Deductive Arguments
Valid and Invalid arguments
CGE14411
Lecture 5
1
Intended Learning Outcomes
After this lecture, you should be able
to
Explain the difference between inductive
and deductive arguments
Explain the basic features of a valid and
sound argument
Examine whether an argument is valid
2
Key concepts
Deductive vs Inductive argument
Valid argument
Invalid arguments
Counter-example
Specific case not fitting general law
3
Revision:
What is a Deductive Argument?
A person is performing deductive
reasoning when he or she argues from
the more general information to arrive
at a more specific conclusion.
4
Revision (cont.):
Structure of Deductive Argument
It is dangerous to drive on General principle
icy streets.
The streets are icy now. Specific situation
So it is dangerous to drive Principle applied to
now. specific situation
All humans cannot fly General principle
Steve Jobs is a human Specific situation
Steve Jobs cannot fly. Principle applied to
specific situation
5
Revision (cont.):
What is a Inductive Argument?
A kind of reasoning that bases on specific
incidents and makes a broader generalization
that is considered probable, though it is
recognized that the conclusion may not be
absolutely accurate.
Domestic helpers from
Tourists from that that country are not
country are all bad- reliable
mannered
The noodle sold in that
chain store is
delicious!
6
Revision (cont.)
Structure of Inductive Argument
The chair in the living room is red. Specific situation
The chair in the dining room is red. Specific situation
The chair in the bedroom is red. Specific situation
All chairs in the house are red. Generalization
Every time you eat peanuts, your Many specific
throat swells up and you can't situations
breath.
So, you are allergic to peanuts. Generalization
7
Deductive Vs Inductive
The pattern of support for the conclusion in a
deductive argument and the pattern of support for
the conclusion in an inductive argument are
different
Deductive :
The conclusion is claimed to follow from its premises with
(logical) necessity ( 邏輯上是必然的 ).
This necessity is absolute and not a matter of degree.
Inductive :
The conclusion is claimed to follow from its premises only
with a certain degree of probability.
This probability comes as a matter of degree.
8
Deductive Inductive
If all the premises are true, If all the premises are true, then
then the conclusion must be the conclusion is probably true,
true. i.e., more likely to be true than
false.
The conclusion follows The conclusion follows probably
necessarily ( 必然 ) from the from the premises.
premises. i.e., the premises provide good
i.e., the premises provide but not conclusive evidence for
conclusive ground for the truth the truth of the conclusion.
of the conclusion.
If we accept all the premises, If we accept all the premises, it is
we must accept the conclusion. reasonable for us to accept the
conclusion, at least tentatively.
9
Why we need to distinguish deductive
and inductive reasoning?
Deductive reasoning
A deductive reasoning generates a definite
conclusion.
There are rules (i.e. logic) that guide us to
make a valid deductive reasoning.
Inductive reasoning
Does not generate a definite conclusion;
instead it produces general patterns.
Must recognize that the general pattern is not
definite.
10
Inductive Reasoning
When we see some specific cases
(usually in a large number) and attempt
to generalize a general law or theory
from them, we are conducting inductive
reasoning
Many people feel happy when they
have friends
Friendship makes people happy
11
Example: Dogs Can Bark
Corgis Specific
can bark.fact Corgis can bark.
BostonSpecific
Terriers can
fact Boston Terriers can
bark. bark.
Chow chows
Specificcan
factbark. Chow chows can bark.
Pugs can bark.fact
Specific Pugs can bark.
Therefore, dogs can Therefore, dogs can
bark. Generalization bark.
12
Deductive Reasoning
When we attempt to apply a theory or a
principle to a specific situation, we are
conducting deductive reasoning
That is, a theory serves as a premise in the
argument
Friendship makes people happy
If you have some good friends,
you are likely to be happier
13
Example: Procrastination
According to Dan Ariely According to Dan
(2009), students have Ariely (2009), tightly
a tendency to restricting students’
procrastinate, and freedom is the best
tightly restricting their cure for
freedom is the best procrastination
cure for Students are given
procrastination. If
clear deadlines, which
students are given clear
restrict their freedom
deadlines, they will be
more hard-working. Students will be less
hard-working
14
What is a Good Deductive Argument?
To be able to convince others
• the argument must be valid
Sound argument
• the premises must be true
15
C. Validity ( 有效性、對確性 )
Valid argument ( 有效 或 對確 的論證 ) is:
An argument is valid if and only if there
is no logically possible situation where all
the premises are true and the conclusion
is false at the same time.
16
Consider the following two arguments:
A1: Barbie is over 90 years old. So
Barbie is over 20 years old.
A2: Barbie is over 20 years old. So
Barbie is over 90 years old.
17
A1: Barbie is over 90 years old.
So Barbie is over 20 years old.
If “Barbie is over 90 years old” is
true, then “Barbie is over 20 years
old” cannot be false.
Explanation: Barbie cannot be over
90 years old and not over 20 years
old at the same time.
18
A2: Barbie is over 20 years old.
So Barbie is over 90 years old.
If “Barbie is over 20 years old” is
true, it does not guarantee that
“Barbie is over 90 years old” is also
true.
Explanation: Barbie could be over 30
years old.
19
A1: Barbie is over 90 years old. So
Barbie is over 20 years old.
A2: Barbie is over 20 years old. So
Barbie is over 90 years old.
20
Examples
All fish live in water
Nemo is a fish
Therefore, Nemo lives in water
If it is true that all fish live
in water,
And if Nemo is a fish,
Nemo lives in water
21
Validity
Validity only requires that if the premises are
true, the conclusion must be true
It depends only on the logical connection
between the premises and the conclusion
It does not depend on whether the premises
are (empirically) true or not (i.e., its truth
status)
If the premises are not true, imagine “if they
were true, is the conclusion necessarily true?”
22
Is this valid?
Li Ka Shing has USD 26
billion
If Andy Lau has USD 50
billion
Wealth USD 26 billion
Then Andy Lau is wealthier
than Li Ka Shing
Wealth unknown
23
Is this valid?
If Jackie can jump
10 meter high
Then Jackie can
jump 5 meter high
Jackie Chan can
actually jump
1.7 m
24
Validity vs. Truth Status
Validity is a feature that is separate from
whether the premises are true or not
A valid argument does not depend on whether
the premises are (empirically) true or not
Truth status ( 真實性 ) is a characteristic of
each premise
Validity is a characteristic of an argument,
or the relations between the premises and
the conclusion
25
Soundness
A sound argument is an argument with a valid
logical connection between the premises and the
conclusion and has empirically true premises and
an empirically true conclusion.
26
Valid True conclusion False conclusion
arguments
True September has 30
days Impossible
premises
This is September By definition, a valid
argument with true
This month has 30 premises must lead to
days true conclusion
False All Chinese people All dogs have eight
speak Putonghua legs.
premises
Mark Zuckerberg is a The Secretary is a
Chinese dog.
Mark Zuckerberg The Secretary has
speaks Putonghua eight legs.
27
Exercise
Are the Is the
premises deduction
Argument true? valid?
Chinese people’s English
proficiency is lower than
that of American.
Therefore American’s
mathematical proficiency is
lower than that of Chinese.
All bananas are animals, all
animals will die, so all
bananas will die.
28
Valid Logical Relation Example 1
All fish live in water
The subject in the specific case is a kind
of the subject in the general law
Nemo is a fish
The consequence in the specific case is a kind
of the consequence in the general law
Nemo lives in water
29
Valid Logical Relation Example 2
According to Dan Ariely (2009), students have a
tendency to procrastinate, and tightly restricting their
freedom is the best cure for procrastination.
The action in the specific case is a kind of
action in the general law
Students are given clear deadlines, which restrict
their freedom
The consequence in the specific case is a kind
of the consequence in the general law
Students will be more hard-working
30
Valid Logical Relation Example 3
According to the theory of Prisoner’s Dilemma,
rational individuals tend to defect in a
cooperative game if the game does not repeat.
The event in the specific case is a kind of event in the general law
Students do not always work with the same
groups, i.e., the grouping does not repeat.
The consequence in the specific case is a kind of the consequence
in the general law
Therefore, there are free-riders in students’
group assignments
31
D. Invalid argument
An argument is invalid
Even if the stated premises are true, the
conclusion is not necessarily true
In other words
Even if the stated premises are true, the
conclusion may be wrong
Then the argument does not satisfy
the definition of a valid argument
32
Examining Invalid Arguments
The following are two major ways to
determine whether an argument is
invalid
By pointing out a counter-example
By pointing out that the specific case
does not fit the description in the general
law
33
Is this valid?
If a person lives in Hong
Kong, then he/she can
speak Cantonese.
Jane can speak
Cantonese.
Therefore, Jane lives in
Hong Kong.
34
D1. Counterexample
A counterexample is a case (real or
hypothetical) that (a) fits the premises but (b)
not the conclusion
Mary is not a man
So Mary is a woman
If the TV is unplugged, it doesn't work.
The TV is not working.
So it's unplugged.
The winning ticket is number 540.
John holds ticket number 539.
So John does not hold the winning ticket.
35
Counter-example showing Invalid Arguments
A valid argument is an argument with no
possible counter-example.
To challenge an argument, it is important that
you are able to discover and construct counter-
examples (can be real or fictitious; however,
they must be logical)
If you can identify a
counter-example, you show
that a certain argument is invalid.
36
”The Gwai Lou Show”,
can speak Cantonese.
This is a counter-
example.
Therefore, it may not
be true that people who An example that fits the
premise (speaking
live outside Hong Kong Cantonese) but not the
cannot speak conclusion (living in
Hong Kong)
Cantonese.
37
Counter-example tells invalid
argument
In order that the argument is valid, the
conclusion must be true if the premises are
true. In this argument, we can find a counter-
example. The team members of ”The Gwai Lou
Show” live in the US but can speak Cantonese.
That is to say, it is possible to find a case that
the premise is true but the conclusion is not
true. Therefore, the argument does not satisfy
the requirement of a valid argument. In other
words, the argument is not a valid argument.
38
D2. Specific Case not Fitting General Law
When the specific case in the second
premise does not belong to the
description in the first premise
(general law), the conclusion would
not be definitively true
39
Examples
The specific case
All fish live in water can be something
other than a fish,
My friend’s name is “Fish” and does not fit
the description in
the first premise
Therefore, my friend lives in water
The conclusion cannot be definitively true
The argument is therefore not valid
40
Specific Case not Fitting General Law
A common mistake in social science
application is
The first premise (the general law or the
theory) states “A will lead to B”
The event in the second premise (the
specific case) is NOT a specific example
of A
But the writer still proposes that B will
happen
41
Example: Procrastination
According to Dan Ariely (2009), students have a
tendency to procrastinate, and tightly restricting
their freedom is the best cure for procrastination.
The subject in the specific case is NOT a kind
of subject in the general law
Students are given clear instructions of penalty for
late submissions
The subject here is the undesirable outcome,
not the limited amount of time (limited freedom)
Students will be more hard-working
42
The situation
Example: Rate of Crime in the
specific case
The theory of social disorganization does not fit
states high rates of crime occur in the
description
those communities that are
of the theory
characterized by poverty, ethnic
heterogeneity and residential mobility
In that school, there has been much
staff turnover, and a number of new
teachers are of different ethnic origins
The crime rate in that school are likely
to increase
The consequence is unlikely to happen;
the conclusion is not necessarily true
43
Conclusion
Valid deductive argument
The conclusion is necessarily true if the
premises are true.
The specific situation fits the description of
the general law.
Invalid argument
Check whether you can find any counter-
examples.
Check whether the specific situation fits the
description of the general law.
44
Reading for this week
Required Reading:
A rulebook for Arguments, Chapter VI on
“Deductive arguments” (Required)
Supplementary Reading:
An introduction to critical thinking and
creativity, Chapter 9 “Valid and sound
arguments” and Chapter 10 “Inductive
reasoning” (Supplementary)
45
