Elementary Logic (650:045:01)       Dr. Edgar Boedeker

Fall 2008         Tues. & Thurs., 9:30-10:45               SEC 323   

 

Office hours: Tuesdays from 2:15 to 3:00 and Thursdays from 11:00 to 11:45 in my office, 145 Baker Hall.  I would also be happy to meet with you at another time.  To arrange a meeting, just send me an e-mail at boedeker@uni.edu or give me a call at 273-7487.

 

Required Text: Patrick J. Hurley, A Concise Introduction to Logic, Ninth Edition.

 

Why Study Logic? A brilliant (but rather eccentric) Austrian named Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951) wrote what is surely the greatest philosophical work on logic, the 50-page-long Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.  When he was 24 years old, hard at work on this book, he wrote to himself: “Whatever logic will turn out to be, it will be a very unique science.”  Soon, he would discover that it is not a “science” at all – at least not in the way that biology, chemistry, and even higher mathematics are sciences.  That is, logic does not try to make true and abstract statements about particular kinds of things, such as living things, molecules, or various kinds of numbers.  But this does not mean at all that logic is merely “subjective”, so that I have my logic and you have yours.  Rather, logic occupies an absolutely central place within statements, and especially within the relations among them.  For example, biology tells us that all whales are mammals, and that no mammals are fish.  From these two statements, we can logically draw the conclusion, or “infer,” that no whales are fish (and thus that quite a number of statements in Moby Dick are false). 

            Logic occupies a similarly central place in ordinary, everyday speaking and thinking.  For example, if someone tells you that they’ll either study tonight or go to a movie, and they don’t end up going to a movie tonight, then you can infer – at least if what they’ve said is true – that they’ll study tonight.  Logic examines these and other kinds of inferential relations among statements.  Indeed, logic (as an academic discipline) can be defined as the study of inferential relations among statements.

            Thus logic is absolutely central to genuine thinking (as opposed to merely experiencing sensations or images) and to genuine language (as opposed to the sort of thing that parrots or newborn infants do).  For this reason, we already understand logic, and have as long as we have been able to genuinely speak and think.  What, then, is the point of studying logic as an academic discipline?

            The answer is that the “natural” languages we speak, such as English or German, did not arise solely for the purely logical purpose of making inferences between some statements and others.  Instead, they developed for a host of reasons, many having to do with convenience and brevity.  For such reasons, our languages sometimes mislead us into inferring some statements that really don’t follow from others, even though they might seem to. 

Essentially, the point of studying logic is to make us aware of these kinds of errors.  This helps us in three ways.  First, the study of logic can help us avoid errors in our own thinking, so that we can come to make only those inferences that really do follow from the statements we believe.  Second, logic can help us be clearer when we present our thoughts, in speech or in writing, to others.  Third, and perhaps most importantly, studying logic can help us to avoid being swayed by people who – whether they know it or not – try to persuade us to accept some conclusion that really doesn’t follow from what we know to be true.  In this way, studying logic can help make us sharper, more critical readers, thinkers, and citizens.

 

Course Content: This course will introduce you to different formal and informal methods of analyzing, symbolizing, and evaluating arguments.  Topics covered will include sentence logic, basic predicate logic, and informal fallacies. 

 

Course Format: Class meetings will consist of lecture, discussion, and weekly quizzes.  Also be aware that there will be a lot of homework for this class!

 

Grading: Your final grade will be determined as follows:

1. Twelve quizzes, worth a total of 60% of your final grade. 

2. The assigned homework will be worth a total of 40% of your final grade.  The homework due since the last quiz will be accepted only in class at the beginning of the class meeting on the day on which it is due.  Homework will be graded with a “check” (full credit), “check-minus” (half credit) or a “check-plus” (credit-and-a-half), based on the perception of your good-faith effort in completing it.

3. On Wednesday, December 17, from 8:00 to 9:50 a.m., you will have the opportunity to make up between 2 and 4 quizzes of your choice (I’ll announce the exact number of quizzes toward the end of the semester).  These can be either quizzes that you missed or ones on which you did poorly.  The make-up quizzes will be graded on a “no penalty” basis.  That is, if your grade on the make-up quiz differs from that on the original quiz for the corresponding week, only the higher of the two grades will be counted.  Naturally, the make-up quizzes will be different from the quiz given in class of the corresponding week, although they will cover roughly the same material.

Further note: Each semester, I teach about 100 students.  Although I give each as much individual time and attention as I possibly can during the semester, I will not be able to send you your individual grade for the course at the end of the semester.  I submit the grades to the Registrar as soon as I can during the week of final exams, and ask you to kindly wait to see your grade until it has been reported electronically.

 

Website: The Department of Philosophy and Religion has relatively few funds available for photocopying (or for anything else, for that matter!).  The great majority of our course materials will therefore be placed on our website: http://www.uni.edu/boedeker.  These materials will include handouts to supplement the textbook.  Please check the website frequently for updates. 

 

MAILSERV: From time to time, I will send announcements pertaining to the class via e-mail.  To facilitate our electronic communication, a MAILSERV distribution list has been created for this class using your UNI e-mail addresses.  The list members include myself and the students who were registered for the class when the list was created.  It is a private list (i.e., only the list members may post to it), but has open subscription.  To send to the list, use 650-045-01-FALL@uni.edu.

If you registered late, or if you wish to be able to send and receive e-mails at an e-mail address other than your UNI one, then please add your e-mail address to this list by sending a message to

mailserv@uni.edu

where the body (not the subject heading) contains these two lines:

SUB 650-045-01-FALL

END

In a similar manner, if you drop this course, you may remove yourself from the list by sending a message to

mailserv@uni.edu

where the body (not the subject heading) contains these two lines:

UNSUB 650-045-01-FALL
END

 

It will be your responsibility to make sure you are subscribed to the MAILSERV right away, check your e-mail regularly, and read the announcements. 

 

Cheating and plagiarism (from UNI’s academic ethics policy): “Students at UNI are required to observe the commonly accepted standards of academic honesty and integrity. Except in those instances in which group work is specifically authorized by the instructor of the class, no work which is not solely the student's is to be submitted to a professor...   Cheating of any kind on examinations… is strictly prohibited…  Students are cautioned that plagiarism is defined as the process of stealing or passing off as one’s own the ideas or words of another, or presenting as one's own an idea or product which is derived from an existing source.”

Disabilities: I will make every effort to accommodate disabilities.  Please contact me if I can be of assistance in this area.  All qualified students with disabilities are protected under the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C.A., Section 12101.  The ADA states that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.”  Students who desire or need instructional accommodations or assistance because of their disability should contact the Office of Disability Services located in 213 Student Services Center (273-2676 Voice, or 273-3011 TTY).

 

 

Tentative Course Schedule:

August 26: Introduction.

August 28: read Section 1.1; do exercises I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30; II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9. Handout

September 2: read Section 1.2; do exercises I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 35; II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9; VI: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9. Handout

September 4: read Section 1.3; do exercises I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30; and 1.3 III (all). Handout

September 9: read Section 1.4; do exercises I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15; II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15.

September 11: do exercises 1.4 III: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20; V (all).

September 16: read Section 6.1; do exercises I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21. Handout

September 18: re-read Section 6.1; do exercises I: 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42, 44, 45, 47, 48, 50. Handout

September 23: do exercises 6.1 II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20; III (all). Handout

September 25: read Section 6.2; do exercises I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9; II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15.

September 30: do exercises 6.2 III: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24; IV: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15.

October 2: read Section 6.3; do exercises I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15; II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15; III: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9. Handout1 Handout2.

October 7: read Section 6.4 and do exercises 6.4 I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9; II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, 18, 20; read Section 6.5 and do exercises 6.5 I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15.

October 9: do exercises 6.5 II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9.  Read Section 6.6 (including summary on pp. 336-7) and do exercises 6.6 I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20.

October 14: do exercises 6.6 II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20; III 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9; IV: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9.

October 16: read Section 8.1; do exercises 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21. Handout1 Handout2.

October 21: do exercises 8.1: 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42, 44, 45, 47, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56, 57, 59, 60.  Also read Section 8.3 (on the change of quantifier rules), but only p. 411 through the middle of p. 412. Handout

October 23: read Section 4.7; change the instructions for 4.7 to “Translate the following into predicate logic propositions;” and do exercises 4.7 I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27 Homework help and Handout.

October 28: change the instructions for 4.7 to “Translate the following into predicate logic propositions;” and do exercises 4.7 I: 29, 30, 32, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42, 44, 45, 47, 48, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56, 57, 59, 60 Homework help.

October 30: read Section 4.1 and Section 4.3 (noting that we’ll be using only the modern, or Boolean, interpretation of universal categorical propositions – not the Aristotelian one); do exercises 4.1: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8; 4.3 I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8; and 4.3 III (for II 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15).

November 4: using the homework you’ve already done from Section 4.7 and the “homework help” given there as a guide, change the instructions for 4.7 to “Express the following as Venn diagrams” and do these exercises again, this time expressing these sentences using Venn diagrams instead of propositional logic.

November 6: read enough of pp. 237-238 in Section 5.1 to understand the concepts of syllogism, categorical syllogism, and the first three conditions of standard form (we won’t be using the fourth); also read Section 5.2 (but only pp. 244 through the top of 251); using only use Boolean (not Aristotelian) Venn diagrams – i.e., the ones you’ve read about – to test the arguments for validity, do exercises 5.1 I: 2, 3, 5; and 5.1 II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9.

November 11: using only use Boolean (not Aristotelian) Venn diagrams, do exercises 5.2 I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20; and 5.2 II: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9.

November 13: read Section 5.4; do exercises 5.4: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9 – using Venn diagrams (not “the rules for syllogisms”) to test the arguments for validity or invalidity.  Also read Section 5.5; do exercises 5.5: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15 using Venn diagrams (not “the rules for syllogisms”) to test the arguments for validity or invalidity. 

November 18: read Section 5.6.  Do exercises I: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15; II for the enthymemes you completed in exercise 5.6 I; and 5.6 III: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9.  Also do exercises 2.1 II 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, but ignoring the instructions in the book.  Instead, treat each passage as an enthymeme or series of enthymemes, identify the missing statements, and indicate whether they are premises or conclusions.

November 20: read Section 2.1 (“Varieties of Meaning”), Section 2.2 (“The Intension and Extension of Terms” but only pp. 82-83), Section 2.3 (“Definitions and Their Purposes” but only pp. 86-91), and Section 2.4 (“Definitional Techniques” but only pp. 98-99); do Exercises 2.1 III: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, and 20; exercises 2.3 III 1-9; exercises 2.4 II 7 b-e; and exercises 2.4 III 8-10 .

December 2: read Section 3.1 and do exercises 3.1: 2, 4, 6, 9, and 10, stating whether the argument commits the formal fallacy of affirming the consequent, denying the antecedent, or some other formal fallacy.  Also read “8. Red Herring” (pp. 122-123), “15. Begging the Question” (pp. 145-147), “16. Complex Question” (pp. 148-149), “17. False Dichotomy” (pp. 149-150), “18. Suppressed Evidence” (pp. 150-151), and “19. Equivocation” (pp. 152-153).  Do exercises 3.1: 2; 3.2 I: 3, 13, 21, 23; 3.2 I: 23; 3.3. III: 3, 13 and 24; 3.4 I: 1, 3; 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 25; 3.4 III: 4, 7, 13, 14, 15, 20, 23, 30, 31, 35, 39, 40, 43, 44, 50; and 3.5 I: 1, 3, 9, 11, 16, 17, 20, 23, 26, 30, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 45, 46, 51, 54, 59; if the argument commits a fallacy, state which why it is a red herring, which question is begged, what is falsely presupposed by the complex question, which disjunction is false, which evidence is suppressed, or which word or phrase is the source of the equivocation. Handout

December 4: read “4. Argument Against the Person” (pp. 116-119), “6. Straw Man” (pp. 120-121), “9. Appeal to Unqualified Authority” (pp. 128-129), and “10. Appeal to ignorance” (pp. 130-131).  Do exercises 3.1: 5 and 8; 3.2 I: 2, 6, 8; 11, 16, 17, 18, 19; 3.3. I: 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14; 3.3 I: 4, 6, 10, 14, 20, 25, 29; 3.3 III: 12 and 22; 3.4 III: 1, 3, 9, 16, 17, 25, 27, 36, 45; and 3.5 I: 10, 14, 24, 40, 43, 49, 51, 53, 56; if the argument commits a fallacy, state its false implicit assumption.

December 9: read “11. Hasty Generalization” (pp. 131-133), “12. False Cause” (pp. 133-135), and “14. Weak Analogy” (pp. 137-138).  Do exercises 3.1: 4 and 7; 3.2 III; 3.3. I: 1, 2, 6, 9, 13, 15; 3.3 III: 1, 3, 5, 7, 11, 14, 15, 19, 22, 27, 28; 3.3 IV; 3.4 I: 8 and 14; 3.4 III: 8, 11, 13, 22, 24, 37, 38, 42, 46, 48; 3.4 IV; and 3.5 I: 7, 12, 13, 18, 20, 22, 25, 28, 29, 33, 36, 41, 42, 43, 47, 52, 55, 57, 58, 60; if the argument commits a fallacy, state its false implicit assumption.

December 11: review and/or catch-up day.

Wednesday, December 17, 8:00-9:50 a.m.: Make-up’s (held in our regular classroom).