Class 3.1: Conditionals

Argument Concepts

Arguments: Review

Recall that arguments are one of the main tools of philosophers in order to be able to think clearly and objectively. When we present a line of reasoning as an argument, we impose rigor and discipline in a way that makes it easy to see what could possibly go wrong.

When giving arguments, the gold standard is always to find arguments that are sound. Only a sound argument is guaranteed to show that its conclusion is true, and the reason that we are interested in arguments is in order to show that their conclusion is true. Since two things are required in order to be sound - formal validity and true premises - there are exactly two kinds of problems that an argument can have - two ways it can fall short of the gold standard. It can be invalid - not formally valid - or it can have one or more false premises.

So whenever I ask you to criticize an argument or object to an argument or give the best objection to an argument that you can, you must either explain why the argument is not formally valid, or show (or at least try to show) that one of the premises of the argument is false. Nothing else counts as an objection to an argument, because these are the only ways that an argument can fall short of the gold standard.

Course Video

For today's class, review the following course video, introducing the concept of conditionals, and several related definitions. The video is short, but you should watch it through a couple of times and take notes on the important definitions.

You can also read and review more about conditionals on the conditionals course handout.

Handout 2.2

Download Handout 2.2, which will be distributed in class.