Informal Logic, Part 3 – A View from the Right

“Without good support, not only is it a ‘bad argument’, it’s merely opinion.”  — me

Welcome back! (Or, just “Welcome!”, if this is the first part you read in this series.)

So far, we’ve been learning some fundamental ideas in what is known as “informal logic”. We looked at the three foundational laws and four logical relationships, as determined by four categorical propositions. They sound boring and maybe a little scary at first. But, they weren’t that bad, right? (Quiet in the peanut gallery!) Taking my cue from Kenneth Samples (whose book inspired this series), I decided to sidetrack just briefly, before getting into argumentation proper — or, proper argumentation.

rope noose on black backgroundAs seen in the subtitle to this post, the first matter I’d like to address is “logical suicide”. It involves the making of self-refuting, or “self-referentially absurd”, statements. It’s not that these statements are made often, but they are so ridiculous — careless, really — that it is a wonder they are made as often as they are. In essence, a self-refuting statement is one which makes a claim — philosophical or otherwise — which, when applied to the statement itself, makes it a contradiction. That is, the claim contradicts itself. Thus, it commits logical suicide.

A few simple examples:….

Read the rest: A View from the Right — commentary on Science, Politics, & Religion.

Informal Logic 101: How to Think and Argue Better, Part 2 | A View from the Right

“Having, then, once introduced an element of inconsistency into his system, he was far too consistent not to be inconsistent consistently, and he lapsed ere long into an amiable indifferentism which to outward appearance differed but little from the indifferentism….”  — Samuel Butler, iconoclastic Victorian author

balding guy scratching head in confusionDespite what you might think from the heading, this post has nothing to do with friends, dating, or marriage. Besides, we all know that logic goes out the door when it comes to that stuff…. 😉

In my initial post for this series, we examined the three founding principles of logic: the Law of Noncontradiction, the Law of Excluded Middle, and the Law of Identity. Now, we will look at the next level of basic principles necessary to get a handle on critical thinking — namely, the four types of logical relationships:

1) Contradictory
2) Contrary
3) Subcontrary
4) Subalternation

Read the rest: Informal Logic 101: How to Think and Argue Better, Part 2 | A View from the Right.

The life of discipleship in Ephesians 4
And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.