Logic and Critical Thinking

Chapter one: Basic Concepts of Logic

What is logic?
 Is a science that evaluates arguments.
Benefits of Logic
Increases confidence
When we are making sense our argument and
criticize the arguments of others, an when we
advance arguments of our own
Develops the skills
 understanding the argument of others
 Critically evaluating those arguments and beliefs of others
 Defending one’s own well-supported argument
Definition of basic terms
1) Statement:
 is a sentence or group of sentences that is either true or false, but not
both(both at the same time).
For instance, the following sentences are statements:
 Dr. Abiy Ahmed is the current Prime Minister of Ethiopia.
 Cabbage is a good source of vitamin A.
 Argentina is located in North America.
2. Truth Values
 truth and falsity are the two possible truth values of a
statement.
 However, there are sentences that are not statements,
Examples:
a) Would you close the window? (Question)
b) Let us study together. (Proposal)
c) Right on! (Exclamation)
d) I suggest that you read philosophy texts. (Suggestion)
e) Give me your ID Card, Now! (Command)
 unlike statements, none of the above sentences can be
either true or false.
 Hence, none of them can be classified as statement.
 As a result, none of them can make up an argument.
3) Argument
 An argument is a systematic combination of one or more
than one statements, which are claimed to provide a
logical support or evidence (i.e., premise(s) to another
single statement which is claimed to follow logically
from the alleged evidence (i.e., conclusion).
 The statements that make up an argument are divided
into one or more premises and one and only one
conclusion.
Premises: are statements that set forth reasons/evidence
on the basis of which the conclusion is affirmed.
Conclusion:
 is a statement that the evidence is claimed to
support/imply.
 In other words, it is a statement that is claimed to
follow from the premises
Two groups of arguments can be identified as:
A. Good arguments :
 Those in which the premises really support the
conclusion, and
B. Bad arguments:
 Those in which the premises do not support
even though they are claimed to
Examples of arguments
All Ethiopians are Africans. (Premise 1)
Tsionawit is an Ethiopian. (Premise2)

Therefore, Tsionawit is African. (Conclusion)

Some Ethiopians are Africans(premise 1)
Zelalem is an Ethiopian(premise 2)
Therefore, Zelalem is an African(conclusion)
 The first one is an example of good argument,
where as the second is an example of bad
argument
 If the premises are supposed to be true, it is
impossible for the conclusion to be false.
 In the second one , it is possible for the
conclusion to be false if the premises are
assumed true
 How to differentiate a conclusion from its premise/s?

A. Indicator Word Test

 Arguments usually contain indicator words that provide
clues in identifying the premise/s and the conclusion.
A. Premise Indicators
 Words like: Since, Because, As indicated by, May be
inferred from, Owing to, in as much as, In that, For the
reason that, Given that, Seeing that, As, For…etc. are
premises indicator words.
 Note: a statement that comes after these indicator words
are usually premises of the argument.
Example;
1. You should avoid any form of cheating on
exams because cheating on exams is
punishable by the Senate Legislation of the
Universit
2. Expectant mothers should never use
recreational drugs, since the use of these drugs
can jeopardize the development of the fetus
B. Conclusion Indicators
 Words like: Therefore, Hence, So, Wherefore, Accordingly,
Whence, It follows that, It must be that, Thus, As a result, We
may infer, Consequently ,we may conclude, whence, so, entails
that, hence, it follows that, implies that, …etc. Note:
 A statement that always comes after these indicator words are
the conclusion of the argument.
Examples:
All roses are flowers
All flowers are plants
Therefore, all roses are plants
 conclusion

2. If there is no indicator word, we use the following tips on

finding the conclusion
 Find the main issue the speaker or the writer is taking as his
position. That is the conclusion.
 Ask yourself “what is the writer or the speaker is trying to
prove?” That will be the conclusion.
• Example1:
• Our country should increase the quality and quantity of its
military. Ethnic conflicts are recently intensified; boarder
conflicts are escalating; international terrorist activities are
increasing.
 The main point of this argument is to show that the country
should increase the size and quality of its military.
 All the rest are given in support of the conclusion.
 As you can see there are no indicator words.
 The following is the standard form of this argument:
Ethnic conflicts are recently intensified. (P-1)
Boarder conflicts are escalating. (P-
International terrorist activities are increasing. (P-3)
Thus, the country should increase the quality and quantity of
its military. (C)
Example.2
The space program deserves increased expenditures in the years ahead.
Not only does the national defense depend upon it, but the program
will more than pay for itself in terms of technological spinoffs.
Furthermore, at current funding levels the program cannot fulfill its
anticipated potential.
The premise and conclusion of the argument can be rewritten as
follow:
P1= The national defense depend upon the space program.
P2= The space program will more than pay for itself
P3= the space program cannot fulfill its anticipated potential.
C= The space program deserves increased expenditures in the years
Identifying Arguments from non -argument
Expressions
 Since logic deals with arguments, it is important for students to
develop the ability to identify whether passages contain an argument.
 In a general , a passage contains an argument if it purports to prove
something; if it does not do so, it does not contain an argument.
 Two conditions must be fulfilled for a passage to purport to prove
something:
1). At least one of the statements must claim to present evidence or
reasons.
2). There must be a claim that the alleged evidence or reasons supports
or implies something- that is, a claim that something follows from the
alleged evidence.
There are three methods to identify arguments from
non arguments.
1. Presence of indicator words
 however, the mere occurrence of an indicator
word by no means guarantees the presence of an
argument.
 The presence of an indicator word does not mean
that the existing indicator word actually and
always indicate a premises or a conclusions
 Thus, before deciding that an indicator word indicates a
premises or a conclusion, make sure that the existing
indicator word is used to indicate a premise or a conclusion.
Example:
 Since Edison invented the phonograph, there have been
many technological developments(the word ‘since’ is time
indicator)
 Since Edison invented the phonograph, he deserves credit
for a major technological development(this is an argument).
2. the presence of an inferential claim between the statements
3. Recognizing typical kinds of non arguments
The followings are a partial list of non arguments
1. warning
Example:
Whatever you promise to tell, never tell political secrets to
your wife
2. Piece of Advice
Example: After class hours, I would suggest that you give
careful consideration to the subject matter you have discussed
3) Statements of Belief/Opinion
Example:
We believe that our university must develop and
produce outstanding students who will perform with
great skill and fulfill the demands of our nation.
This passage does not make any claim that the
belief or opinion is supported by evidence, or that it
supports some conclusion, and hence does not
contain an argument
4) Report
 It consists of statements that convey information about
some situation/event.
Example:
A powerful car bomb blew up outside the regional
telephone company headquarters in Mogadishu, injuring
25 people and causing millions of dollars of damage to
the nearby buildings, police said. A police statement said
the 198-pound bomb was packed into a milk churn
hidden in the back of a stolen car
5) Expository passages
 A kind of discourse that begins with a topic sentence followed
by one or more sentences that develop the topic sentence.
 Its purpose is not to prove but to develop the topic sentence.
Example:
 There are three familiar states of matter: solid, liquid, and gas.
Solid objects ordinarily maintain their shape and volume
regardless of their location. A liquid occupies a definite
volume, but assumes the shape of the occupied portion of its
container. A gas maintains neither shape nor volume. It
expands to fill completely whatever container it is in.
6) Illustration
 It consists of statements about a certain subject
combined with a reference to one or more
specific examples intended to exemplify that
statement. Ex.
Mammals are animals that feed their young with
milk. For example, cats, dogs, goats, monkeys
and humans are mammals.
7) Conditional Statement
 This is an “if…,then…”statement.
 Every conditional statement is made up of two
statements or sentences.
 The component statement that immediately
follows the “if” is called the Antecedent, and the
one following the “then” is called the Consequent.
Example: If Daniel works hard, then he will get a
promotion.
Note:
1. No single conditional statement is an argument.
2. However, conditional statements may serve as either the premise
or conclusion or both of an argument.
Examples:
If he is selling our national secretes to enemies, then he is a traitor.
If he is a traitor, then he must be punished by death.
Therefore, If he is selling our national secretes to enemies, then he
must be punished by death
3. Sometimes the inferential content of a conditional statement can
be re-expressed in the form of argument .
Conditional statements express the relationship between
necessary and sufficient conditions.
 ‘A’ is said to be a sufficient condition for ‘B’ whenever the
occurrence of A is all that is needed for the occurrence of B.
 ‘A’ is a necessary condition for ‘B’ whenever ‘B’ can’t occur
without the occurrence of ‘A’.
Example:
Being a female is a necessary condition to be a
mother(necessary condition but not a sufficient condition)
Being a lion is sufficient condition to be an animal(sufficient
condition, but not necessary condition)
8) Explanation
 a statement/group of statements intended to shed-light on some
phenomenon that is accepted as a matter of fact.
 Every explanation consists of two distinct components:
 Explandum: the statement that describes the event/phenomenon
to be explained and
 Explanans: the statement that purports/claims to do the
explaining.
Example.
 The sky appears blue from the earth’s surface because light
rays are scattered by particles from the atmosphere.
 Types of Arguments

arguments

Deductive Inductive

weak
Valid invalid strong

Sound unsound Cogent uncogent

 Arguments can be divided into tow groups: Deductive and
Inductive Arguments.
A. Deductive Argument:
 is the one in which the premise/s support its conclusion with
certain degree of possibility or impossibility.
 It attempts to show that its conclusion must be true given the
premise asserted (assumed true).
Example:
All philosophers are critical thinkers.
Socrates is a philosopher.
Therefore, Socrates is a critical thinker.
B. Inductive Argument
 is the one in which the premise/s support its conclusion with certain
degree of probability or improbability.
• Is a kind of argument in which the conclusion is probable or likely,
given the premises.
Example:
Most African leaders are blacks.
Mandela was an African leader.
Therefore, probably Mandela was black.
 In the above example, the conclusion does not follow from the
premises with strict necessity, but it does follow with some degree of
probability.
 Tips/ways to differentiate deductive and
inductive arguments
 There are three factors that influence the
decision about the deductiveness or
inductiveness of an argument’s inferential claim.
 These are:
1)The occurrence of special indicator words,
2)The actual strength of the inferential link
between premises and conclusion, and
3)The form of argumentation the arguers use.
1. Indicator word test
 Arguments may contain some words that indicate the
arguer’s certainty and confidence, or the arguer’s
uncertainty or doubt, about the truth of his/her conclusion
 Deductive arguments indicators words
Certainly It logically follows that
Definitely It is logical to conclude that
Absolutely This logically implies
Conclusively This entails that
Necessarily Strictly follows
 Inductive arguments indicator words
Probably One Would Suspect
Likely
Unlikely It Is A Good Bet That
Plausible Chances Are That
Implausible Odds Are That
2. the actual strength of the inferential link between premises and
conclusion.
 If the conclusion actually does follow with strict necessity from the
premises, the argument is clearly deductive.
 In such an argument, it is impossible for the premises to be true and
the conclusion false.
Example-1:
All Ethiopian people love their country.
Debebe is an Ethiopian.
Therefore, Debebe loves his country.
The majority of Ethiopian people are poor.
Alamudin is an Ethiopian.
Therefore, Alamudin is poor
 In the first example, the conclusion follows with
strict necessity from the premises.
 In the second example, the conclusion does not
follow from the premises with strict necessity,
but it does follow with some degree of
probability.
 If we assume that the premises are true, then
based on that assumption it is probable that the
conclusion is true.
3. Form of argumentation
 Occasionally, an argument contains no special indicator
words, and the conclusion does not follow either
necessarily or probably from the premises; in other
words, it does not follow at all.
 This situation points up the need for the third factor to
be taken into account, which is the character or form of
argumentation the arguer uses.
 Let us see some examples of deductive argumentative
forms and inductive argumentative forms.
 A. Deductive Argumentative Forms

• Five examples of such forms of argumentation are arguments

based on mathematics, arguments from definition, and
syllogisms( categorical, hypothetical, and disjunctive
syllogisms)
A. Argument based on mathematics
 is an argument in which the conclusion depends on some
purely arithmetic or geometric computation or measurement.
 For example, you can put two oranges and three bananas in a
bag and conclude that the bag contains five fruits.
Normal body temperature of man is 37c0. Fasil’s body
temperature is 40c0 . Therefore, Fasil is abnormal.
2. Syllogistic Arguments:
2.1. Categorical Syllogism
 syllogism is in general an argument with two premises and
one conclusion.
 categorical syllogism is a syllogism in which each statement
begins with one of the words “all”, “no” or “some’.
EX.1.
All Egyptians are Muslims.
No Muslim is a Christian.
Hence, no Egyptian is a Christian.
2.2. Hypothetical Syllogism
 is a syllogistic argument having a conditional
statement for one or both of its premises.
 If you study hard, then you will graduate with
Distinction.
 If you graduate with Distinction, then you will get
a rewarding job.
 Therefore, if you study hard, then you will get a
rewarding job
2.3. Disjunctive Syllogism
• This is a syllogism having a disjunctive statement or “either…
or…”statement for one of its premises.
Example
Rahel is either an Ethiopian or an Eritrean.
Rahel is not an Eritrean.
Therefore, Rahel is an Ethiopian.
3. Argument based on definition
 is an argument in which the conclusion is claimed to depend merely
upon the definition of some word or phrase used in the premise or
conclusion.
Example: Jallele is a cardiologist. Therefore, she is a doctor
 B. Inductive forms of Argumentation

A. Prediction
 Is a kind of argument in which we forecast
about the future based on the past or present
situation. Example.
 It has rained in Debre Berhan every March
since the weather record has been kept.
 Therefore, it will probably rain in Debre
Berhan in the next March
B. Argument from Analogy
 This is the one that depends on the existence of lists
of similarities between two things.
Examples:
Abebe’s 2006 model Lifan automobile has luxurious
seats, an excellent gas mileage and a computer set.
Matiyas’s 2006 model Lifan automobile has luxurious
seats, and an excellent gas mileage. Probably,
Matiyas’s Lifan automobile has a computer set.
C. Inductive Generalization
 This is an argument that proceeds from the knowledge of a
selected sample to some claim about the whole group.
 It is an argument in w/c generalization (a statement that
attributes some characteristics to all or to most members of a
given class) is claimed to be probably true based on
information about some members of a particular class.
Examples:
• 10 apples selected at random from a basket containing 100
apples were found to be ripe. Probably, all the rest 90 apples
are ripe.
D. Arguments based on Signs
 is an argument that proceeds from the knowledge of a certain sign
to a knowledge of the thing or situation that the sign symbolizes.
 If signs like traffic symbols are placed or misplaced from the right
position, then the conclusion rests on chances of
probability/improbability
example
 When driving on highway from Addis to Adama one might see a
sign indicating that the road makes several sharp turns one mile
ahead. Based on this information, one might argue that the road
does indeed make several sharp turns one mile ahead.
E. Statistical argument
 An argument rests on statistical evidence, that is,
evidence that some percentage of some group has some
particular characteristics.
 As opposed to pure mathematics, most arguments in
statistics are inductive.
Example:
83% of H/Mariam Mamo’s students join DBU.
Assefu is a H/Mariam Mamo’s student.
Therefore, Assefu probably joins DBU
F. Argument from authority
 Asserts a claim and then supports that claim by
citing a presumed authority who has said the
claim is true.
Example: Judge Belarde argues that Mack
committed the murder because an eyewitness
testified to that effect under oath.
 Evaluating Arguments
Evaluating deductive Argument: Validity, Truth, and Soundness
I. Valid Argument
 This is an argument such that if the premises are assumed true,
it is impossible for the conclusion to be false.
 In such a case, the conclusion follows with strict necessity
from the premises.
II. Invalid Argument
 This is the one such that if the premises are assumed true, it is
possible for the conclusion to be false.
 Here the conclusion does not follow with strict necessity from
the premises.
Example1:
All men are mammals.
All bulls are men.
Therefore, all bulls are mammals
Example 2:
All philosophers are rational.
Socrates was rational.
Therefore, Socrates was a philosopher
 The first example is valid argument, because the conclusion
actually followed from the premises with a strict necessity.
 If all men are assumed as mammals and bulls as men, then
it is impossible for bulls not be mammals. Hence, the
argument is valid.
 The second example is invalid argument, because the
conclusion did not actually follow from the premises with a
strict necessity, even though it is claimed to. That is, even if
we assume that all philosophers rational and Socrates is
rational, it is not actually impossible for Socrates not be a
philosopher.
 For an argument to be valid it is not necessary
that either the premises or the conclusions be
true, but merely that if the premises assumed
true, it is impossible for the conclusion be
false.
 That is, we do not have to know whether the
premise of an argument is actually true in
order to determine its validity
Sound argument = Valid argument + All true
premises.
Unsound Argument falls into one of the following
three categories.
1. It is valid but has at least one (more) false
premise.
2. It is invalid and all true premises or
3. It is invalid & has at least one (more) false
premises.
 Evaluating inductive Argument: Strength,
Truth, and Cogency
 Depending on the strength or weakness of the reasoning,
there are two types: Strong and Weak inductive arguments.
A. Strong argument :
 is an inductive argument such that if the premises assumed
true it is improbable for the conclusion to be false.
 In such argument, the conclusion does in fact follow
probably from the premises.
B. Weak argument :
is an inductive argument such that if the premises are
assumed true it is probable for the conclusion to be false
C. Cogent argument= strong argumnt +all true premes
D. Uncogent Argument
It falls into one of the following three categories:
1. It is strong but has at least one (more) false premise/s.
2. It is weak & has all true premises, or
3.It is weak & has at least one (more) false premise/s.
Note
Statements can be true or false, but can not be valid, invalid, sound,
unsound, strong, weak, cogent or uncogent.
Arguments can be valid, invalid, sound, unsound, strong, weak,
cogent or uncogent, but can not be true or false
 Methods to prove validity and invalidity

There different forms of valid argument .

A. Form 1: All A are B. All B are C. So, all A are
C.
B. Form 2: All A are B. Some C are not B. So,
some C are not A
All puppies are dogs. TP
Some animals are not dogs. TP
some animals are not puppies. TC (Valid, Sound)
3. Form 3: All A are B. All C are B. So, all A are C.
A= Birds B= Animals C= Dogs
Ex.1. All birds are animals. TP
All dogs are animals. TP
So, all birds are dogs. FC (Invalid, Unsound)
Form 4: All A are B. Some B are not C. So, some C are not
A.
Example: All dogs are animals. TP
Some animals are not puppies. TP
So, some puppies are not dogs. FC (Invalid, Unsound)