Logical argument in the context of "Philosophical aspects of the abortion debate"

Play Trivia Questions online!

or

Skip to study material about Logical argument in the context of "Philosophical aspects of the abortion debate"

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Logical argument

An argument is one or more premisessentences, statements, or propositions—directed towards arriving at a logical conclusion. The purpose of an argument is to give reasons for one's thinking and understanding via justification, explanation, or persuasion. As a series of logical steps, arguments are intended to determine or show the degree of truth or acceptability of a logical conclusion.

The process of crafting or delivering arguments, argumentation, can be studied from three main perspectives: through the logical, the dialectical and the rhetorical perspective.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<
In this Dossier

Logical argument in the context of Theorem

In mathematics and formal logic, a theorem is a statement that has been proven, or can be proven. The proof of a theorem is a logical argument that uses the inference rules of a deductive system to establish that the theorem is a logical consequence of the axioms and previously proved theorems.

In mainstream mathematics, the axioms and the inference rules are commonly left implicit, and, in this case, they are almost always those of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with the axiom of choice (ZFC), or of a less powerful theory, such as Peano arithmetic. Generally, an assertion that is explicitly called a theorem is a proved result that is not an immediate consequence of other known theorems. Moreover, many authors qualify as theorems only the most important results, and use the terms lemma, proposition and corollary for less important theorems.

↑ Return to Menu

Logical argument in the context of Analogy

Analogy is a comparison or correspondence between two things (or two groups of things) because of a third element that they are considered to share.

Logically, it is an inference or an argument from one particular to another particular, as opposed to deduction, induction, and abduction. It is also used where at least one of the premises, or the conclusion, is general rather than particular in nature. It has the general form A is to B as C is to D.

↑ Return to Menu

Logical argument in the context of Self-evidence

In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident proposition is a proposition that is known to be true by understanding its meaning without proof, and/or by ordinary human reason.

Some epistemologists deny that any proposition can be self-evident. For most others, one's belief that oneself is conscious and possesses free will are offered as examples of self-evidence. However, one's belief that someone else is conscious or has free will are not epistemically self-evident.

↑ Return to Menu

Logical argument in the context of Self-deception

Self-deception or self-delusion is a process of denying or rationalizing away the relevance, significance, or importance of opposing evidence and logical argument. Self-deception involves convincing oneself of a truth (or lack of truth) so that one does not reveal any self-knowledge of the deception.

↑ Return to Menu

Logical argument in the context of Five Ways (Aquinas)

The Quinque viæ (Latin for "Five Ways") (sometimes called the "five proofs") are five logical arguments for the existence of God summarized by the 13th-century Catholic philosopher and theologian Thomas Aquinas in his book Summa Theologica. They are:

  1. the argument from "first mover";
  2. the argument from universal causation;
  3. the argument from contingency;
  4. the argument from degree;
  5. the argument from final cause or ends ("teleological argument").

Aquinas expands the first of these – God as the "unmoved mover" – in his Summa Contra Gentiles.

↑ Return to Menu