MAY/JUNE 2023
PLS2601
Critical Reasoning
, Question 1
1.1 The ability to conceptualize, analyse, question, and evaluate ideas and beliefs is
a necessary component of critical reasoning actively and deftly. Dogmatism is the
opposite of critical reasoning. Dogma is unchallenged knowledge that is accepted
without the involvement of active thought or criticism. To reason critically is to
challenge authority and dogma as well as one's own ideas and beliefs.
1.2. The "modus ponens" and "modus tollens" are both valid deductive argument
forms.
Modus ponens (affirming the antecedent) is structured as follows: "If P, then Q. P.
Therefore, Q." This argument form affirms the consequent based on the affirmation
of the antecedent. Example: "If it is raining, then the ground is wet. It is raining.
Therefore, the ground is wet."
Modus tollens (denying the consequent) is structured as follows: "If P, then Q. Not Q.
Therefore, not P." This argument form denies the antecedent based on the denial of
the consequent. Example: "If it is raining, then the ground is wet. The ground is not
wet. Therefore, it is not raining."
Example fallacies:
Affirming the consequent fallacy:
"If it is raining, then the ground is wet. The ground is wet. Therefore, it is raining."
(This is invalid because there could be other reasons for the ground being wet, not
necessarily due to rain.)
Denying the antecedent fallacy:
"If it is raining, then the ground is wet. It is not raining. Therefore, the ground is not
wet." (This is invalid because there could be other reasons for the ground being wet,
even if it's not raining.)
1.3. A In an argument, a premise is a statement or proposition that serves as
evidence or support for the conclusion. It is a statement that is put forward as true or
assumed to be true, and it is used to build a case or reasoning for the conclusion. On
the other hand, the conclusion is the statement or proposition that follows from the
premises and is considered to be the result or outcome of the argument.
PLS2601
Critical Reasoning
, Question 1
1.1 The ability to conceptualize, analyse, question, and evaluate ideas and beliefs is
a necessary component of critical reasoning actively and deftly. Dogmatism is the
opposite of critical reasoning. Dogma is unchallenged knowledge that is accepted
without the involvement of active thought or criticism. To reason critically is to
challenge authority and dogma as well as one's own ideas and beliefs.
1.2. The "modus ponens" and "modus tollens" are both valid deductive argument
forms.
Modus ponens (affirming the antecedent) is structured as follows: "If P, then Q. P.
Therefore, Q." This argument form affirms the consequent based on the affirmation
of the antecedent. Example: "If it is raining, then the ground is wet. It is raining.
Therefore, the ground is wet."
Modus tollens (denying the consequent) is structured as follows: "If P, then Q. Not Q.
Therefore, not P." This argument form denies the antecedent based on the denial of
the consequent. Example: "If it is raining, then the ground is wet. The ground is not
wet. Therefore, it is not raining."
Example fallacies:
Affirming the consequent fallacy:
"If it is raining, then the ground is wet. The ground is wet. Therefore, it is raining."
(This is invalid because there could be other reasons for the ground being wet, not
necessarily due to rain.)
Denying the antecedent fallacy:
"If it is raining, then the ground is wet. It is not raining. Therefore, the ground is not
wet." (This is invalid because there could be other reasons for the ground being wet,
even if it's not raining.)
1.3. A In an argument, a premise is a statement or proposition that serves as
evidence or support for the conclusion. It is a statement that is put forward as true or
assumed to be true, and it is used to build a case or reasoning for the conclusion. On
the other hand, the conclusion is the statement or proposition that follows from the
premises and is considered to be the result or outcome of the argument.
