Argument from authority The basic structure of such arguments is as follows: Professor X believes A‚ Professor X speaks from authority‚ therefore A is true. Often this argument is implied by emphasizing the many years of experience‚ or the formal degrees held by the individual making a specific claim. The converse of this argument is sometimes used‚ that someone does not possess authority‚ and therefore their claims must be false. (This may also be considered an ad-hominen logical fallacy – see
Premium Argument Logic Critical thinking
STEPS IN EVALUATING AN ARGUMENT The following four steps are an efficient way to apply what you learned in this chapter—in other words‚ to evaluate your argument and overcome any errors in validity or truth that it may contain. 1. State your argument fully‚ as clearly as you can. Be sure to identify any hidden premises and‚ if the argument is complex‚ to express all parts of it. 2. Examine each part of your argument for errors affecting truth. (To be sure this examination is not perfunctory
Premium Logic Reasoning
addressing our argument to a group of representatives from corporate companies in the country. In 2011 we successfully held a fundraising event which helped us raise enough funding to support the activities of our organization. We used the funding to buy the healthiest vegetables from local farmers and purchase only the naturally raised meat. While our goal is to fight hunger in the country‚ we also maintain an eco-friendly outlook. A clear statement of purpose for the argument After the financial
Premium Logic Hunger Argument
Making a good argument:Paraphrase the three parts of argument in your notes1.Claim – The claim states your position in‚ as well as the main idea of an argument.2.Data – The data in an argument is any type of evidence that supports your claim/position. It may be an expert’s opinion‚ your own logical reasoning‚ statistics‚ or facts‚ as well as graphics.3.Warrant – The warrant is what connects your claim to your evidence and explains why your position is correct. It also explains the conclusion to be
Premium Critical thinking Logic Argument
Aquinas’ Five Proofs What real evidence can be supplied for God’s existence? St. Thomas‚ in his Summa Theologica‚ sets forth five separate proofs for the existence of God‚ Unlike St. Anselm’s proof‚ which deals with pure concepts‚ St. Thomas’ proofs rely on the world of our experience-what we can see around us. In these proofs we can easily see the influence of Aristotle and his doctrine of the Four Causes. l) The Proof from Motion. We observe motion all around us. Whatever is in motion now
Premium Ontology Existence of God Existence
Fallacies are defects that have the power to weaken an argument. Fallacious arguments are much more common than we may think‚ and they tend be persuasive to the casual listener or reader. Politicians‚ celebrities‚ and advertisement commercials constantly make use of them. As an example of a fallacy‚ I’m going to use the Hollywood celebrity Alec Baldwin in the commercial for Hulu. Alec Baldwin is known for his success in the movie industry. His career began on television in an NBC soap opera called
Premium Critical thinking Fallacy Argument
is an ontological argument? What is the distinguishing feature of St. Anselm’s theism that makes it ontological? An ontological argument for the existence of God attempts the method of a priori proof‚ which uses intuition and reason alone. 5. What is a cosmological argument? Explain St. Aquinas’ argument from design. The cosmological argument is an argument for the existence of a First Cause (or instead‚ an Uncaused cause) to the universe‚ and by extension is often used as an argument for the
Premium Philosophy Religion Metaphysics
Archbishop of Cantebury (1033-1109)‚ is the originator of the ontological argument‚ which he describes in the Proslogium as follows: [Even a] fool‚ when he hears of … a being than which nothing greater can be conceived … understands what he hears‚ and what he understands is in his understanding.… And assuredly that‚ than which nothing greater can be conceived‚ St. Anselm‚ Archbishop of Cantebury (1033-1109)‚ is the originator of the ontological argument‚ which he describes in the Proslogium as follows: [Even
Premium Ontology Metaphysics Plato
of Canterbury “The Ontological Argument” claims to both prove and disprove God’s existence. However this arguments possess a certain sense of ambiguity‚ meaning that it can be interpreted in different ways and therefore come away with more than one sensible conclusion towards the existence of God. In this paper i will delve in to each argument and give reasons as to how these arguments either disprove or support a belief in God. Firstly there is that of “The Ontological Argument” a pivotal movement
Premium Metaphysics Ontology Existence
Ontological Argument of St. Anselm St. Anselm was a philosopher who proposed the first ontological argument in Western Christian tradition back in 1078 through his work Proslogian. An ontological argument is “an argument aiming to prove the existence of God through just thought of God alone” (Timmons 439). St. Anselm believed the definition of God to be‚ “That than which nothing greater can be conceived.” While Anselm argued God’s existence was purely through introspection‚ it can be disputed that
Premium Existence Ontology Metaphysics