This is like logic inception! Concepts keep progressively stemming out from the previous concept. The cumulative nature of the subject would be much too confusing to grasp without the videos, but thanks to Mark Thorsby I learn more every video. Thank you for taking your time to create these! Love how you're evidently passionate about the subject, helps to motivate me.
Changing the bank argument to a valid one. "All banks are financial institutions. Wells Fargo is a bank. Therefore, Wells Fargo is a financial institution." Changing the terms around forms it into a sound argument. Thank you for these videos. I wish my instructor had the option to use this book. It seems to better explain what I've been struggling with for a few weeks now.
We may call the first inductive argument example strong and cogent also for the fact that the younger dinasaur bones are likely to be found in the upper stages of the soil rather than deeper as they die after the older dinasaurs and covered with land later on. Sorry about my English if my sentence wasn't understandable.
Professor Thorsby, I'm having trouble figuring out whether the following argument is valid or not: "Since the Department of Defense Building in Washington, D.C. has the shape of a hexagon, it follows that it has seven sides". Although both the premise and conclusion are false, the premise appears to support the conclusion. That's why I'd think that the argument is valid. It would be clearly valid if the conclusion stated that the building had six sides rather than seven.
How the heck is it possible? a university instructor tries to explain same content for 5 classes and I still dont understand. But I understand this 30minute video! University system is collapsing....
how exactly is a weak inductive argument uncogent by necessity? If cogent just means that the argument's conclusion is true and uncogent is that it is false, can't we have a weak inductive argument that has a true conclusion? not sure how a weak inductive argument cant be cogent.
It's unfortunate that mathematics and logic use "induction" in different way. Contradictory even, as mathematical induction is actually a deductive process. Things like that bother me.
An example of a valid argument against gay married would be: All homosexual invidious who are married are unhappy. Pedro is a homosexual married person. Therefore, Pedro in unhappy. This is a unsound valid deductive argument Obs: I'm totally in favour of love no matter the gender! :)
He's a professor so he makes this for his classes lol I'm taking his online class and he's great! He did cut the video shortly after so I'm sure he took care of his kid.
My midterms are in a week and you saved like 75% of a college freshman's life. Thank you.
This is like logic inception! Concepts keep progressively stemming out from the previous concept. The cumulative nature of the subject would be much too confusing to grasp without the videos, but thanks to Mark Thorsby I learn more every video. Thank you for taking your time to create these! Love how you're evidently passionate about the subject, helps to motivate me.
I am currently taking this exact course. Your videos have been extremely helpful. Hurley's book has been so dry so thanks for lightening it up.
Do you have pdf format of the book?
@@qasimraza3377 yeah I have it
19:31 "who knows what that is" LOLOLOL
i wish this dude was my teacher lmao
I died at that part too haha xD
I hang on your every word... I have never listened to another human being so intently...
😂😂😂
i love your posts Mr. Thorsby. they are more clearer and understandable and i need help with Axioms, Paradoxes and Problem Solving
Changing the bank argument to a valid one. "All banks are financial institutions. Wells Fargo is a bank. Therefore, Wells Fargo is a financial institution." Changing the terms around forms it into a sound argument. Thank you for these videos. I wish my instructor had the option to use this book. It seems to better explain what I've been struggling with for a few weeks now.
Hello how is life right now?
Thank you so much for these videos. I am finding them very helpful.
This was so helpful, thank you so much for your help.
This is good stuff. I’m gonna get the Hurly book and do an on-line course with Professor Thorsly.
Thanks for putting this up Introduction to logic 13th edition by copi/cophen wasn't explaining this part very well.
thank you so much for your help
THANK YOU!!!!!!! for this post!
You teach so good ❤️
thank you dr.mark!
Thank you so much ....!!!
What criteria, indices, or factors bear on likelihood of desired outcome in inductive reasoning? Who determines them and how?
Great video thanks homie
We may call the first inductive argument example strong and cogent also for the fact that the younger dinasaur bones are likely to be found in the upper stages of the soil rather than deeper as they die after the older dinasaurs and covered with land later on.
Sorry about my English if my sentence wasn't understandable.
You Are Awesome.
I just did subcribe to your channel so I can keep visiting it and learn more philosophy and Logic.
Professor Thorsby, I'm having trouble figuring out whether the following argument is valid or not:
"Since the Department of Defense Building in Washington, D.C. has the shape of a hexagon, it follows that it has seven sides".
Although both the premise and conclusion are false, the premise appears to support the conclusion. That's why I'd think that the argument is valid. It would be clearly valid if the conclusion stated that the building had six sides rather than seven.
amazing man, thanks.
thanks thanks thanks!
So validity of an argument is its form in which it express itself while soundness shows if the argument is true or false? Am I right?
How the heck is it possible? a university instructor tries to explain same content for 5 classes and I still dont understand. But I understand this 30minute video! University system is collapsing....
12:04 A nugget worth holding on to! P.S....I didnt know Edward Snowden taught Logic!
How does one verify an inductive argument for cogency?
Professor can you please fix your picture , so i can see what you're writing? Thank You.
Prof Thornsby,
Which program are you using to record, illustrate, and type in this series?
Plz can anyone explain the difference between an inductive argument and an invalid deductive argument ?
how exactly is a weak inductive argument uncogent by necessity? If cogent just means that the argument's conclusion is true and uncogent is that it is false, can't we have a weak inductive argument that has a true conclusion? not sure how a weak inductive argument cant be cogent.
It's unfortunate that mathematics and logic use "induction" in different way. Contradictory even, as mathematical induction is actually a deductive process. Things like that bother me.
Do you have something on how to find the gap in the argument or the assumption in the argument
who knows what that is, i certainly dont
tanx
uhh sir, it's "Barack" not "Barak" I believe this makes your argument invalid by minor spelling mistake
👍
"Barak"
"Liklihood"
17:00
You like Rob Schneider
Rob Schneider is in all of Adam Sandler's movies.
Thus you must actually like Adam Sandler movies.
barack*
Like
An example of a valid argument against gay married would be:
All homosexual invidious who are married are unhappy.
Pedro is a homosexual married person.
Therefore, Pedro in unhappy.
This is a unsound valid deductive argument
Obs: I'm totally in favour of love no matter the gender! :)
your face keeps getting in the way of your writing when you are giving examples.
An "invalid deductive argument..."
Say whaaaaat? lol
Some editing will help. Your face is covering up important information.
to be president you have to be 35
Nope to be a president you have to be a hypocrite
33:53 that moment when getting UA-cam money is more important than your offspring.
He's a professor so he makes this for his classes lol I'm taking his online class and he's great! He did cut the video shortly after so I'm sure he took care of his kid.
run through is good but flawed, book is beter
You should make ur videos shorter