PHL 313Q

HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENTS

HOMEWORK #1: Propositional Logic

Due Sept. 14. Resubmit: Sept. 24.

A. Use Socrates to analyze the following arguments.
PP. 32-33: 2, 11, 17, 22, 23.
B. Translate the following into symbolic notation, using the scheme of abbreviation given.
PP. 44-45: A 1, 2, 4.
C. Use truth tables to demonstrate the following:
P. 45: B 116, C22, D30.

HOMEWORK #2: Argument Analysis

Due Sept. 21. Resubmit: Oct. 1.

PP. 58-59: A 2, 5; B 1, 8; C 5; D 1, 5.

HOMEWORK #3: Modal and Defeasible Logic

Due Oct. 15. Resubmit: Oct. 29. New dates

Pp. 87-88: A 5; B 2, 5, 18.
PP. 103-4: 1, 7, 8, 13.

HOMEWORK #4: Rebuttals in Defeasible Logic

Due Oct. 22. Resubmit: Nov, 5. New dates.

P. 118: A 3, 4, 9; B 3.

HOMEWORK #5: Defeasible Argument Analysis.

Due Oct. 22. Resubmit: Nov. 5.

PP. 118-123: C3; D 8, 11, 27.

HOMEWORK #6: Proofs in Propositional Logic

Due Nov. 9. Resubmit: Nov. 19.

PP. 190-191: 3, 4, 9, 12, 15.

HOMEWORK #7: Predicate Logic

Due Nov. 21. Resubmit: Dec. 7.

• PP. 156-159: A. 10, 11, 23, 27; B 6; C 10, 11.
• P. 168-170: A 1, 5.

HOMEWORK #8: Tables and Proofs in Predicate Logic

This assignment is now optional. I'm shifting the HW standards down: 7 = 100; 6 = 90; 5 = 80; 4 = 70; 3 = 60; etc.

Due Dec, 1, No re-submission.

P. 168-170: A 8; D 3; E 3.

PP. 201-2: 5, 11, 14, 29 [Bonus: 22].

TERM PROJECT

A rough draft of the project, including at least a set of tables and an outline of the essay, must be turned in by November 21. The final draft of the project is due Dec. 7.

Find an argumentative essay on any issue of interest to you. Try to locate the most powerfully reasoned essay on the issue you can. Focus your attention on a few paragraphs of this essay, trying to extract two connected arguments. Photocopy this part of the essay, highlighting the sentence from which you extract these arguments.

1. Translate these arguments into symbolic form. Provide the scheme of abbreviation. Eliminate all superfluous or extraneous statements, and add whatever unstated premises or conclusions needed to make the arguments logically correct.
2. Construct semantic tables, verifying that these arguments are deductively valid (or defeasibly correct).
3. Construct one effective counter-argument or rebuttal to each argument. [Your counter-argument should have as its conclusion either the negation of the conclusion of the original argument, or the negation of one of the premises of the original.] Use semantic tables to demonstrate that your counterargument is valid.
4. Write a 3-5 page essay (in ordinary, clear English prose) in which you present the reasoning extracted and developed in parts 1-3. You should summarize the arguments from your source, and spell out for your reader several objections (point 3 above). Don't refer to the semantic tables, or to any of the technical machinery of logic, in your essay. Write to an audience of intelligent readers who lack any specialized training in logic.

Phl 313Q Home Page | Philosophy Department | UT Austin Web Central | Prof. Koons