: God doesn’t exist, so that can’t be true.
6. Liz: I don’t believe that any God exists.

Rich: Wrong, everyone believes in God, since you have to
believe in something.
7. Liz: Life begins at conception, when a distinct genetic definition

of a new organism is formed.
Rich: Such life is not human, as humanity is the ability to reason
and feel.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

8. Liz: There is no “I” in “team”!
Rich: There is in “win.”
9. Liz: C’mon, you have to believe the conspiracy happened or that

it didn’t happen.
Rich: No, actually, I have no belief about the topic at all. It might
have happened, but I don’t reject it or accept it.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

METAPHORS AND PROVERBS
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

• Metaphors and proverbs involve vague use of language that
carries many associations. They are the type of sentences that can
carry more than one meaning simultaneously and which also
have different functions, depending on the circumstances.
• METAPHOR:- A figure of speech in which a word or phrase is used

to describe an object or action with which it does not normally
have an association in order to imply a connection.
• PROVERBS:- They are phrases that embody some advice or

commonly believed fact. They can also be referred to as axioms,
truisms, clichés and adages.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

• Examples of metaphors and proverbs are;
1.Time is money.(metaphor)
2.Juliet is the apple of my eye.(metaphor)
3.Life is war.(metaphor)
4.Birds of a feather flock together.(proverb)
5.When a palm-branch reaches its height, it gives way for a fresh one to
grow.(proverb)
. Understanding metaphors and proverbs depends so much upon the
situation, mood, reception, background knowledge or
preparedness of listeners to appreciate and interpret the
multiplicity of the meaning of metaphors and proverbs.
Individuals can read their own meanings into metaphors and
proverbs.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
• Thus metaphors and proverbs cannot be relied upon to convey a
single objective meaning. They are useful in inspiring, motivating,
advising and to speak on topics that are socially powerful and
highly charged.
• NB. To be very clear and straight-forward in conveying
information it is usually best to avoid metaphorical and
proverbial expressions. This is because their interpretations are
open-ended and indecisive.
• For instance, referring to Kwame as a lion, he might interpret it to
mean that he is an animal and for that matter lives in the forest
when you intend to mean that he is brave or courageous.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

COMMON LINGUISTIC VICES
VAGUENESS, EQUIVOCATION AND AMBIGUITY
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

What are Linguistic Vices?
• Linguistic vices refer to the bad ways in which we sometimes
explain our thoughts.
• When we convey information to other people we make certain
errors that distort the effectiveness of the communication such
that others misinterpret or misunderstand the information
conveyed.
• The goal of declarative speech is to be explicit and clear as
possible in describing, prescribing, generalizing and predicting the
states of affairs in the world.
• The vices we will be looking at are:

• Vagueness, Ambiguity, and Equivocation.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
1. VAGUENESS
• When the component words of a statement have not been
carefully considered such that more information need to be
conveyed to tell exactly what in the world the words refer to then
that statement is said to be vague.
An expression is vague when there is:
 Lack of clarity or distinctness
 Lack of preciseness in thought or communication
 Inexplicitness or indeterminateness as to the meaning or
denotation of the expression
 Unclarity as to what in the world the expression refers to
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

1. VAGUENESS
Examples:
“My officials are monitoring this situation very closely, and I can promise
that we shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the situation is
resolved in a way that is fair to all the parties involved.”
What are “appropriate measures”? They could be anything or nothing. What
does “fair to all the parties” mean? We have no clear idea. They could mean
anything.
Mom: What did you do at school today?
Son: Stuff.
He said he will be here any moment from now.
We are sorry to say that we are looking for a younger person for the job.
Temporarily out of service. We are unable to dispense money at this time.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

2. EQUIVOCATION
 The use of more than one connotation of a word in the same
context without any signal of the shift with the intention to
manipulate or to persuade is called equivocation.
 The intended meaning of a word seems to shift back and forth
between two or more distinct connotations without warning or
indication
• Examples:
1.I don't see how you can say you are an ethical person. It is so hard
to get you to do anything; your work ethic is so bad.
2.Sure philosophy helps you argue better, but do we really need to
encourage people to argue? There's enough hostility in this world.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

2. EQUIVOCATION
 Examples
Employer to Job Applicant: “In this job, we need someone who is
responsible”
Applicant: “Then I am the one you are looking for. In my last job every
time anything went wrong, they said I was responsible”
• Can you spot the equivocation in this sign?
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

3. AMBIGUITY
• When a word or phrase or an expression conveys more than one meaning
then we say that the expression or word is ambiguous.
• Ambiguity can be lexical (a word) or structural (the whole sentence); that
is, either the word or the whole sentence is open to more than one
interpretation. To disambiguate is to reveal the two meanings
interpretations
• Examples:
1.I rode a black horse in red pajamas. This could mean either the black horse
was in red pajamas when you rode it but you intend to mean you were in a
red pajamas when you rode the black horse
2.John took off his trousers by the bank. Did he do that by a building(financial
institution) or by the edge of a river?
3.The passerby helps dog bite victim. Is the passerby helping a dog bite
someone? Or is he helping a person bitten by a dog? It’s not clear.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
EXERCISE: Disambiguate the following expressions.....
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Dr. Richmond Kwesi


1. Drunk gets nine months in stolen laptop case
2. Military head seeks arms.
3. Prostitutes appeal to pope
4. Teacher strikes delaying WAEC candidates
5. Police squad helps rabid dog bite victim
6. Enraged billy goat injures farmer with cutlass
7. Miners refuse to work after death
8. Juvenile court to try shooting defendant
9 Stolen jewels discovered by tree
10. Two American oil tankers collide in the Gulf of Guinea; one dies
11. Two sisters reunited after 18 years in market stall
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
TYPES OF DISCOURSE REVEALED IN
PASSAGES

DISCOURSE REVEALED IN PASSAGES
• A discourse is a unit of connected speeches or writings longer than a
sentence in the form of a passage either to covey an argument,
narrate an event, give a set of instructions, or to make verbal – self
assertions using rhetoric or polemic.
The types of discourse revealed in passages are
1. Narrative
2. Instruction
3. Rhetorical polemic
4. Argument
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

1. NARRATIVE
• This is a passage which reports a sequence of events in
order of their occurrence. The sentences are ordered
according to time.
• Example:
I was about five years old when my sister informed me that I was too old to still be riding a bike
with training wheels. That was the time I decided not to depend on them anymore. Even though I
had some doubt, my sister and I went outside and started to take the little wheels off my bike.
After my bike went through the transformation, I was now ready for the big moment. With
butterflies in my stomach, I slowly got on the bike, and with my shaky hands, I gripped the
handles tightly. Meanwhile my sister was holding on to me to help keep my balance. I was so
afraid that she would let go, yet I was determined to ride this bike on my own. Next with a little
push from her, I started to peddle. The faster my bike went the faster my heart raced. Finally I
looked back nervously and noticed that my sister let go of my bike a long time ago. I was so
excited that I accomplished freedom on my bike that I forgot to peddle. The next step I
remember, I was lying on the ground, yet I did not care because of the adrenaline rush. I will
never forget the exhilarating moment and growing up stage of riding a bike without training
wheels
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
2. INSTRUCTION
• This is a passage that gives description or sequence of things to do
in a specified order; it might also provide a list of directives to
follow to accomplish some desired effect, like a prescription.
• Example.
If you are from Legon campus and you want to go to Madina, get to
the Okponglo junction and wait for any of the commercial buses.
Listen carefully to any of the bus conductors that mentions Madina.
Get onboard one of the buses. As you sit down, you make your 1
Ghana cedi ready to be given to the conductor of the commercial
bus and you tell him/her that you will get down at Madina.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

3. RHETORICAL POLEMIC
• This is a passage that communicates (usually strong) feeling or
persuasively vents an opinion.
• Examples:
What does the ECG think it is doing with the poor service of power
supply. I wont pay any electricity bill again and let us see who
will dare to take me to court.
“We shall not flag or fail.We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in
France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with
growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend
our island…we shall never surrender.” Sir Winston Churchill.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

4. ARGUMENT
An argument is NOT:
The use of aggressive language or
demeanour in an attempt to shout down or
intimidate an opponent
An attempt to ‘win at all costs’
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

ARGUMENT
A reason is a consideration that provides
evidence that a belief is true, or very likely to be
true.
 Reasons are said to “support,” “justify,” or “prove”
beliefs by providing evidence for them.
An argument is a set of statements presented

to support/justify/prove a belief or claim with a
set of reasons.
Every argument has two parts:
Conclusion: the belief being supported.
Premise(s): the reason(s) intended to support
the conclusion. Each reason is called a premise.
Every argument has at least one premise.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
ARGUMENT
Belief/Claim: Richie is intelligent
Why?:
1. All Accra Aca boys are intelligent,
And
2. Richie is an Accra Aca boy
Argument:
All Accra Aca boys are intelligent
Richie is an Accra Aca boy
Therefore, Richie is intelligent
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

ARGUMENT
 In each of the following arguments, there is a conclusion and at
least one premise. Can you distinguish the premise(s) from the
conclusion?
1) Bats are mammals, and they can fly. So, some mammals can fly.
2) The officer will arrive to the base on time, since she’s never been late
a day in her life.
3) War is wrong because it involves killing innocent people, and that is
always wrong.
4) Humankind was created by aliens from another planet. A wise man
once told me so.
 All four examples above are arguments. All of them attempt to

show that a conclusion is true by offering premises in support of it.
However, you probably noticed that most of them are not good
arguments.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
ARGUMENT
Bats are mammals, and they can fly. So, some mammals can fly.
[Premise 1] Bats are mammals, and [Premise 2] they can fly.
[Conclusion] So, some mammals can fly.
The officer will arrive to the base on time, since she’s never been late
a day in her life.
[Conclusion] The officer will arrive to the base on time, since
[Premise] she’s never been late a day in her life.
NOTE: A syllogism is an argument with two premises

Dr. Richmond Kwesi
ARGUMENT
War is wrong because it involves killing innocent people, and
that is always wrong.
[Conclusion] War is wrong because [Premise 1] it involves
killing innocent people, and [Premise 2] that is always wrong.
Humankind was created by aliens from another planet. A wise

man once told me so.
[Conclusion] Humankind was created by aliens from
another planet. [Premise] A wise man once told me so.
Identify the premise(s) and conclusion....
 We must resist all forms of government
censorship. Freedom of speech and expression
are essential to a democratic form of
government. As soon as we allow some
censorship, it won't be long before censorship
will be used to silence opinions critical of the
government.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Identify the premise(s) and conclusion....
Witches are real.They are mentioned in the Bible.

There are many people today who claim to be
witches. And historical records reveal that there
were witches in Salem, Massachusetts (Vaughn
2010: 25).

FINDING ARGUMENTS
 Tips for finding arguments:
1) Find the conclusion first. Whenever you read or hear something

and you’re not sure if it contains an argument, ask yourself “What
claim is the author/speaker trying to persuade me to
believe?” That claim will be the conclusion.
2) After identifying a possible conclusion, find the premises. If an

argument is present, there should be a conclusion that the author is
trying to convince you of and reasons (premises) offered to show that
the conclusion is true. If there are no premises, there is no argument.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

FINDING ARGUMENTS
3) Look for indicators—words or phrases typically followed by a

premise or conclusion. (Indicators are not always used!)
 Points of caution: (1) The lists below are not complete! (2)
Some arguments contain no indicators at all!
Premise Indicators Conclusion Indicators
because, since, for, as, after so, therefore, thus, hence,

all, the reason is that, in light ergo, implies that, it follows
of the fact that, based on the that, accordingly,
fact that, etc. consequently, we may infer
that, etc.

EXERCISES....
• “The university ought to raise the retirement age from 65 to

75. People are living longer than they used to, and many
academics are still productive even after 70. Why, Dr Morgan
discovered the cure for the common cold when she was 72!
Older academics have a great deal of expertise that can
benefit younger members of staff. If academics know they are
going to be forced out at 65, they may feel unhappy about
their jobs. So academics are likely to be less productive if the
retirement age stays as it is.”
1. What is the main conclusion of the argument?
2. What are the main premises of the argument?
3. Write out any sub-conclusions of the argument.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
EXERCISES....
Identify whether the passage is or is not an argument; if a passage is an argument,
state its main conclusion.
a) The tiger, whose population is estimated at about 6000, may become
extinct in the next decade, according to some claims.
b) Of all the animals commonly eaten in the Western world, the pig is
without doubt the most intelligent. The natural intelligence of a pig is
comparable and perhaps even superior to that of a dog; it is possible to
rear pigs as companions to human beings and train them to respond to
simple commands much as a dog would. (Peter Singer, Animal Liberation)
c) Since animals are sentient, and can feel both pleasure and pain, we ought
to take their interests into account; we should not harm animals for no
good reason. Most humans can thrive on a plant-based diet, so eating
meat is unethical. We should always try to act ethically, so we should all
avoid eating meat.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
EXERCISES....
Identify whether the passage is or is not an argument; if a passage is an argument,
state its main conclusion.
I. I’m not sure a bad person can write a good book. If art doesn’t
make us better, then what on earth is it for? (Alice Walker)
II. Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us
estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose,
you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is.
(Blaise Pascal).
III. Is the arrow-maker less benevolent than the maker of armour of
defense? And yet the arrow-maker’s only fear is lest men should
not be hurt, and the armour-maker’s only fear is lest men should
be hurt. So it is with the priest and the coffin maker. The choice of
profession, therefore, is a thing in which great caution is required.
(Menicus)
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
End of Session
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

UGRC 150
CRITICAL THINKING &
PRACTICAL REASONING
Session 5 – THE NORMATIVE AND THE
EMPIRICAL
Session Overview
• Think of an example where someone is criticizing on moral

grounds the legitimacy or justness of a civil statute or a law.
Imagine a situation where there seem to be a conflict between
something that is an accepted practice on legal grounds but is
regarded as unacceptable on moral grounds. These examples and
situations illustrate that there must be more than one sense we
attribute to the notion of law.
• To avoid being fooled by switching connotations without indication,

this session introduces the critical thinker to the different senses of
law.
• Required Reading: UNIT 5

Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Review: Factual statements vs Value
Judgements
• Factual statements are expressions that describe the way the world
is. What this means is that, they give a report of the way the world
is as we experience them with our senses.
• We call them EMPIRICAL because they are expressions derived
from experience or observations and they are verifiable.
• Value judgments on the other hand are expressions that prescribe

or evaluate the way the world or things or someone should or
ought to be.
• We call them NORMATIVE because they state standards or norms
to prescribe or evaluate an action or behavior or something.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

The Normative and the Empirical
• The distinction between factual statements and value

judgements, therefore, helps us to understand general claims
of two kinds: normative principles—which indicate how things
must be or how they should be—vs. empirical
generalisations—which supposedly report how things are in
fact.
• Rules or laws of Logic and Critical thinking are normative, in

the sense that they capture how we ought to think and not
how we actually do think
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

The Different Senses of ‘Law’
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

LAW
• There is no one definition for the word ‘law’ but rather
different notions. Depending on the context of usage, the
word law can mean a natural law, civil law, customary law,
moral law, law of reasoning, mathematical law or divine law.
• Law is a system of rules or general principles that govern

the nature of things, or the way individuals are supposed to
behave.
• Laws are expressed in the form of statements.
• Some laws are descriptive and others are prescriptive.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

1. NATURAL LAW
• Natural laws also called scientific laws refer to statements that
express laws about nature (living things, rivers, celestial bodies
etc.)
• They are defined as statements that aim to describe the
regularities or uniformities in the patterns of event or features
of things we observe around us.
• They are formed based on our past experiences. For instance,
we observe that at any point in time when a fish is taking out
of water for a maximum of five minutes, it dies so we conclude
that “all fish survive in water” as a statement that expresses an
attribute or a property that applies to all fish any where,
anytime.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

NATURAL LAW.....
EXAMPLES NB
1. Every planet moves around the • Natural law statements
sun in an elliptical orbit. have no exceptions and are
2. All metals expand when therefore called law-like.
heated. But there is no way to be
3. Any physical object that goes absolutely certain that such
up must come down. statements will always be
4. All green plants use sunlight for true. So they are called law-
photosynthesis. like because maybe
5. All fish live in water. someday counterevidence
6. Every human being breath will make them false.
oxygen.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
NATURAL LAW....
• Natural laws are disguised predictions. They predict about
future realities. The statement “all metals expand when
heated” means that “if you come across any metallic object
and you heat it then expect it to expand.”
• But what if you discover a new metal and it does not expand
upon heating it, then it will make the statement “all metals
expand when heated” to be false.
• Scientific laws always depend upon evidence, and they are
predictions. They may turn out to be false so we call them law-
like statements or hypothesis
• NB: Since they describe regularities and uniformities in the
patterns of events around us they are EMPIRICAL.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
NATURAL LAW....
 This sense of natural law in terms of scientific law
makes natural law an empirical concept
 Natural law as a normative concept is about rules

for how humankind should fit in with a divinely
ordained natural order of things.
- This sense of natural law works on the presumption
that rationally organized and legitimized social conduct
follows from a larger picture of the universe
- Hence, we can say things like a particular action is
unnatural or that it does not cohere with the laws of
nature
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
2. CIVIL LAW AND STATUTORY LAW
• CIVIL LAWS AND STATUTORY LAWS are man-made laws that
represent the legal instruments that governments of states
use to regulate the behavior of citizens. They prescribe how
citizens ought to behave in specific circumstances.
• They are laws backed by force since they come with

sanctions.
• NB: They are prescriptive statements since they express what

one should do or must not do, so they are NORMATIVE.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

CIVIL LAW AND STATUTORY LAW
Examples NB
1. Commercial laws • If these laws are broken by
2. Tax laws individuals, the individuals are
3. Constitutional statutes rather punished. Violations do
not make the laws falsified and
4. Land tenure regulations for that matter must be changed.
5. Rules for electoral process. The laws still remain and
6. Criminal laws in response to rape, sanctions are carried out. This is
stealing, murder, manslaughter, what makes it different from
assault. natural laws. The sanctions
7. Human rights laws, traffic laws, attached are what makes
interstate laws etc. them laws to be obeyed by
all citizens.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

CIVIL LAW AND STATUTORY LAW
 Example: 1992 Constitution of Ghana:
 Article 276 (1) A chief shall not take part in active
party politics; and any chief wishing to do so and
seeking election to parliament shall abdicate his stool
or skin. Notwithstanding clause (1) of this article and
paragraph (c) of clause (3) of article 94 of this
constitution, a chief may be appointed to any public
office for which he is otherwise qualified.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

3. CUSTORMARY LAW
▪ The laws, practices, customs of indigenous and local
communities which are intrinsic and central part of the way of
life of these communities.
▪ Customary laws are embedded in the culture and values of a
community or society, they govern acceptable standard of
behaviour and are actively enforced by members of the
community.
▪ Most customary laws deal with standards of the community
that have been long-established in a given locale
▪ Generally, customary laws are not written, but are transmitted
through oral tradition and practice.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

CUSTORMARY LAW
• Just like the civil laws or
Examples
statutory laws, they are man-
made and also have sanctions 1.Taboos like incest, not farming
or fishing on a particular day.
attached to them to regulate
behaviors of members of a 2.The traditional customary
marriage.
particular community, clan or
lineage. The system of 3.Acknowledgements of chiefs as
traditional custodians of lands.
authority that enforces the
customary laws are Chiefs, 4.Traditional inheritance system
clan heads etc. and marriage system. etc
• NB CUSTOMARY LAWS ARE
ALSO NORMATIVE.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

CUSTORMARY LAWS and CULTURAL NORMS
• Customary laws are distinguished from cultural norms, social rules

and conventions in the sense that the latter are not laws and they
do not have sanctions attached to them in case of any violation.
• Examples of cultural norms are wearing of certain kinds of apparel

in certain public and private circumstances, dietary rules, worship
behavior, observance of public holidays and public ceremonies etc.
• NB: Cultural norms or social rules are the commonly adhered

practices in a society that normally do not attract any severe form
of punishment or sanction.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

4. MORAL LAW
 a general rule of right living; especially, such a rule or group of
rules conceived as universal and unchanging and as having the
sanction of God's will, of conscience, of man's moral nature, or
of natural justice as revealed to human reason
 Morally good law NOT same as cultural norm – [there would be no
way to criticize any cultural norm as being immoral]
 Morally good law NOT same as being legal – [then there would
have been no way to challenge apartheid law on moral grounds]
 Moral Laws are presumed to be universal, transcending ones
culture, religion, constitution or society.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

MORAL LAW
• Examples .
1.It is morally wrong to steal.
2.It is wrong to kill.
3.It is morally right to respect other people’s views.
4.To legalize segregation is morally wrong.
NB: MORAL LAWS ARE ALSO NORMATIVE.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Quotes for reflection.....
• Spend some time to reflect on what some prominent people have
said about moral law…..
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Dr. Richmond Kwesi

5. LOGICAL LAW
• LOGICAL laws are the principles or rules for thinking that are
required in order to move from statements that are accepted as
true, to further statements which by all means will necessarily also
be true since they follow from the premises that were assumed to
be true from the outset.
• They guide us in distinguishing good reasoning from bad reasoning.
• They are deductive in nature. Since they guarantee that if your
starting point( assumptions or premises) are true then your final
conclusion will also be true.
• Example: If all As are Bs and every B is a C then every A is a C
• Example: the law of excluded middle (or the principle of excluded
middle) states that for any proposition, either that proposition is
true, or its negation is true.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
6. MATHEMATICAL LAW
WHAT ARE THEY Examples
1. Laws of addition, subtraction, division,
• These are laws that regulate multiplication. AND
the way operations in 2. Never divide by zero, Laws of indices
mathematics ought to be are all general rules of mathematical
done. practices.
• We have rules for 3. Every even number is the sum of two
mathematical practices and odd numbers, is an example of a
descriptive laws that descriptive law that summarizes the
results of mathematical practice for
summarize the results of all time.
mathematical practice for all
• NB. Mathematical laws are
time.
also NORMATIVE.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

7. DIVINE LAW
WHAT IS IT.
EXAMPLES
• These are laws whose contents
1. The ten commandments of
come from a particular
Christians.
religious doctrine.
2. The sharia law of the
• The authority of such laws
Muslims.
come from a supreme
being,(deity, God, god) 3. Some religions practice
monogamous marriage
• They are prescriptive in nature
while others practice
so they are also NORMATIVE.
polygamous marriage.
• They are subject to revelation
• NB DIVINE LAWS are
as the means by which they are
binding only on the
made available to man and can
practitioners of religion.
be changed.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
END OF SESSION
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

UGRC 150
CRITICAL THINKING &
PRACTICAL REASONING
Session 8 – INDUCTIVE REASONING IN THE
SCIENCES AND EVERYDAY LIFE
Session Overview
• In this Session, we will discuss inductive reasoning. Unlike deductive

reasoning, the connection between the premises and the conclusion
of an inductive argument does not depend solely upon the logical
structure or patterns shaping the premises in relation to the
conclusion. You have to study meaning content of the statements—
you have to examine the quantity of things referred to, you have to
decide whether the information called ‘evidence’ given in the
premises really adds up to a good reason for believing the
hypothesis, which is given as the conclusion, is likely to be true.
• This session is to enable students know the methods of scientific or
empirical research- how data are presented and conclusions drawn.
And the quality of reasoning contained in scientific or empirical
claims.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Session Outline

• CONTRASTING VERIFIABLE AND CONFIRMABLE STATEMENTS.
• THE TYPES OF HYPOTHESES: law-like Hypothesis AND Statistical
Hypothesis.
• PREDICTIVE POWER OF HYPOTHESES
• ENUMERATIVE INDUCTION
• UNCERTAINTY AS A VIRTUE IN THE SCIENCES
REQUIRED READING: UNIT 7
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
• An inductive argument on the other hand is an argument where

the premises provide good reasons or evidence to believe the
conclusion will be true. The premises do not prove the
conclusion to be true like the way it is in the case of deduction
but rather the premises confirm the likelihood or probability of
the conclusion being true depending on how good the evidence
or information provided in the premises are. This means that for
inductive arguments if the premises are true, the conclusion can
be false without any contradiction.
• The test is to ask yourself, is it possible for the conclusion to be
false even when the premises are true?. If you answer YES, THEN
THE ARGUMENT IS INDUCTIVE.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
 Inductive reasoning involves how our beliefs about the world
around us – statements of fact, evidence, research results, findings,
observation statements, testimonies, eye witness reports, data,
exhibits [premises] – provide support for a legal opinion, a
decision, ruling, verdict, conviction, an empirical conjecture,
hypothesis, theory [conclusions].
 The premises of an inductive argument confirm [they do not

prove] the likelihood of the conclusion being true.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
In deduction we pay attention to the form of the argument and the

logical connectives and relations within and between statements; In
induction we focus on the content and subject matter of the
statements to examine the sorts of things being described in the
premises and conclusions
Inductive conclusion is strengthened or weakened based on the

quality and quantity of evidence available in its favour.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Types of Inductive Arguments
1. Argument by Analogy
2. Argument from Cases (Enumerative Induction)
3. Argument from Testimony
4. Inference to a Plausible Explanation (Abduction)
5. Causal Reasoning
In this session, we will focus only on Enumerative

Induction. Session 9 will treat Causal Reasoning
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Examples of Inductive Reasoning
◦ (From medicine.) Mice are mammals, have a

mammalian circulatory system, have typical
mammalian biochemical reactions, and experience a
reduction in blood cholesterol when given the new
cholesterol pill, kumipreko. Humans are mammals,
have a mammalian circulatory system, and have
typical mammalian biochemical reactions. Therefore,
humans will also experience a reduction in blood
cholesterol when given the new cholesterol pill.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

 (From forensics.) Whenever we have observed this spatter of
blood, we have subsequently learned that the gunshot victim was
about four feet from the gun when it was fired and the victim was
facing away from the assailant. In this crime scene, we have exactly
the same pattern of blood spatter. Therefore, the victim was about
four feet from the gun when it was fired and was facing away from
the assailant.
 (From everyday life.) Molly is Milly’s twin. Milly is very musical.
Molly and Milly grew up together and went to the same school. So, I
guess, Molly is musical too.
According to Encyclopedia Britannica, the solar system has 9 planets.

So, that is the number of planets in the solar system.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Frederick has been having trouble with his watch. It

keeps losing time. He had the battery replaced, but
that didn’t help. So, Frederick hypothesized that an
invisible demon had possessed his watch, causing it to
slow. He took the watch to a priest for an exorcism,
but that didn’t help. Then Frederick and his friends held
a séance to rid the watch of the demon—still to no
effect. So Frederick concluded that the demon
possessing his watch is so powerful that there is no
way to detect or eliminate it.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Cogency and Strength of Inductive
Reasoning
 Any good inductive argument must satisfy two criteria:
1) The argument must have true premises.
2) The argument must be strong, i.e., the truth of the premises must
support the truth of the conclusion.
 A strong argument: if the premises are true, then it is probable (but

not guaranteed) that the conclusion is true.
 A weak argument: if the premises are true, then it is not probable
(but still possible) that the conclusion is true.
◦ Strength and weakness are exclusively characteristics of

inductive arguments.
 A cogent argument is a strong argument with all true premises.

◦ An argument is uncogent if either it is weak, or it has at least one
false premise.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Reasoning
 Two examples of cogent arguments:
1) 90% of Americans speak English.

2) Barack Obama is an American.
3) Therefore, Barack Obama speaks English.
1. Almost every raven ever to have been observed was black.

2. Therefore, the next raven to be observed will be black.
 Both these arguments are strong, and their premises are all true.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Reasoning
 An argument may be uncogent either because it is weak, or because it
has at least one false premise. The following argument is uncogent.
1) 90% of Ghanaians are bald.

2) Akuffo Addo is a Ghanaian.
3) Therefore Akuffo Addo is bald.
This argument is not cogent because the first premise is false.

 However, it’s easy to tell that the argument is strong, since if the
premises were true, it would be probable that the conclusion is true.
To test whether an argument is strong, you must first assume that all the
premises are true (even if in fact they‘re not). Then you must ask yourself
this question: “Assuming all the premises are true, is it probable that the
conclusion is true as well?” If the answer is “yes,” the argument is strong.
If the answer is “no,” the argument is weak.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Reasoning
1) About 24% of all living human beings are women.
2) Oprah Winfrey is a human being.
3) Therefore, Oprah Winfrey is a woman.
 The premises and conclusion of this argument are true. But

the argument is not cogent because it’s weak. The premises,
even if true, do not show that the conclusion is probably
true.
 To see that this argument is weak, you have to set aside your
knowledge that the conclusion is true.You must only
consider the information expressed by the premises, and
then see whether that information shows that the
conclusion is probably true.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Reasoning
 Inductive strength is a matter of degree.
- In an inductively strong argument the conclusion is probable,
and probability is a matter of degree.
We can sensibly speak of arguments being “somewhat strong”,
“moderately strong”, and “very strong”
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Reasoning
 compare these three arguments:
A. 51% of all serial killers were abused as children. Ted Bundy was
a serial killer. Therefore, Ted Bundy was abused as a child.
B. 70% of all serial killers were abused as children. Ted Bundy was
C. 90% of all serial killers were abused as children. Ted Bundy was
 Argument C is stronger than argument B, and B is stronger than A.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

VERIFIABLE AND CONFIRMABLE
STATEMENTS
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

VERIFIABLE STATEMENTS
• Because we treat the premises of inductive arguments as evidence
or observation reports out which conclusions are drawn, the
statements that make up inductive arguments from the premises
to the conclusion are understood or examined in terms of
verifiable statements and confirmable statements
• VERIFIABLE STATEMENTS are the same as PARTICULAR
STATEMENTS. They are also called evidence, data, test results,
observation reports or research findings.
• They are called verifiable statements because as particular
statements their reference classes are finite. That is their subjects
are fixed or countable.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

VERIFIABLE STATEMENTS
Thus, for verifiable statements, because their reference classes

or subjects are finite(particular statements), a test or an
experiment or observation can be done to establish directly
in one, two or few times, to determine whether they are true
or false.
• We therefore define a verifiable statement as a statement
that is directly testable through experience because its
reference class or subject is finite(countable).
• Verifiable statements usually form the premises of inductive
arguments.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

VERIFIABLE STATEMENTS...Examples
1. This copper strip expanded when it was heated to 120°F.

2. That man is the Dean of Science.
3. This person’s passport has expired.
4. That table is green.
5. This stone is not a real diamond.
6. As of today, none of the students on this list have

registered for this class.
 Finite reference classes
 Directly testable – a test could be run to determine they

are true or false; can be measured; tests can be repeated
 They serve as evidence, data that confirms hypothesis
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

CONFIRMABLE STATEMENTS
• CONFIRMABLE STATEMENTS on the other hand are the same as GENERAL

STATEMENTS. They are also called hypotheses.
• As general statements, the reference classes or subjects of confirmable
statements are infinite(uncountable) .
• The are not tested directly; we only gather a sample or evidence to test
them, however what ever may be the results of our observation or sample
or evidence, we project to be the result of the confirmable statement.
• Thus confirmable statements are testable indirectly based on the results
of verifiable statements.
• We therefore define confirmable statement as statements that are
indirectly testable through experience because their reference classes or
subjects are infinite(countable).
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

CONFIRMABLE STATEMENTS...examples
1. All metals expand when heated.

2. Planets move in elliptical orbits around the Sun.
3. Heavy smokers have a carbon film on their lung tissue.
4. No student registers unless forced.
5. Some cow meat from England is infected with lethal

bacteria.
6. 80% of all retailed stones are not real diamond
 Infinite reference classes
 No observation to directly determine whether they are

true or false
 They are indirectly testable
 They are confirmable statements – They cannot be proven

Dr. Richmond Kwesi
TYPES OF CONFIRMABLE STATEMENTS
• We know from the previous discussion that hypotheses are

also called confirmable statements. However there are two
types of confirmable statements or hypotheses.
• The first type is called law-like statement or law-like
hypothesis.
• The second type is called statistical statement or statistical
hypothesis.
• NB. TAKE NOTE THAT BEFORE A STATEMENT CAN BE LAW-
LIKE OR STATISTICAL IT MUST FIRST BE A GENERAL
STATEMENT OR CONFIRMABLE STATEMENT.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

LAW-LIKE HYPOTHESIS
• A law-like hypothesis is a confirmable statement or general

statement that has no exception. It is always expressed in the
form. All As are Bs. or No As are Bs.
• Examples:
1. All metals expand when heated.
2. All living things require oxygen to live.
3. No student register unless forced.
4. All voters hate the New Democratic Congress Party.
• A law-like statement attributes a property to every individual
in its reference class without exception whatsoever. A property
that every individual or thing in its reference class will have.
This means it is a regularity without any deviation at all
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
STATISTICAL HYPOTHESIS
• A statistical hypothesis on the other hand is confirmable statement

that has an exception.
❖ That is, some percentage less than 100% and more than 0% of
the reference class has the property described in the attribute
class.
❖ The percentage may not be mentioned explicitly, but instead
referred to vaguely by the terms ‘hardly any’, ‘few’, ‘occasionally’,
‘some’, ‘most’, ‘many’, ‘typically
• Examples:
1. Most metals expand when heated.(not all metals)
2. Some students register when they are forced.(not all students)
3. 80% of Ghanaian voters do not like the New Democratic Congress Party.
4. Almost all Ghanaians are afraid of the corona virus.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
STATISTICAL HYPOTHESIS
• A statistical hypothesis on the other hand is confirmable statement

that has an exception.
❖ That is, some percentage less than 100% and more than 0% of
the reference class has the property described in the attribute
class.
❖ The percentage may not be mentioned explicitly, but instead
referred to vaguely by the terms ‘hardly any’, ‘few’, ‘occasionally’,
‘some’, ‘most’, ‘many’, ‘typically
• Examples:
1. Most metals expand when heated.(not all metals)
2. Some students register when they are forced.(not all students)
3. 80% of Ghanaian voters do not like the New Democratic Congress Party.
4. Almost all Ghanaians are afraid of the corona virus.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Predictive Power of Hypotheses
• Hypotheses are disguised or implicit predictions. This is because

every hypothesis, be it statistical or law-like, can be framed as a
conditional
• Hypotheses are constructed in relation to evidence. Statements that
cannot be tested directly or indirectly are pseudo-scientific
• Predictive power is the ability of a statement to say something
about the future.
• A Law-like hypothesis makes no exception about its reference
classes and because of that, it has a higher predictive power.
• A Statistical hypothesis on the other hand makes exception about
its reference classes and because of that, it has less predictive
power.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Understanding the Significant Differences
between Law-like and Statistical Hypotheses
The distinction between law-like and statistical
hypotheses can be appreciated along the following
dimensions:
 Predictive power
 Falsifiability
 Empirical content
 Valuable
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Let’s use an example to illustrate the differences:
A. All Legon Hall residents play football once a
week
B. 40% of Legon Hall residents play football at
least once a week.
 (A) is a law-like hypothesis
 (B) is a statistical hypothesis
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

A. All Legon Hall residents play football once a week
B. 40% of Legon Hall residents play football at least once a week.
 Each of these is a prediction
A. If x is a LH resident then x will play football once a week
B. if x is a Legon Hall resident then the chances are 4 out of 10 that x will play football
once a week or more than once a week.
 Which of these statements is more likely to stay true, as you
encounter Legon Hall residents one at a time and check to see
if they have this attribute?
 (B) is more likely to be true; because if you encounter a
Legon Hall resident who does not play football at all, then
(A) will be proven false—because (A) admits of no
exception: for prediction (A) to stay true, every single
Legon Hall resident must play football exactly once a week.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
 (B) is more certain to be true than (A). The conditions

that make (B) true are far more liberal and varied than the
conditions required for (A) to be true.
 We say (A) is more falsifiable than (B),
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

 From (B) you know that 40% of the residents play at least once
a week, but (B) does not tell you exactly how often in fact they
play. (B) doesn’t tell you about any one particular individual at
all, actually.
 So (B) gives you much less information, if it is true, than
would hypothesis (A). If hypothesis (A) is true, then it gives you
a specific bit of information about every single Legon Hall
resident.
 So (A) has more empirical content than hypothesis (B).
 Hypothesis (A) is more valuable than hypothesis (B).
 In the natural and social sciences, however, uncertainty is a
virtue.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Uncertainty as a Virtue
• As mentioned above we cannot be absolutely certain

of any claim or conclusion that we arrive at by means
of induction.
• This is because we understand now that the premises
of our inductive conclusions only confirm the
conclusion ( i.e., they indicate the degree of
probability of the conclusion being true depending on
how good the reasons are).
• However this uncertainty about inductive claims or
conclusions is of great importance in science as well
as our everyday understanding of the world.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Uncertainty as a Virtue
• Uncertainty is a characteristic of all empirical observations.

This means they are not always true, but are sometimes true
and sometimes false.
• If a statement is falsifiable or can be doubted then it gives us
reason to find out the truth about something in the world.
Thus it gives us knowledge about the world. But if a
statement not falsifiable then such a statement gives us no
knowledge about the world.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Implications....
 The more falsifiable a statement is, the more predictive
power it has, and the more empirical content is has, so
the more valuable it is in giving us a picture of how
the world is. The more likely a statement is to be
false, the more information its truth provides us
about the world, if in fact it is true.
 As scholars and scientists, we try to formulate
hypotheses and claims about the world, hoping these
claims will be true, but we must ensure that the
claims we make are able to be false; otherwise the
empirical hypotheses or statements we produce will
not be saying anything about the world.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Implications....
 We seek knowledge in the humanities, and in social
studies and in the natural sciences, but this does not mean
as scholars and scientists that we seek absolute security
that everything we claim to know can never be
contradicted and must never be questioned.
 It means rather that as a critical thinker you should never
be shy of controversy.
 You should question and challenge what people say,
especially people presented to you as experts and
authorities.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Implications....
 As an empirical scientist or humanities scholar

you need to propose hypotheses or theses that
are testable, that is, there should be something to
look for, some experiment that can be conducted
or an investigation to pursue, or a debate to
engage in, whose results will indicate whether
your thesis is likely to be true or to likely to be
false. If there is no way at all for the thesis to be
false, then there is nothing in particular about the
world that we can learn from its being true.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

ENUMERATIVE INDUCTION
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

• Enumerative induction or induction by enumeration is the type

of inductive argument that uses verifiable statements or
particular statements as premises to support a general
statement(confirmable statement )or hypothesis as conclusion.
• It is called enumerative because the conclusion based on an
accumulated number of instances or evidence to support it.
• It is the accumulated number of instances or evidence that will
determine which type of hypothesis will be the conclusion. The
conclusion can either be a law-like hypothesis or a statistical
hypothesis.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Enumerative Induction also known as arguing from cases:
Form I
A is an X and Y
B is an X and Y
C is an X and Y
.
.
.
Therefore, All Xs are Y
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Example with a law-like Example with a statistical
hypothesis as conclusion hypothesis as a conclusion
• Five different snakes were fed with • Five different snakes were fed with live
live rats in an experiment and the rats in an experiment and the results
results are as follows, are as follows,
1. The first bit its rat and it died. 1. The first bit its rat and it died.
2. The second bit its rat and it died. 2. The second bit its rat and it died
3. The third bit its rat and it died. 3. The third bit its rat and it died
4. The fourth bit its rat and it died. 4. The fourth bit its rat and it did not die.
5. The fifth bit its rat and it died. 5. The fifth bit its rat and it did not die.
------------------------------------------------ -----------------------------------------------
Summary: The five snakes that were fed Summary: 3 out of the 5 snakes that were
all killed their rats by biting them. fed killed their rats by biting them.
______________________________ ____________________________________
Therefore, ALL SNAKES ARE • Therefore, 60% OF SNAKES ARE
POISONOUS. POISONOUS.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Enumerative induction involving a law-like hypothesis
Premises
 This silver spoon was heated to 400F and expanded
 This copper wire was heated to 120F and expanded.
 This iron bar was heated to 800F and expanded
 This mercury was heated to 100F and expanded.
 This aluminum pot was heated to 350F and expanded.
 This gold ring was heated to 500F and expanded.
 This tin strip was heated to 275F and expanded.
Summary of data: All the metals that were tested expanded

when heated.
Conclusion: All metals expand when heated.

Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Enumerative Induction involving a statistical hypothesis
Premises
1. The first person who contracted the corona virus died within two weeks
2. The second person who contracted the corona virus died within three days.
3. The third person who contracted the corona virus survived after two weeks
4. The fourth person who contracted the corona virus died within three days
5. The firth person who contracted the corona virus survived after two weeks
6. The sixth person who contracted the corona virus died within three days
7. The seventh person who contracted the corona virus died within three days
8. The eighth person who contracted the corona virus died within three days
9. The ninth person who contracted the corona virus died within three days
10. The tenth person who contracted the corona virus survived after two weeks
Summary of data: 7 out of the first ten people who contracted the corona
virus died
Conclusion: 70% of all human beings who contract the corona virus will
die.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Induction by enumeration Form II
1) X percent of a sample of population A have property P.
2) Therefore, X percent of all members of A (probably) have property
P.
 Induction by enumeration involves reasoning from premises about some

members of a group to a conclusion about all members of that group.
 In the form depicted above, A refers to the population—the class of

things about which a conclusion is made. The sample of A is the class of
observed members of the population. The sample is a subset of the
population, meaning that some members of the population are not
members of the sample. P is the relevant property of the population
being studied.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Here is an example of induction by enumeration of the second form:
“Two hundred samples of water taken at random from many sites all
along the Weija show unsafe concentrations of cholera. Hence the
water in the Weija is not safe to drink.”
 Population: Water in the Weija.

 Sample: Two hundred samples of water taken at random from
many sites along the Weija.
 Relevant property: Having unsafe concentrations of cholera.
 The argument is strong.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Statistical Hypothesis could be used as premises or

conclusions of inductive arguments:
Premises: In a sample of 10 patients who contracted the corona
virus, 7 of the patients died within two weeks.
Conclusion: 70% of all human beings who contract the corona virus
will die.
Premise 1: 70% of patients who contract the corona virus die within
two weeks
Premise 2: Osofia has contracted the corona virus
Conclusion: Osofia will die within two weeks
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

 Enumerative inductive arguments can also be:

 1. sample to population arguments
[Consider the metals expanding and the coronavirus examples above]
 2. population to sample arguments

Most UG Law students are intelligent.
Victor Zondo is a UG Law Student
So, probably, Victor Zondo is intelligent
 3. sample to sample arguments

My first four girlfriends cheated on me
So, probably, the next one will cheat on me too
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
END OF SESSION
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

UGRC 150
CRITICAL THINKING &
PRACTICAL REASONING
Sessions 6 & 7 – DEDUCTION vs INDUCTION

Session Overview
• In this Session we will learn to tell the difference between deductive

and inductive reasoning. We need to distinguish induction from
deduction because we need to evaluate each type of reasoning using
different principles of dependability and credibility. The principles or
rules governing the form of thoughts fitting together are called
DEDUCTIVE. The other equally important aspect of our declarative
thoughts concerns how they reflect the world around us. We call this
side of reasoning INDUCTIVE. Each aspect requires different
principles and techniques to evaluate whether the reasoning has
been executed well or poorly. All actual reasoning that humans do
(practical, aesthetic, spiritual, philosophical, moral, and scientific)
except for very specialised situations is both inductive and deductive.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Session Outline
• The Two types of Statements: Particular & General

• The Two types of Arguments: Deductive & Inductive
• The Four Valid Syllogisms
• The Four Formal Fallacies
• Validity and Soundness of Arguments
REQUIRED READING: UNIT 6 of the Textbook

Dr. Richmond Kwesi
ARGUMENT
A reason is a consideration that provides
evidence that a belief is true, or very likely to be
true.
 Reasons are said to “support,” “justify,” or “prove”
beliefs by providing evidence for them.
An argument is a set of statements presented

to support/justify/prove a belief or claim with a
set of reasons.
Every argument has two parts:
Conclusion: the belief being supported.
Premise(s): the reason(s) intended to support
the conclusion. Each reason is called a premise.
Every argument has at least one premise.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Statements: Particular vs General
• A statements can be defined as a sentence that can either

be true or false.
• The premises and conclusion of an argument are all
expressed in the form of statements. However the nature
the statements are such that they come in two forms:
PARTICULAR and GENERAL statements.
• But FOR a statement to be particular or general its
REFERENCE CLASS must first be determined.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

• Every statement has two parts.
• The reference class:- this is the grammatical subject of the
statement.
E.g.1. Joshua and Kofi are reading in the library.
2. A small group of taxi drivers in Accra can speak
Chinese.
• The attribute class:- this is the attribute or property or action
that the statement tells us about the subject (the predicate of
the sentence)
• E.g. 1. Joshua and Kofi are reading in the library.
2. A small group of taxi drivers in Accra can speak Chinese.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

• However, it is the reference class of every statement that
determines the type of statement.
• A PARTICULAR STATETMENT is a statement with a
finite(countable) reference class(subject)
• Examples:
1. Joshua and Kofi are reading in the library (two individuals)
2. The water in this person’s bucket is finished. ( one person’s
bucket)
3. Accra is filthy. ( one city)
4. All the students in this class are Distance Education students.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

• A GENERAL STATEMENT on the other hand is a statement with an
infinite(uncountable) reference class(subject).
• Examples:
1. A small group of taxi drivers in Accra can speak Chinese.
2. All students are distance education students
3. No human being can fly.
4. Some Ghanaians have not travelled before.
5. All students from University of Ghana read critical thinking.
NB. Thus the two types of statements are particular and general statements.
And very often the premises and the conclusion of any argument comprise
these two types of statements. However note that this distinction between
statements cannot be used to distinguish deductive from inductive
arguments
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Distinguishing Deductive from
Inductive Arguments
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Deductive Arguments
• A deductive argument is an argument where the conditions
that ensures the truth of the premises require that the
conclusion will also be true. This means that the conclusion of
a deductive argument is the logical consequence of the
premises such that if one assumes the premises to be true and
deny the conclusion, it will result in a contradiction. If the
premises are taken to be true the conclusion cannot be false.
So we say that in a deductive argument, the premises prove,
guarantee or contain the conclusion.
• The test is to ask yourself: if you assume the premises of the
argument to be true, can you deny the conclusion? If your
answer is NO then the argument is DEDUCTIVE.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Deductive Arguments
EXAMPLES
1. All animals that live on trees 3. All footballers are
can fly.(premise) rich.(premise)
All birds live on All rich people are hard
trees.(premise) working.(premise)
So All birds can fly(conclusion) So all footballers are hard
2. Ama is older than working.(conclusion)
Yaw.(premise) 4. All politicians are
Yaw is older than dishonest(Premise)
Abena.(premise) Muhammad is a
it follows then that Ama is older politician(premise)
than Abena.(conclusion) So Muhammad is dishonest(conc)
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Deductive Arguments
• From the above example it can be seen that it is impossible
for one to assume the premises to be true and deny the
conclusion because doing so will result in contradiction.
• From E.g. 2 if it is true that “Ama is older that yaw”, and it is
also true that, “Yaw is older than Abena” can you conclude
therefore that “Ama is not older than Abena”? THE ANSWER
IS NO. so the above E.g. 2 is a deductive argument, and the
rest all are. That is how you identify a deductive argument.
• NB: If you observe carefully you can see that the movement
from premises to conclusion is not the same for all the
arguments but they are all deductive arguments because if
their premises are taken to be true the conclusion cannot be
false.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
INDUCTIVE Arguments
• An inductive argument on the other hand is an argument where
the premises provide good reasons or evidence to believe the
conclusion will be true. The premises do not prove the
conclusion to be true like the way it is in the case of deduction
but rather the premises confirm the likelihood or probability of
the conclusion being true depending on how good the evidence
or information provided in the premises are. This means that for
inductive arguments if the premises are true, the conclusion can
be false without any contradiction.
• The test is to ask yourself, is it possible for the conclusion to be
false even when the premises are true?. If you answer YES, THEN
THE ARGUMENT IS INDUCTIVE.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

INDUCTIVE Arguments
EXAMPLE 1 AND 2 EXAMPLE 3

1. Some footballers are 3. Two independent witnesses
hardworking. claim they saw John commit
Jordan Ayew is a footballer. the murder. John’s fingerprints
Therefore Jordan Ayew is are all over the murder
hardworking weapon and John himself
confessed to the crime. So we
2. All the 5 Miss Malaika winners can conclude that John
are from Volta hall and they committed the murder.
are all very pretty.
So the next Volta hall lady that
will win Miss Malaika will
also be very pretty.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

INDUCTIVE Arguments
• From the above examples if we do the test we will realize that
it is possible for the premises to be true and conclusion to be
false. Hence they are all inductive.
• From E.g.1, the fact that Jordan Ayew is a footballer does not
guarantee that he is hardworking because the first premise says
some footballers are hardworking not all of them. So it is
inductive.
• In E.g. 2, it also possible that the next Volta lady that wins Miss
Malaika will not be very pretty even when the premises are
true. If the next Volta lady that wins Miss Maliaka happens to
be very pretty, that will still not guarantee that the next Volta
lady that wins will be very pretty and on and on and on. So it is
also inductive.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
INDUCTIVE Arguments
• In E.g. 3 also, the conclusion John committed the murder can be false
even when the premises are true. What if john is covering up the murder
case for the girlfriend so he wipes off the girlfriend’s fingerprints and puts
his own there and confesses convincingly that he committed the murder.
Then it will mean that in actual sense he did not commit the murder and
that will make the conclusion false. Or maybe he is framed for the crime;
someone planted his fingerprints on the murder weapon and those two
independent witness are hired witnesses. That will also make the
conclusion false as well.
• NB: So now you can tell the difference between inductive
arguments and deductive arguments. DEDUCTION IS AN
ARGUMENT OF PROOF OR CERTAINTY WHILST INDUCTIVE IS AN
ARGUMENT OF CONFIRMATION.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Deductive vs Inductive Arguments
 There are two types of arguments: deductive and
inductive.
◦ In a good deductive argument, the premises

successfully provide reasons for believing that the
conclusion must be true.
- In a good inductive argument, the premises

successfully provide reasons for believing that the
conclusion is probably true.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

 Inductive reasoning involves how our beliefs about the world
around us – statements of fact, evidence, research results, findings,
observation statements, testimonies, eye witness reports, data,
exhibits [premises] – provide support for a legal opinion, a
decision, ruling, verdict, conviction, an empirical conjecture,
hypothesis, theory [conclusions].
 The premises of an inductive argument confirm [they do not

prove] the likelihood of the conclusion being true.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

 In deduction we pay attention to the form of the argument and
the logical connectives and relations within and between
statements; In induction we focus on the content and subject
matter of the statements to examine the sorts of things being
described in the premises and conclusions
 Inductive conclusion is strengthened or weakened based on

the quality and quantity of evidence available in its favour. A
deductive argument is either valid or invalid. A valid argument
with true premises is a sound argument.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Evaluating Deductive and Inductive
Arguments
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Deduction: Validity and Soundness
 Any good deductive argument must satisfy two criteria:
1) The argument must be valid.
A valid argument is such that if all the premises are true, then the conclusion
must be true. In other words, if all the premises are true, there is no way the
conclusion can be false.
In an invalid argument, it is possible for all the premises to be true and
the conclusion false.
Validity is exclusively a characteristic of deductive arguments. No
inductive argument is valid.
A sound argument is a valid argument with all true premises.

An argument is unsound if it is invalid, or at least one of its premises is
false.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
 Two examples of sound arguments:
1) All men are mortal.

2) Socrates is a man.
3) Therefore Socrates is mortal.
1) All collies are dogs.

2) All dogs are animals.
3) So all collies are animals.
 Both these arguments are valid: If all the premises are true, then the
conclusion must be true. And in both these arguments, all the premises are
true. So the arguments are also sound.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
 An argument may be unsound either because it is

invalid, or because it has at least one false premise.
The following argument is unsound. Can you explain
why?
1) All women are married.

2) Some executives are not married.
3) So, some executives are not women.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

1) All women are married.
2) Some executives are not married.
3) So, some executives are not women.
 The first premise is false. That alone makes the argument unsound.
* However, the argument is valid, since if the premises were true, then the
conclusion must be true. To test whether an argument is valid, you must first
assume that all the premises are true (even if in fact they‘re not). Then you must
ask yourself this question: “Assuming all the premises are true, must the
conclusion be true as well?” If the answer is “yes,” the argument is valid. If the
answer is “no,” the argument is invalid.
Now obviously in any good argument, we would expect all the premises to be
true. So even a valid deductive argument will not be a good deductive argument if
it has a false premise.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
1) All dogs have flippers.
2) All cats are dogs.
3) Therefore, all cats have flippers.
The above argument is unsound because both premises are

clearly false. However, the argument is valid.
1) All physicians are cartoon characters.

2) SpongeBob (right) is a physician.
3) Therefore, SpongeBob is a cartoon character.
Unsound because of the false premises. However, valid

Dr. Richmond Kwesi
1) Some Americans work in business. [True]
2) Donald Trump is an American. [True]
3) So, Donald Trump works in business. [True]
All the premises of this argument are true. However, the argument is invalid and
therefore unsound.
To see that this argument is invalid, we must set aside our knowledge that the
conclusion is true. Assuming that some Americans work in business, and that
Donald Trump is an American, this doesn’t guarantee that Donald Trump works in
business. The premises don’t rule out the possibility that Donald Trump is an
American who doesn’t work in business. So even assuming that the premises
are true, the conclusion could still be false. Thus the argument is invalid.
BEWARE: Arguments that have a true conclusion and all true premises can be
invalid.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
 Validity is not truth; invalidity is not falsehood.
The previous examples show that a valid argument can have:
true premises and a true conclusion

false premises and a false conclusion
false premises and a true conclusion
An argument with all true premises and a true conclusion can be

invalid.
Validity is exclusively a property of deductive arguments.

Truth is exclusively a property of statements.
No argument is true or false. No statement is valid or invalid.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
INDUCTION: Cogency and Strength
 Any good inductive argument must satisfy two criteria:
2) The argument must be strong, i.e., the truth of the premises must
support the truth of the conclusion.
 A strong argument: if the premises are true, then it is probable (but

not guaranteed) that the conclusion is true.
 A weak argument: if the premises are true, then it is not probable
(but still possible) that the conclusion is true.
◦ Strength and weakness are exclusively characteristics of

inductive arguments. Deductive arguments are neither strong
nor weak.
 A cogent argument is a strong argument with all true premises.

◦ An argument is uncogent if either it is weak, or it has at least one
false premise.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
 Two examples of cogent arguments: Yes I can
…speak
... speak
English!
1) 96% of Americans speak English.
2) Barack Obama is an American.
3) Therefore, Barack Obama speaks English.
1. Almost every raven ever to have been observed was black.

2. Therefore, the next raven to be observed will be black.
 Both these arguments are strong, and their premises are all
true. Also notice that both arguments are invalid.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
 Here is an example of an uncogent argument. Can you tell
why it’s not cogent?
1) About 49.5% of all living human beings are women.

2) Oprah Winfrey is a human being.
3) Therefore, Oprah Winfrey is a woman.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

 Strength is not truth; weakness is not falsehood.
Strength and weakness are exclusively characteristics of

inductive arguments.
Truth and falsehood are exclusively characteristics of
statements.
No statement is strong or weak.
No argument is true or false.
(No person is odd or even.)
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Validity ≠ Strength
 Deductive validity is an all-or-nothing affair. Validity is not a
matter of degree. An argument is either valid or invalid. No
argument can be more or less valid than another argument.
- Comparative judgments do not make sense - *somewhat valid,
*moderately valid, *very valid.
 Inductive strength is a matter of degree.

- In an inductively strong argument the conclusion is probable,
and probability is a matter of degree.
We can sensibly speak of arguments being “somewhat strong”,
“moderately strong”, and “very strong”
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Deduction vs. Induction Summary
Arguments
Deductive Arguments Inductive Arguments
Validity Probability
Valid Valid
arguments arguments Strong Arguments
with all with at
true least one Strong Strong Weak
premises false arguments arguments arguments
are sound. premise are with all true with at least are all
unsound. premises one false uncogent.
are cogent. premise are
uncogent.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi 33
THE FOUR VALID SYLLOGISMS
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Universal Generalizations
 They are universal statements which applies to all
the entities in that domain.
 They are either universal affirmations or
universal negations
 Universal Affirmations: All As are Bs. Eg. All men
are mortal; All vandals are wise; All vague contracts
are void.
 Universal negations: No As are Bs; All As are not
Bs. Eg. No cats are reptiles; All animals are not
wise
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Universal Generalizations
UNIVERSAL AFFIRMATION UNIVERSAL NEGATION

• They are statements in the • They are the opposite of
form ALL As are Bs. universal affirmation. Their
• Examples: structure looks like this.
1. All cats have claws. • “No As are Bs” or “All As
2. All snakes are poisonous. are not Bs”. Examples are:
3. Every metal expand when 1. No cat has claws.
heated. 2. ALL cats do not have class.
4. Every day it rains. 3. No student cheats in exams.
5. Students cheat in exams. 4. All students do not cheat in
exams.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Conditional Statements
• A conditional statement on the other hand is any statement

expressed in the form “IF (X is an A) THEN (X is a B).”
• E.g1 If “you pay your school fees” then “you will be allowed to write
the exams”.
• E.g2 If “Kwame is a student of UG” then “he reads critical thinking”.
• Every conditional statement has two parts, the antecedent and the
consequent.
• The antecedent is the condition that must occur first before the
other condition or event will occur. It is the statement that comes
immediately after the “IF”.
• The consequent on the other hand is the effect or condition expected to
take place after the antecedent has occurred. It is the statement that
comes immediately after the “THEN”.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
THE ANTECEDENT CONDITION THE CONSEQUENT CONDITION

• If “you pay your school • If you pay your school fees
fees” then you be allowed then “you be allowed to
to write the exams. write the exams.”
• If “Kwame is a student from • If Kwame is a student from
UG” then he reads critical UG then “he reads critical
thinking. thinking”.
• If “this animal is fish” then • If this animal is fish then “it
it must have gills for must have gills for
breathing. breathing”.
• This animal will like banana if • “This animal will like
“it is a monkey.” banana” if it is a monkey.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
• However, all universal affirmations and universal negations
can be expressed in the form of conditional statements.
• For instance, “All snakes are poisonous” can be written in a
conditional sense as “if this animal is a snake then it is
poisonous”.
• “All students do not cheat in exams” as a conditional
statement means “if you are a student then you do not cheat
in exams”.
• NB: THUS all universal affirmations and universal negations
have antecedents and consequents and the only way you
can ascertain the antecedent and consequent is to change
them in to the form of a conditional statement( if… then…..).
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
SYLLOGISMS vs ENTHYMEMES
 P1: All footballers are rich
 P2: Rooney is a footballer
 C: Therefore, Rooney is rich
• Syllogism – 2 premises and a conclusion
• Enthymeme – usually one premise (or
conclusion) is unexpressed or implicit.
• P1: All comedians are bald
• C: Therefore, Rowan Atkinson is bald
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

ENTHYMEMES
 An enthymeme is an argument with an unstated premise or an unstated
conclusion.
 Examples:
◦ Abortion takes the life of a fetus. So, abortion takes the life of a human being.
◦ All composite substances are substances that have parts. Therefore, no souls are
composite substances.
◦ No matter of faith is provable. At least one belief about life after death is a
matter of faith.
 Going by the strict definitions we’ve been using in this course, two of the
above passages are invalid, and one of them isn’t even an argument (since it
lacks a conclusion).
 However, it seems easy to interpret these passages as valid arguments. In fact,

that is what we should do.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
ENTHYMEMES
 What premises could be added to these passages to make
them valid arguments? [Inserted in bold below]
◦ Abortion takes the life of a fetus. [A fetus is a human

being.] So, abortion takes the life of a human being.
◦ All composite substances are substances that have parts.

[No souls have parts.] Therefore, no souls are
composite substances.
◦ No matter of faith is provable. At least one belief about

life after death is a matter of faith. [Therefore, at least
one belief about life after death is not provable.]
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

VALID ARGUMENT FORMS
 An argument form is a pattern of reasoning.
 Example:These two arguments share the same form.
1) If Tyrion is a Lannister, then Tyrion is a royal.

2) Tyrion is a Lannister.
3) So Tyrion is a royal.
1) If Obama is a US president, then Obama is a US citizen.

2) Obama is a US president.
3) So Obama is a US citizen.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

1. MODUS PONENS (Affirming the
Antecedent)
 An argument form is a pattern of reasoning.
1) If Tyrion is a Lannister then Tyrion is a royal

2) Tyrion is a Lannister.
3) So Tyrion is a royal.
1) If Obama is a US president, then Obama is a US citizen.

2) Obama is a US president.
3) So Obama is a US citizen.
The shared form of these arguments is called modus ponens:
1) If P, then Q.
2) P.
3) Therefore Q.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
1. MODUS PONENS (Affirming the
Antecedent)
1. Modus ponens:
1) If P, then Q. // 1. All Ps are Qs
2) P. 2. This is a P
3) Therefore Q. 3. Therefore, this is a Q
 Modus ponens is a valid argument form. A valid argument form is such

that every argument which has that form is valid.
 Because modus ponens is a valid form, you can substitute any statement for
P, and any statement for Q, and the resulting argument will always be valid.
◦ For instance, in modus ponens let P = Santa Clause has big trousers and Q
= The moon is made of cheese. The resulting argument is valid.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

2. MODUS TOLLENS (Denying the
Consequent)
 Another valid argument form is called MODUS TOLLENS:
Modus tollens
1) If P, then Q. // 1. All Ps are Qs
2) Not Q. 2. This is not a Q
3) Therefore, not P. 3. Therefore, this is not a P
Here are two arguments that have the form of modus tollens. It’s easy to
see that they’re both valid.
1)If it’s raining [= P], then the park is closed [= Q].

2)The park is not closed [= not Q].
3)Therefore, it’s not raining [= not P].
1) If Accra is in China [= P], then Accra is in Asia [= Q].

2) Accra is not in Asia [= not Q].
3) Therefore, Accra is not in China [= not P].
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
3. DISJUCTIVE SYLLOGISM
3. Disjunctive Syllogism
Either P or Q. Either P or Q.
Not P. Not Q
Therefore, Q. Therefore, P.
Example: Either Pat went to the show or Betsy went to the

show. Pat did not go to the show. Therefore, Betsy went to
the show.
Example 2: Either Kotoko won the league, or Hearts won the
league. Hearts did not win the league. So Kotoko won.
Example 3: Either the Earth is round, or I am the Pope. I am not

the Pope. So the Earth is round.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
4. HYPOTHETICAL SYLLOGISM
 A categorical/hypothetical syllogism is an argument made up of
statements about classes of things. For example: “All dogs are animals” and
“Some humans are women.”
◦ A class (or set) is a collection of objects—e.g., the class of dogs.
All X are Y.
All Y are Z.
Therefore, all X are Z.
Example:
1) All pediatricians are physicians.
2) All physicians are people who have medical degrees.
3) Therefore, all pediatricians are people who have medical
degrees.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
4. HYPOTHETICAL SYLLOGISM
All X are Y.
All Y are Z.
Therefore, all X are Z.
 If energy taxes are increased, then the deficit will

be reduced. If the deficit is reduced, then inflation
will be checked. Therefore, if energy taxes are
increased, then inflation will be checked.
 All politicians are corrupt. And all corrupt people

will go to hell. Hence all politicians will go to hell.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
FORMAL FALLACIES / INVALID
ARGUMENT FORMS
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Formal Fallacies
 A formal fallacy is an invalid argument form. If an argument
has an invalid argument form, then the argument is invalid.
Contrast with modus ponens:

1. Affirming the consequent If P, then Q.
If P, then Q. P.
Therefore, Q.
Q.
Therefore, P.
Example: An invalid argument that affirms the consequent.
1) If Los Angeles is the capital of the USA, then Los Angeles

is in the USA.
2) Los Angeles is in the USA.
3) Therefore, Los Angeles is the capital of the USA.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Formal Fallacies
1. Affirming the consequent
If P, then Q.
Q.
Therefore, P.
Example 2:
1) If Mary is at university, then Mary passed WASSCE.
2) Mary did pass WASSCE
3) So Mary is at university.
Example 3:
1) If Jacob committed suicide, then Jacob is dead.
2) Jacob is dead.
3) So Jacob committed suicide.
Affirming the consequent is an invalid form, while modus

ponens
Dr. Richmond Kwesi is a valid form.
Formal Fallacies
2. Denying the Antecedent
If P, then Q.
Not P.
Contrast with modus tollens:
Therefore, not Q. If P, then Q.
Not Q.
Therefore, not P.
Example:An invalid argument that denies the antecedent.
1) If Napoleon was killed in a car accident, then Napoleon is

dead.
2) Napoleon was not killed in a car accident.
3) Therefore, Napoleon is not dead.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Formal Fallacies
Denying the Antecedent
If P, then Q.
Not P.
Therefore, not Q.
Example 2:
1) If you get 100% for the final exam, you will pass the
course.
2) Jane did not get 100% for the final exam.
3) Therefore, Jane did not pass the course.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Formal Fallacies
Valid Argument Forms Invalid Argument Forms
Modus ponens Affirming the consequent
If P, then Q If P, then Q
P Q
Therefore Q Therefore P
If it’s raining, then the streets are wet If it’s raining, then the streets are wet
It is raining The streets are wet
So the streets are wet So it is raining
Modus Tollens Denying the antecedent

If P, then Q If P, then Q
Not-Q Not-P
Therefore not-P Therefore not-Q
If it’s raining, then the streets are wet If it’s raining, then the streets are wet
The streets are not wet It’s not raining
So it’s not raining So the streets are not wet.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
3. ELIMINATIVE FALLACY / FALSE
DISJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
Either P or Q.
P.
Therefore, not Q.
Example:An invalid argument that commits the eliminative fallacy.
1) Either a monkey is a mammal, or a human being is a mammal.
2) A monkey is a mammal.
3) Therefore, a human being is not a mammal.
Contrast with Disjunctive syllogism:

Either P or Q.
Not P.
Therefore, Q.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
4. False Hypothetical Syllogism
All As are Cs.
All Bs are Cs.
So: All As are Bs.
Example I:
All girls are mean
All boys are mean
So all girls are boys
Example II
All NDC supporters want to win the election in 2016
All NPP supporters want to win the election in 2016
So all NDC supporters are NPP supporters
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
Test yourself:VALID OR INVALID
 Nobody saw what happened. If nobody witnessed it,

nobody can testify. If nobody can testify, you can’t be
convicted. So you can’t be convicted.
 If a fetus is a person, it has a right to life. So, if a fetus

is not a person, it doesn’t have a right to life.
 Nothing is better that liberty. Prison life is better

that nothing. Therefore, prison life is better than
liberty.
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Test yourself:VALID OR INVALID
 If Sally has pneumonia, she needs penicillin and lots of
rest. Sally does need penicillin and lots of rest. So Sally
has pneumonia
 If chicken is overcooked, it is dry. This chicken is not

overcooked. Therefore, this chicken is not dry.
 If Socrates died, he died either while he was living or

while he was dead. But he did not die while living;
moreover, he surely did not die while he was already
dead. Hence Socrates did not die. (Sextus Empiricus)
Dr. Richmond Kwesi
END OF SESSION
Dr. Richmond Kwesi

UGRC 150
CRITICAL THINKING &
PRACTICAL REASONING
Sessions 9 & 10 – CAUSAL REASONING

Outline
 Different senses of ‘cause’

 Causal Inferences
 J. S. Mill’s Methods of Causal Reasoning
 Some mistakes with Causal Reasoning
REQUIRED READING: UNIT 9
2
Causal reasoning…
 Various concerns with causal connections are prevalent in
everyday life.
 Causal reasoning is more particularly concerned with
studying the justification of causal claims rather than with
how causes can be discovered.
 As a critical thinker you must be concerned with the
quality of the evidence supporting causal claims.
- This requires 1. a rudimentary sense of how causes are
conjectured and how arguments with causal conclusions
are evaluated, and 2. an awareness of commonplace
mistakes in causal reasoning (causal fallacies) and learn how
they are avoided.
The Cause…
 Reference to “the cause” of some event or
condition conceals the complexity of
most causal situations.
 Sometimes one aspect of a complex
causal process is identified as ‘the cause’
because that aspect is more susceptible to
control than other aspects.
Different senses of ‘cause’
❑ Proximate cause – the causal event nearest in time
and place to the occurrence under investigation, in a
chain of events.
E.g. The gun-shot victim died because his lungs filled with fluid
due to an allergic reaction to the anaesthetic and so he
stopped breathing.
❑ Causal agent – the cause is attributed to an

individual or corporate entity with intention or motive
for bringing about the effect.
E.g. The gunshot victim died because he was shot by a jealous

husband.
Different senses of ‘cause’
❑ Necessary causal condition – a condition that is
necessary in the sense that the effect cannot occur
without that condition.
E.g. The victim died because his heart stopped pumping blood for
more than ten minutes.
❑ Sufficient causal condition – whenever the

condition is present the effect is present as well.
E.g. The man died by a gunshot wound near his heart.

Different senses…
❑ Individually necessary and jointly sufficient
conditions – anytime each of the conditions are all
present, the effect will occur, and not otherwise.
E.g. Germination in viable seed
❑ Probabilistic cause – an antecedent condition

whose presence make the occurrence of the condition
under investigation more probable than it would be in
the absence of the antecedent condition.
E.g. Heavy smoking causes lung cancer.

Oversimplified cause
 When a multitude of causes is responsible
for a certain effect but the arguer selects
just one of these causes and represents it as
if it were the sole cause
 E.g: The quality of education in our basic and
high schools has been declining for years.
Clearly, our teachers just aren’t doing their job
these days
Aristotle on causation
 Each thing has an essence unique to its kind, and the
particular identity of each thing is dependent upon four
causes: formal, efficient, material, and final or
teleological
 Example: a house
I. Formal cause – the design or blueprint that determines
the shape, layout and dimensions of the house
II. Efficient cause – whoever or whatever agency actually
executed the house’s construction.
III. Material cause – the tin, wood, cement, thatch, mud that
constitute the materials used
IV. Final or teleological cause – the purpose for which the
house was meant to be built, e.g. the need for shelter or
storage
Kinds of causal claims
 Describes an event that happens at a particular time, in a

particular place.
 e.g. My car didn’t start this morning because of the cold

weather.
 e.g. I threw a coin into a fountain and made a wish before

my exam.
It worked! – I passed my exam!
 Particular causal connections are instances of general

causal laws.
Kinds of causal claims
 Describes what causes usually produce which effects.
 e.g. Cars don’t start easily when it’s very cold.
 e.g. Throwing a coin into a fountain will make your

wish come true.
 A particular causal claim can’t be true if the cause it

picks out does not produce the effect it identifies.
 A general causal claim can still be true if one
instance of the kind of cause it picks out does not on
this occasion produce the effect it identifies.
Causal claims VS Causal Inferences
 Causal claims are particular or general. They

are statements which are either True or False.
Arguments are made up of claims
 Causal arguments / inferences can proceed by
relevant difference (Method of
Difference) or by common-thread
(Method of Agreement) reasoning or both.
 Causal arguments can be strong or weak –
Inductive Arguments
Causal inferences….
I didn’t put much effort into my essay.
People who don’t work hard tend not to do well.
I failed the essay because I didn’t put any effort into it.
My fortune cookie on Monday night said that I would

come into great wealth, and on Tuesday I got a job
offer.
The fortune cookie actually changed my life!
Two years ago, I met the love of my life in my Critical

Thinking class.
We would never have met had I not taken that class.
Taking Critical Thinking brought me more joy than I
could ever have imagined.
How do we know when one event causes
another?
 To know that A caused B we must know that:
1. B follows A Temporal ordering
and
Counterfactual
2. If A hadn’t occurred, dependency
then B wouldn’t have either
and/or
3. A-type events are usually Nomological

followed by B-type events generalization
Causal inferences …. temporal ordering
+
nomological
I didn’t put much effort into my essay. generalization
People who don’t work hard tend not to do well.
I failed the essay because I didn’t put any effort into it.
My fortune cookie on Monday night said that I would

come into great wealth, and on Tuesday I got a job offer
The fortune cookie changed my life! temporal
ordering
Two years ago, I met the love of my life in my Critical

Thinking class.
We would never have met had I not taken that class.
Taking Critical Thinking brought me temporal ordering
+
more joy than I could ever have imagined. Counterfactual
dependency
 Your neighbor sprinkles white powder on his lawn in
Accra to keep away tigers, and, sure enough, no tigers
show up on his lawn. She reasons therefore that the
white powder caused the tigers to be away
 Is there a causal inference? Questions

 1. if there had been no white powder would tigers
stay away from the lawn in Accra?
 Assume the powder works, would anything else had
worked? If yes, then the white power is insignificant
 For there to be cause and effect, it must be
that if the cause hadn't occurred, there wouldn 't
be the effect.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
 “after that, therefore because of that”
 The fallacy of concluding on the basis of only the
temporal ordering of two events that the first one
caused the second one.
 e.g.Day comes before night.
So day causes night.
 ‘The rooster crows immediately before sunrise,
therefore the rooster causes the sun to rise’.
 In order to conclude that A caused B we also have

to know either that
◦ (a) a nomological generalization holds, or
◦ (b) a counterfactual dependency holds
◦ preferably both (a) and (b)
Two kinds of causal reasoning
 Inferring causation on the basis of a

counterfactual is called
 Inferring causation on the basis of

nomological generalization is called
Relevant difference reasoning
 AKA the method of difference
 e.g. Everyone is being so unusually nice to me.

It must be because today’s my birthday.
 e.g. The president doesn’t normally present weekly televised

addresses to the nation. It must be all that fuss about the Covid-19
pandemic
 e.g. I opened the store as usual at 9am. But today I did a 30mins
devotion before letting the first customer in and I made more than a
week’s profit today. I think the morning devotion brought me all the
many customers today.
Something, B, happens in one situation that hasn’t happened before in
a similar situation or similar situations.
There is a relevant difference, A, between this new situation and the
others.
Therefore this relevant difference, A, must be the cause of B.
Common-thread reasoning
 AKA the method of similarity/Agreement
 e.g. I was ill last night and so was my friend Igor.

We had lunch together yesterday.
We must have got food poisoning.
 e.g. Every year, for the last 500 years, we’ve thrown a virgin
into the volcano.
The volcano hasn’t erupted for the last 500 years.
Sacrificing virgins appeases the gods.
X, Y and Z all display the same effect, B.

X, Y and Z all share the common thread of A.
Therefore the common thread, A, must be the cause
of B.
Combined relevant difference and
common-thread reasoning
 e.g. I wore my pink cycling mitts for the race last week, and
won. I wore the same pink mitts for the next race, and won
again. But this week I couldn’t find them in time for the race,
and lost. Those mitts obviously help me to win.
 Many tribal peoples have lost their cultures when they’ve been
moved off their traditional lands. Think of so many cases in
regions of Africa, Australia and the Americas. But the Aboriginal
people of Arnhem land have kept both their land and their
culture. Losing one’s land clearly leads to many other losses.
• X and Y display the same effect, B.

• X and Y share the common thread of A.
• Z is relevantly different from X andY in that Z does not share this
common thread, A.
• And Z does not display B.
• Therefore A must be the cause of B.
J. S. Mill’s Methods of Causal
Reasoning
1. Method of Agreement
2. Method of Difference
3. Joint method of Agreement and Difference
4. Concomitant Variation
Finding the cause...
 Suppose a group of passengers arrive at the KIA
airport, excitedly ready to attend an international
conference at UG. But some in the group begin
to complain about fever, tiredness, cough and
difficulty breathing a few hours after their arrival
at their hotel. Those suffering illness all visit the
UG Hospital, where the following pattern of
investigative reasoning is pursued to discover the
cause of these ailments, which we dub E
(COVID-19).
 Suppose an inventory is made of the countries
they have visited before their arrival in Accra by
everyone with the complaints E:
 O = Oman
 P = Poland
 Q = Qatar
 R = Russia
 S = Spain
 T = Tunisia
 U = Uganda
 V = Vietnam
I. Method of Agreement
case Antecedent Effect under
circumstances scrutiny
Dorcas S, U, V E
Vincent S, P, Q E
Gifty S, O, T E
Cyril S, R, Q, V E
Peter S, O, V E
O = Oman; P = Poland; Q = Qatar; R = Russia; S = Spain;T = Tunisia; U =
Uganda;V = Vietnam
 The method of agreement compares the antecedent
factors of all the cases that share the effect under
investigation i.e. E – symptoms of Covid-19 [countries
visited]
 O through V are countries passengers visited.
 These varied among members of the group that contracted
the bad symptoms, but in common they all visited S =
Spain
 So, this common factor S is concluded as being the cause,
or part of the cause, of, E.
But…
 This method does not guarantee that the cause has been
found since there is no telling from the method whether
there is not something else not yet considered and left off
the list of antecedent conditions that brought about E as
well as visiting S
 And there is no telling what there was about visiting Spain
that caused E.
- Did all passengers transit in Spain or they live in Spain?
- Did they come in contact with the same person
infected?
It is not possible to prove a causal connection, given all

these possible variables.
 Suppose that two passengers - a couple - Mr. & Mrs. Sanie,
among the group had visited the same countries prior to
their arrival. But since Mrs. Sanie does not have a Spanish
Visa, she did not visit Spain; only the husband did.
 So the countries they had visited were identical, except for
the Spain that the husband alone visited.
 The wife did not get sick, the husband did.
case Antecedent Effect for which cause
circumstances is sought
1 Mr. Sanie O, P, Q, R, S, U E occurs
2 Mrs. Sanie O, P, Q, R, U E does not occur
 Since the only difference between E occurring and failing to

occur is the presence of S (visiting Spain) in the antecedent
circumstances of E.
 And since unless S occurs, E fails to occur, by the method of
difference the data suggests that S is the cause or an
indispensable feature of the cause of E.
But….
 The method of difference is still inadequate since
the real cause might not be listed in the
antecedent circumstances considered so far, in
which case the method would not be able to
detect the real cause.
3. Joint method of agreement and difference
case Antecedent circumstances Event or condition
studied
G1 O, P, S, T, U E occurs
G2 O, P, T, U, V E does not occur
 Here, the cases that have the effect under scrutiny are
grouped together, and the cases that do not have the effect
(in our example, the people among the group who did not
experience any illness of Covid-19).
 The letter V is for Vietnam that only members of Group 2
visited
 Vietnam is a difference between the two groups but it is
not judged to be the cause of the illness because persons
who visited Vietnam did not present any symptoms. So, it is
not causally related to the effect in question
 So, S is the cause of E
 The joint method is important for establishing a
cause.
 If you just have two individuals in your sample,
one with and the other without the effect in
question, then there is no telling whether any
detected difference in the antecedent conditions
between them is related to that effect or not.
 But if one such antecedent factor is shared by
several other cases where the effect also has
occurred then the likelihood of a causal
connection is very much increased.
4. Method of concomitant variation
case Antecedent Effect or condition
circumstances studied
1 S+, P, U E+ (or E–)
2 S–, P, U E– (or E+)
 Sometimes the suspected causal agent under investigation

cannot be eliminated from any of the cases. Neither the
Method of Difference nor the Joint Method of Agreement
and Difference can be applied in such situations.
 If, however, the condition or effect under study varies in
degree or strength from one case to another then the method
of concomitant variation is a useful tool for justifying causal
hypothesis.
case Antecedent Effect or condition
circumstances studied
1 X+, Y, Z E+ (or E–)
2 X–, Y, Z E– (or E+)
 Example: The method of concomitant variation was used for

investigating fatal levels of air pollution from SO2 in London
from November 29 to December 16, 1952 [MacMahon, B., et al, 1960.
Epidemiologic Methods. Boston: Little, Brown. p. 6]
 There is no way to eliminate sulphur dioxide from any city’s

atmosphere anywhere, so the only way to study this causal
connection was to compare the increase and decrease of the
effect under study (number of deaths per day) with the daily
variation in amounts of sulphur dioxide funes in the
atmosphere from various sources.
 A positive correlation was noted, and in consequence a
causal connection was hypothesized between sulphur
dioxide emission levels and the daily death toll.
Common causal reasoning
mistakes
 Just because an argument adheres to the
form of relevant difference or common-
thread reasoning doesn’t necessarily make
it a good causal argument.
 Relevant difference and common-thread

reasoning can go wrong in various ways:
Common causal reasoning mistakes
1. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc

e.g.Yesterday when I greeted the old lady, Maame
Praba at the store I had a stomach upset when I got
home. Today too I’m feeling uneasy in my stomach
and I am sure that it is because I greeted that old
lady again.
e.g. The picture on Serwaa’s old TV set goes out of

focus. She shouts “Jesus!” and the picture goes back
into focus. Serwaa tells her friends that shouting
‘Jesus’ fixed it.
Common causal reasoning mistakes
2. Confusing cause with effect

Angela: Sitting too close to the TV ruins your eyesight.
Anthony: How do you know?
Angela: Well, two of my grade school friends used to sit
really close, and both of them wear really thick glasses
now.
e.g. “In my hometown we were plagued by lice every year.

But whenever I got sick, I never had any lice on me. And
the same with my friends, the only time they had no lice
at night was when they were sick with fever. So to this
day, to keep away illness, I always make sure I have lice
on my head every night before I go to bed.”
3. Overlooking (an underlying) common cause
 One day Maura wakes up with a fever. A few hours
later she finds red spots on her skin. She concludes
that the fever must have caused the red spots. Her
friend, Kelvin, insists that the spots and the fever are
caused by some microbe. Maura laughs at this and
insists that if she spends the day in a tub of cold
water his spots will go away
 “All the ladies on my floor at Jubilee who are doing

very well in their courses have CD players and
macbook pro. So in order to get good grades, all I
have to do is somehow find enough money to invest
in getting a CD player and a macbook pro.”
 Night causes day.
- [overlooks a common cause of night and
day which is the rotation of the earth
relative to the sun]
4. Coincidence
 E.g. a friend tells you that a piano fell on her
teacher the day after she dreamt that she saw
him in a recital
 e.g.It’s probably just coincidence that the
volcano has been dormant for the past 500
years, and not the case that the annual sacrifice
of a virgin has prevented it from erupting.
 e.g.It’s probably just coincidence that your
fortune cookie predicted imminent wealth and
you got a job offer the following day.
 In the past 20years every president in
Ghana has been called ‘John’. Therefore,
to win the forthcoming presidential
elections, the candidate for DPP should
go to court and change his name from
‘Mumuni’ to ‘John’.
5. Confusing Correlation with Causation
 ‘Correlation does not imply causation’

 There are more laws on the books today
than ever before, and more crimes are being
committed than ever before. Therefore, to
reduce crime we must eliminate the laws.
 As people stay home and poisonous gases in
the atmosphere is reduced the rate of
infection of the corona virus keeps surging.
Therefore the reduction in poisonous gases
in the atmosphere is the causes of the
corona virus infections
Summary
 Complexity of identifying the cause
 Causal Reasoning: agreement (common-
thread) and difference
 Causal Mistakes
What is your analysis?

“Marriage is the chief cause of divorce”
UGRC 150
CRITICAL THINKING &
PRACTICAL REASONING
Sessions 11 & 12 – INFORMAL
FALLACIES
Outline
 Rhetorical Ploys and Polemical Tricks
 Informal Fallacies
1. Equivocation
2. Begging the Question
3. Appeal to Force
4. Appeal to Pity
5. Appeal to the People REQUIRED
6. Ad Hominem
7. Appeal to Unqualified Authority
READING:
8. Hasty Generalization UNIT 10
9. Misplaced Vividness
10. Genetic Fallacy
11. Pseudo-Precision
12. Semi-Attached Figure UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Rhetorical Ploys and Polemical Tricks
 If the speech is designed to argue a point with the intent to
manipulate the listener or reader into believing there is a
legitimate basis for dissent but in fact provides none, then the
argument is called polemic and the reasoning is described as
polemical
 Sometimes we are moved to accept or reject claims based
on psychological inducements: something is said in
connection with a claim that elicits or is intended to elicit a
psychological response of some sort—a desire, fear, some
feeling of emotion—that may well induce acceptance of the
claim UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Informal Fallacies
 Formal fallacies: patterns or structures of
arguments which make purely logical mistakes
and are invalid.
 Informal fallacies: Errors and mistakes to do
with the content of inductive arguments.
Defective arguments that often use rhetorical
ploys
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Kinds of Informal Fallacies
 Fallacies of Relevance: where the premises are not
logically relevant to the conclusion; changes the subject
 Fallacies of Weak Induction: where the premises are

relevant to the conclusion, but they do not support the
conclusion in the way intended.
 Fallacies that manipulate language and statistics:

fallacies to do with how we use language, mathematics, or
data to deceive others to accept our claims UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
1. Equivocation
 The use of more than one connotation of a word in the same
context without any signal of the shift with the intention to
manipulate or to persuade is called equivocation.
Example 1:
 Interviewer: In this job, we need someone who is
responsible
 Applicant: Then I’m the one you are looking for. In my last
job, every time anything went wrong, they said I was
responsible
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Equivocation….Examples
Example 2:
Happiness is the end of life.The end of life is death. Therefore, happiness is
death.
Example 3:
I want to have myself a merry little Christmas, but I refuse to do as the song
suggests and make the yuletide gay. I don't think sexual preference should
have anything to do with enjoying the holiday.
Example 4:
Noisy children are a real headache.Two aspirin will make a headache go
away. Therefore, two aspirin will make noisy children go away.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
2. Begging the Question
AKA: Circular Reasoning; Petitio Principii
 Begging the question is an attempt to prove the conclusion of
an argument by using that conclusion as a premise
 It involves reasoning in a circle
Premise(s): A statement, or set of statements, which either

explicitly or implicitly claims that X is true.
Conclusion: X is claimed to be true (but usually in different
words).
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Begging the Question….Examples
Example 1:
The Book of Mormon is true because it was written by Joseph Smith.
Joseph Smith wrote the truth because he was divinely inspired. We
know that Joseph Smith was divinely inspired because the Book of
Mormon says that he was, and the Book of Mormon is true.
Example 2:
The Bible says that God exists. The Bible is true because God wrote it.
Therefore, God exists (Vaughn 2010: 194).
Example 3:
People who lack humility have no sense of beauty because everyone
who has a sense of beauty also has humility.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Begging the Question….Caution!
Begs the Question:
The Bible says that God exists. The Bible is true because God
wrote it. Therefore, God exists (Vaughn 2010: 194).
Does NOT Beg the Question:

Everything the Bible says is true. The Bible says that God exists.
Therefore, it is true that God exists.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
3. Appeal to Force
AKA: Appeal to Threat/Fear/Consequences; Scare Tactics;
Argumentum ad Baculum
 Coercing you to believe or accept a conclusion by shifting the
focus away from the belief or conclusion’s veracity, and
instead drawing attention to what will happen to you if you
don’t believe or accept it
Premise(s): You can avoid being harmed by accepting this
statement (or argument).
Conclusion: This statement is true. (Or, this argument is good).
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Appeal to Force….Examples
Example 1:
Lately there has been a lot of negative criticism of our policy on dental
benefits. Let me tell you something, people. If you want to keep working
here, you need to know that our policy is fair and reasonable. Anybody
working here who doesn’t know this will have to be let go (Howard-
Snyder & Wasserman 2009: 153).
Example 2:
I know that some of you oppose the president’s nomination of Kuffour
as the new DCE. Well, do you still want the government to continue
with the Free SHS policy? Do you want the president to bring
development projects to our district? If Kuffour is not approved, it may
become necessary to stop the Free SHS and other projects in the
district.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Appeal to Force….Examples
Example 3:
Johnny, of course I deserve the use of your bicycle for the
afternoon. After all, I’m sure you wouldn’t want your mother to
find out that you beat your little sister today.
Example 4:
Either you marry me right now or I’ll be forced to leave you
and never speak to you again. I’m sure you wouldn’t want me
to do that. Therefore, you’ll marry me right now.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
4. Appeal to Pity
AKA: Appeal to Emotion/Sympathy/
Argumentum ad Misericordiam
 The attempt to persuade solely by the use of emotive
language or by arousing someone’s feelings, rather than
presenting relevant reasons to support a conclusion
Premise(s): You have reason to pity this person (or group).
Conclusion:You should do X for the benefit of this person (or group), although
doing X is not relevant to the reason given
//
Premise(s): We feel sorry for X or X has been in a bad situation
Conclusion: X cannot possibly be guilty UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Appeal to Pity….Examples
Example 1:
Please Sir, I deserve a better mark than an F for UGRC 150.
Look, my parents just got a divorce. If they see that I got an F,
they will just blame each other, the fighting will start all over
again, and I’ll be very sad.
Example 2:
You really ought to vote for Jane Mahama as MP for Ayawaso
West. Poor Jane has faced one adversity after another her
whole life. She was born into dire poverty, both her parents
died when she was a child, and two years ago she was
diagnosed as having diabetes UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Appeal to Pity….Examples
Example 3:
Members of the jury, surely you can find it in your heart to acquit
the defendant of burglary. This poor man has lived his whole life
without the benefits most of us take for granted. When he was a
kid his parents never bought him stuff or even gave him a hug. He
has to fend for himself all these years. Surely he is not guilty of this
crime.
Example 4:
Nkosi Johnson, 11 years old, made the keynote speech for the
opening ceremony of the 13th International AIDS Conference in
Durban. Just look at how sweet and innocent he is, doomed to die
in only a few months, yet so courageous and selfless. And indeed he
died within that same year. So certainly whatever he said about
how the most important thing to do for Africans with AIDS is to
administer anti-retroviral drugs must be true. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
5. Appeal to the People
AKA: Grandstanding; Bandwagon; Appeal to the Masses; Appeal
to Consensus; Argumentum ad Populum
 The acceptance of a claim (or practice) solely on the basis of
its acceptance by a large number of people.
 The justification or defence of an action on the grounds that
everybody or most people do it or know it.
Premise(s): Most or all people accept this claim (or argument).
Conclusion: Therefore, the claim must be true (or the argument must
be good).
NB: Not a fallacy if conclusion appeals to the beliefs of a majority of
authorities (experts). UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Appeal to the People….Examples
Example 1:
You should read Manasseh Azuire’s latest novel right away. It’s
sold over a million copies, and practically everyone in the media
is talking about it.
Example 2:
Jane, I can’t believe you don’t have a smart phone yet. Why,
practically everybody today has one. Surely you’ll buy one right
away
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Appeal to the People….Examples
Example 3:
But officer, I don't deserve a ticket; everyone goes this speed.
If I went any slower, I wouldn't be going with the stream of
traffic.
Example 4:
It is well recognized by most people that the present
technological revolution has affected the ethical basis of the
nation's institution of education. Since this belief is so widely
held, there can be little doubt of its accuracy.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
6. Ad Hominem
AKA: Argument against the Person/Man; Attacking the Person
 The fallacy of attacking the character or circumstances of an
individual who is advancing a statement or an argument
instead of trying to disprove the truth of the statement or
the soundness of the argument.
 Responding to someone’s argument by making an attack upon
the person, rather than addressing the argument itself
Premise(s): X—someone who advances a statement or argument—is
a bad person.
Conclusion: Therefore, the statement advanced by X is false. (Or, the
argument advanced by X is a bad one.) UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Ad Hominem….Examples
Example 1:
Don’t mind what he says.You know that he is a lying, ignorant
NPP man who has a personal interest in the matter.
Example 2:
Friedrich Nietzsche’s philosophy is not worth the paper it’s
printed on. Nietzsche was an immoral reprobate who went
completely insane from syphilis before he died.
Example 3:
Professor Addison’s arguments in favour of the theory of
evolution should be discounted. Addison is a cocaine-snorting
sex pervert and, according to some reports, a member of the
Communist party. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
‘You too’ // ‘look who is talking’
 Reject someone’s claim on grounds that s/he is inconsistent
or guilty of that which s/he criticizes
Premise(s): X makes claims about Y.

Premise(s): However, X does not practice or live according to
his/her claims about Y.
Conclusion: Therefore, X’s claims about Y are false.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
….Examples
Example 4:
Dad tells me I shouldn’t lie. He says lying is wrong because it
makes people stop trusting one another. But I’ve heard my Dad
lie. Sometimes he calls in “sick” to work when he isn’t really
sick. So, lying isn’t actually wrong.
Example 5:
That representative from China has argued that our trade
policies violate human rights. But China’s own record on
human rights is abominable! China regularly executes prisoners
just to salvage their body parts. That representative should
keep his mouth shut! UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Dyslogistic and Eulogistic Ad hominem
 If the facts cited about the person associated with the
conclusion are negative and detracting from the person’s
integrity or worthiness of confidence, then the fallacy is called
dyslogistic ad hominem
 If pleasant and laudatory facts are cited about the individual

responsible for or associated with the conclusion, then the
fallacy is called eulogistic ad hominem.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
….Examples
Example 6:
Christine has argued persuasively that Parliament should
support stem cell research involving fetal tissue. But Christian
has no morals at all. She has sex with any man who walks
through the door, and she has had 3 abortions. No one with
morals should listen to her. [Dyslogistic]
Example 7:
The Finance Minister, Mr. Ken Ofori Atta is the most honest
and eloquent person to hold this office. Therefore, his
argument for increasing taxes cannot possibly be flawed.
[Eulogistic] UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
7. Appeal to Unqualified Authority
AKA: Illegitimate Appeal to Authority; Argumentum ad
Verecundiam
 The fallacy occurs when we make an unjustified (illegitimate)
appeal to an alleged authority but such an appeal is unjustified
either because his/her area of competence lies outside the
field in which the matter falls or he/she is not adequately
informed.
 The fallacy of appealing to the testimony of an authority
outside his/her special field
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Appeal to Authority….Examples
Example 1:
Our pastor says that prayer in public schools is not
unconstitutional. Therefore we must conclude that such prayer
is perfectly legal.
Example 2:
Prof. Ebenezer Oduro, the highly respected Vice-Chancellor of
the University of Ghana, and professor of entomology has
recommended chloroquine for the treatment of corona virus.
And Prof. Oduro is also a learned scholar and researcher.
Therefore, chloroquine should be used to treat the corona
virus. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
8. Hasty Generalization
AKA: Jumping to a Conclusion
 A hasty generalization is an inductive argument in which one
makes a fallacious inference from a relatively small number of
cases to a generalization about a class of instances
 When few members of a group of people or items are

observed and their qualities are extended to the entire
membership of the group
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Hasty Generalization….Examples
Example 1:
Yesterday two students were diagnosed as contracting the
corona virus. Today two more were given the same diagnosis. It
is obvious we have an epidemic. Everyone on campus has
corona virus.
Example 2:
The actress Jackie Appiah, the journalist Abeiku Santana and the
influential man of God, Pastor Otabil, have all endorsed
Mahama for President in the 2020 elections. I think that settles
it. Every famous person intends to vote for Mahama.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Hasty Generalization….Examples
Example 3:
On our first date, Richie had his hands all over me, and I found
it nearly impossible to keep him in his place. A week ago John
gave me that stupid line about how, in order to prove my love, I
had to spend the night with him. Men are all alike. All any of
them want is sex.
Example 4:
Officers of the AMA Task Force assaulted the family of John
Addo at Makola, killing his wife, and they were also involved in
the destruction of the Melcom building at Accra, with great loss
of life. The conclusion is clear that the AMA Task Force officers
are just a pack of killers. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
9. Misplaced Vividness
 When an emotional impact causes a person to jump to a
conclusion or hastily generalise from their experience
 A small number of dramatic and vivid events are taken to

outweigh a significant amount of statistical evidence.
 It deflects attention by focusing too much on a particularly

vivid and provocative case.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Misplaced Vividness….Examples
Example 1:
Anne: I am giving up extreme sports now that I have children. I
think I will take up golf.
Bill: I wouldn't do that. Do you remember Charles? He was

playing golf when he got hit by a golf-cart. It broke his
leg, and he fell over, giving himself a concussion. He was
in hospital for a week and still walks with a limp. I would
stick to paragliding.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Example 2:
Jane: I've been thinking about getting a new laptop.
Bill: What sort of laptop do you want to get?
Jane: Well, it has to be easy to use, have a low price and have
decent processing power. I've been thinking about getting an
rlg laptop. I read in that consumer magazine that they have
been found to be very reliable in six independent industry
studies.
Bill: I wouldn't get the rlg laptop. A friend of mine bought one a
month ago to finish his master's thesis. He was halfway
through it when smoke started pouring out of the CPU. He
didn't get his thesis done on time and he lost his financial
aid. Now he’s selling bofrot on the street.
Jane: Ei! I guess I won't go with the rlg laptop then. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Example 3:
Yes, I read the side of the cigarette pack about smoking being
harmful to your health. That's the Surgeon General's opinion,
him and all his statistics. But let me tell you about my uncle.
Uncle Sam has smoked cigarettes for forty years now and he's
never been sick a day in his life. He even won the Milo
Marathon in his age group last year.You should have seen him
running from Tema to Dansoman. He smoked a cigarette during
the award ceremony, and he had a broad smile on his face. I was
really proud. I can still remember the cheering. Cigarette
smoking can't be as harmful as people say. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
10. Genetic Fallacy
 When the origin, source or history of a conclusion/claim/idea
is used as basis for accepting or rejecting the conclusion/claim
or idea
 Attempts to discredit or support a claim or an argument

because of its origin (genesis) when such an appeal to origins
is irrelevant
 It fails to assess the claim on its own merit or within its

current context or meaning
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Genetic Fallacy….Examples
Example 1:
The phone you are using was manufactured in China so it must be
a fake one.
Example 2:
The new undergraduate system is a copy of the American
University system, so it must be an improvement over what we had
before
Example 3:
You're not going to wear a wedding ring, are you? Don't you know
that the wedding ring originally symbolized ankle chains worn by
women to prevent them from running away from their husbands? I
would not have thought you would be a party to such a sexist
practice. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Genetic Fallacy….Examples
Example 4:
He was born to Catholic parents and raised as a Catholic until
his confirmation in JHS. Therefore, he is bound to want to
defend some Catholic traditions and, therefore, cannot be
taken seriously.
Example 5:
Yes sure, the media claims that former President Mahama is
‘Government Official 1’ in the Airbus Scandal. But the media
you are referring to is Peace Fm. And we all know Peace Fm’s
credibility, don’t we? Peace Fm doesn’t like NDC. So, my bro we
should dismiss this claim coming from them. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
11. Pseudo-Precision
AKA: Over-Precision; False Precision; Misplaced Precision;
Mathematical Mystification
 Exact statistical figures are used to characterize notions that
cannot be expressed in exact or numerical terms.
 The application of figures to indicate precise quantities where,

to date, no measurement can be feasibly expected.
 This is often done to awe or impress people with numbers

UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Pseudo-Precision….Examples
Example 1:
In a recent two year survey, 75.38% of students at University of
Ghana were discovered to be spiritually motivated. So we can
confidently suppose that over ¾ of Legon students on campus
today are spiritually motivated.
Example 2:
A tour guide at a museum says a dinosaur skeleton is exactly
100,000,005 years old, because an expert told him that it was
100million years old when he started working there 5 years
ago.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
12. Semi-attached Figure
 A statistic/figure is attached to a conclusion but it is irrelevant
to the attribute featured in the conclusion or indirectly
related to it.
 When the sample is not relevant to the hypothesis the figures

provided may just be partially related to the hypothesis.
 This is done to deflect attention from the subject matter and

create the impression that the conclusion has been
meticulously researched.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Semi-attached Figure….Examples
Example 1:
If you want to sell your alcoholic drink as a cure for Covid-19, but
can't actually prove that it works, then simply publish your
laboratory report demonstrating that half an ounce of your drink
killed 99% of germs in a test tube in under seven seconds. Now all
you need is a photo of a handsome doctor, and your advertisement
is ready to go!
Example 2:
Ghanaian university students are more intelligent than Nigerian
students. A research team from Boston College discovered that at
Legon, over the 3 year period 2001-2004, 75% of enrolled students
had As in English Language. But in Ibadan over the same period, only
58% of the students had As in English Language. UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Multiply-flawed Reasoning
Example 1:
The terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center really
shouldn’t be blamed for their actions. They came from poor,
struggling families oppressed by religion.You argue that
terrorists should be punished, but you’ve always been a mean-
spirited, stingy guy with no sympathy for anyone.
1. Appeal to Pity
2. Ad Hominem
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Example 2:
You say it’s wrong for me to download music from the Net
without paying for it. That’s crazy. Everybody is doing it.You
know what’s really wrong? It’s all these kayayei who are being
prosecuted for stealing from the electronic store. These
innocent women are living difficult lives and sometimes they
barely make GHC10 a day. How do you expect them to buy
mobile phones?
2. Appeal to Pity
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Example 3:
Honey, either you buy me that five carat emerald ring, or I’ll
have nothing to wear on this awfully bare finger.You do want to
make me happy, don’t you? Give me that ring, and I will love
you for life. Every good husband buys their wives emerald rings.
Look at my friend Akos. She is very happy now that her
husband bought her the ring. And Serwaa too.You see, wives
become unhappy because their husbands refuse to buy them
emerald rings.
1. Appeal to Threat
3. Hasty Generalization UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
Conclusion
 A critical thinker will not be duped if armed with an
awareness of the different ways there are to provide a
motivation to believe a conclusion instead of being provided
good logical reasons to believe that conclusion
 To accept a claim on the basis of some irrelevant

psychological inducements – fear, emotions - cultural beliefs,
personal biases, linguistic and statistical manipulations, is to
fall short as a critical thinker.
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA
THANK YOU
UNIVERSITY OF GHANA

Ugr150 Combined Slides

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

Ugr150 Combined Slides

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UGRC 150

CRITICAL THINKING &

Instructor: Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 2

• At the end of the session, the student will

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 3

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 4

• Sentence-shape thought refers to the different forms of

• A sentence is a group of words that has a subject and predicate,

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 6

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 7

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 9

• Imperatives are sentences expressed to get someone

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 11

• Sentences that convey information of different kinds are called

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 13

• DEFINITIONS: They are sentences that conveys the

• VALUE JUDGMENTS: They are sentences that prescribe or

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 16

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 17

 statements can contain implicit and explicit meanings

 In many cases, we state explicitly what we think to be the

NB. Since fragments are incomplete sentences, they are not

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 21

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 22

4. My life will never be the same without you! (sorrow)

NB: Emotive expressions are subjective and have no

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 23

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 24

Dr. Richmond Kwesi

Instructor: Dr. Richmond Kwesi

• Contrary to what many students might suppose before their

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 2

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 3

• A Definition is a declarative sentence that conveys or presents the

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 5

1. To achieve Clarity and relevance of concepts and terms

5. To Avoid verbal disputes

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 6

• Every standard definition must have two parts: the

• DEFINIENDUM:- The word to be defined which is the

• DEFINIENS:- The rest of the definition that conveys

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 8

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 9

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 12

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 13

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 14

• Thus depending on the connotation of a word we will be able to

• NB. IF a word has several connotations, each connotation will

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 15

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 17

• Real definition is a well-defined definition

• When a term is well-defined, it means that the definition

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 23

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 24

• Definiendum – even number

• NB: achieving the essential meaning of words enables us to

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 26

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 27

• NB. WELL-DEFINED TERMS HAVE ONLY ONE MEANING.

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 28

Dr. Richmond Kwesi Slide 29

• Family , justice, intelligence, equality, democratic