roy

Was the United States morally justified in going to war against Iraq? I think just war theory gives us an answer. The theory says a preemptive attack against a state is justified only if that state presents a substantial danger that is “immediate and imminent.” That is, to meet this criterion, an attack by an […]

DECONSTRUCTING ARGUMENTS In the real world, arguments do not come neatly labeled, their parts identified and their relation- ships laid bare. So you have to do the labeling and connecting yourself, and that can be hard work. Where are the premises and the conclusion? Are there implied premises? What statements are irrel- evant to the

Here is a typical argument with an unstated premise: The use of condoms is completely unnatural. They have been manufactured for the explicit purpose of interfering with the natural process of procreation. Therefore, the use of condoms should be banned. In this argument, the first two sentences con- stitute a single premise, the gist of

EVALUATING MORAL ARGUMENTS ’ QUICK REVIEW statement—An assertion that something is or is not the case. argument—A group of statements, one of which is supposed to be supported by the rest. premise—A supporting statement in an argument. conclusion—The statement supported in an argument. indicator words—Terms that often appear in argu- ments to signal the presence

Do you see the problem with these two? Do you see the problem with these two? In the first one (denying the antecedent), even a false antecedent (if Maria will not walk to work) doesn’t mean that she will not be late. Maybe she will sit at home and be late, or be late for

would believing without evidence (failing to use critical thinking) be immoral? MORAL REASONING ’ You might be surprised to learn that some philoso- phers consider reasoning itself a moral issue. That is, they think that believing a claim without good reasons (an unsupported statement) is immoral. Probably the most famous exposition of this point comes

Can you think of a counterexample to his argument—that is, instances in which believing without evidence would be morally permissible? MORAL REASONING ’ You might be surprised to learn that some philoso- phers consider reasoning itself a moral issue. That is, they think that believing a claim without good reasons (an unsupported statement) is immoral.

Do you agree with Clifford? MORAL REASONING ’ You might be surprised to learn that some philoso- phers consider reasoning itself a moral issue. That is, they think that believing a claim without good reasons (an unsupported statement) is immoral. Probably the most famous exposition of this point comes from the philosopher and mathematician W.

MORAL REASONING ’ You might be surprised to learn that some philoso- phers consider reasoning itself a moral issue. That is, they think that believing a claim without good reasons (an unsupported statement) is immoral. Probably the most famous exposition of this point comes from the philosopher and mathematician W. K. Clifford (1845–79). He has

ARGUMENTS GOOD AND BAD A good argument shows that its conclusion is wor- thy of belief or acceptance; a bad argument fails to show this. A good argument gives you good rea- sons to accept a claim; a bad argument proves nothing. So the crucial question is, How can you tell which is which? To