This is a draft cheat sheet. It is a work in progress and is not finished yet.
Dimensions of Reasoning
∙Inferential: the varying inferential relations premises and conclusions stand in when connected together via reasoning
∙Representational: the varying degrees of accuracy statements exhibit when connected with reality via assertion and belief
Norms of Reasoning
Rationality: norm for evaluating the inferential dimension of arguments
Rational: premises successfully justify the inferred conclusion
[positive inferential "value"]
Irrational: premises fail to justify the inferred conclusion
[negative inferential "value"]
Accuracy: norm for evaluating the representational dimension of arguments
True: positive inferential "value"
Irrational: negative ver "value"
Inaccurate: statement successfully
[positive representational "value"]
False: statement fails to veridically represent the actual facts
[negative representational "value"]
1. Indicator Words
2. Common Types of Non-Statement
1. Indicator Words
2. Logical Order
3. Background Context
4. Common Types of Argument
5. Common Types of Non-Argument
Assessing Validity, Pt. 2
Validity vs. Strength: Similarities
1. Both depend on whether the truth-conditions of the premises and the truth-conditions of the conclusion are correctly related.
2. Neither depend on the actual true-value of the premises or the conclusion.
Validity vs. Strength: Differences
1. Only deductive inferences can be valid/invalid, and only inductive inferences can be strong/weak.
2. When the premises in a valid argument are all true, it's impossible the conclusion is false. When the premises in a strong argument are all true, it's only improbable the conclusion is false.
3. Validity is all-or‐nothing, but strength is a matter of degree.
For strong arguments, when
it is still For strong arguments, even if the premises are true, the conclusion can s9ll be false.