Logical reasoning

Aristotle gave concept of deductive reasoning

It supports conclusion with certains

Example

P1:all men are mortal

P2: I am a man

conclusion’: so I am mortal

THOC ---theory ,hypothesis,observation,conformation

General to specific

Top down approach

Syllogism is a form of deductive reasoning

Formal

Validity

A statement assumed to be true when it agrees with reality

Ie…all men are humans

INDIAN LOGIC

Indian logic [means of logic]

Two categories

 1]----Orthodox—astik
 Nyaya
 Vaisheshika
 Mimamsa/puv minmansha
  Samkhya
 Yoga
 Uttar minmasa[Vedanta]

Unorthodox [naastik ]--- non vedas—jainsm,buddhism,crakak,ajivika

 NAYAYA

 Given by -----GOTAMA
 This school also known as tarksastra school—sci of logic
 It is associated with ‘ atomic pluralism ‘ and logical resoninng means liberation of the
‘indivisual self ‘

 Vaiseshika

 Developed metaphysics and ontogy

 They are oldest
 Rishi Kannada
 Reality is a atom or derived from atom

 Sankya school
 Kapil muni
 Purush and prakrati or consciousness and matter

 Mimamsa
 Purv mimansha—rishi jaimana—interpretation
 Uttar minsaha—means –vedant--bhadrayana
MEANS OF KNOWLEDGE/TRE KNOWLEDGE—CALLED PRAMAN

6 TYPES---TRICK OF 6--PAUSAA

PERCEPTION---PRATAX KNOWELEDGE

 MOST IIMEDIATE AND FUNDAMENTAL SOURCEOF KNOWLEDGEIT IS ABOUT AWARENESS

ABOUT OF OBJECT THROUGH 5 SENSES

EX—IF YOU SEE A RED APPLEON A TABLE AND PERCIVE ITS COLIR THROUGH YOUR SENSE OF
SIGHT,YOU ARE ACQURING KNOWLEDGE

ANUMAN OR INFERENCE---

IT REFERS TO LOGICAL INFERENCE OR REASONING ,IT INVOLVES DRAWING CONCLUSIONS BASED ON

OBSERVED FACTS OR PREMISES.

AGAR KAHI SE DHUMA UTT RAHA HAI TOH AAP KAH SAKTE HAI KI KAHI AAG LAGI HAI AS U SEE THIS
IT BEFORE

UPAMANA –COMARISION—

IT IS KNOWLEDGE OBTAIN THROUG COMPARISIONOR ANOLOGY .IT INVOLVES UNDERSTANDING

SOMETHING NEW BY COMPARISION IT TO SOMETHING FAMILIAR

IMAGE U HAVE NEVER SEEN PEACOCK BEFORE SOMEONE DESCRIBE YOU AS A BIRD WITH COLORFUL
FEATHERS THAT SPPREAD LIKE A FAN LIKE RAINBOW COOLOURS

SABDA-- VERBAL TESTOMANY

KNOWLEDGE THROUGH VERBAL TESTOMANY OR AUTHRORUTIVE TESTOMANY.

IT IS ACCQUIRED BY ACCEPTING THE STATEMENT OR TEACHIN OF REALLIBLE SOURCE SUCH AS

EXPERTS ,SCRIPTURES

ARTHIPATI—IMPLICATION

KNOWELEDGE BASED ON PRESUPTION OR POSTULATION. IT INVOLVES ACCEPTYIBG SOME THING

BASED ON ABSENCE OF A CONTRACTING [Link] IS USED WHEN OTHER MEANS OF KNOWELEDGE
FAIL TO EXPLAIN A PHENOMENA

Example---MOTA AADMI HAI

MORNING MEI KHAANA NI KHATTA

OK NIGHT MEI KHATA OGA YA BIMARI HOGI

OR

Uske mat may 98 mark sai hai jab Ke Din Mein Hameo Kabhi Bhi Math Padani Dikhta ishq Ka Yahu Aki
Varat Ko Pataar Pati Kai

ANULABDHI—IT IS ABOUT ABSENCE THE ABSENCE OF AN OBJECT .

ANUMANA[INFERENCE]
DRAWING CONCLUSION BASED ON OBSERVED FACTS OR PREMISES

IT CONSIST OF 5 COMPONENTS--PHUUN

PRATIJANS---THESIS—THE HILL HAS FIRE

HETU[REASON]—WHEREEVER THERE IS A SMOKE THERE IS A FIRE

UDAHARAN -EXAMPLE—THERE IS SMOKE COMING FROM HILL

UPANAYA(APPLICATION)—HILL HAS SMOKE WHERE THERE A SMOKE HERE IS A FIRE

NIGAMANA(CONCLUSION)—SO HENCE PROVE BY SEEING ALL THINGS

VYPATI (INVARIABLE RRELATION)—APRAVANTANYA

SAMBADH
VAHA DHUVA HAI TOH AAG LAGI HAI—YE CONCLUSION MERE ANDAR PEHALE SE VYAPTH THA—
MUJHE INN CHEJO KA RELATION GYAN THA

VPYPTI IS CONSIDERD AS THE LOGICAL GROUND OF INFERENCEWHICH IS ONE OF THE MEANS OF

KNOWELEDGE,NO CONCLUSION CAN BE DRAWN WITHOUT KNOWELEDGE OF VYAPTI

HENCE

NO CONCLUSION WITHOUT VAPTI

VYAPTI GURNTEES THE TRUTH OF CONCLUSION

RELATIONSHIP HETU (MIDDLE TERM ) AND SADHYA(MAJOR TERM)

WE FOUND MAJOR AND MINOR TERMS IN CONCLUSION

FALLACY
[Link]
SAVYABHICHARA OR FALLACY OF IRREGULAR MIDDLE

A MIIDLE TERM MAY BE IRREGULAR RELATED TO THE MAJOR TERM,WHEN THE MIDDE IS NOT
UNIFORMLY RELATED TO THE MIDDLE TERM.

ALL BIPEDS ARE RATIONAL----MIDDLE TERM IS BIPED

SWANS ARE BIPEDS

THEREFORE SWANS ARE RATIONAL

MIDDLE TERM IS BIPEDS BUT NOT UNIFORMLY RELATED TO THE MAJOR TERM [Link]
MIDDLE TERM HERE CAN BE RELATED TO BOTH RATIONAL OR IRRATIONSL

VIRRUDH OR CONTRARRY

SOUND IS ETERNAL BECAUSE IT IS PRODUCED—DONO BAATH VIRUH HAI EK DUSARE

SATPRATIPAKA OR THE INFERENTIALLY CONTRADACTED MIDDLE

BIG 2 SENTANCES

ASSIDHA

SKYROOT IS FRAGNANTED,BECAUSE IT HAS LOTUSNESS IN IT LIKE A NATURAL

BADHITA HETU OR NON INFERENTIALLY CONTRADACTED MIDDLE

HERE WE CAN SOLVE BY OY]UR COMMMON SENSE

FIRE IS COLD BECAUSE IT IS A SUSTANCE

EXTRA CONCEPTS
 EQUIVOCATION or ambigunity

THIS FALLOCY OCCURS WHEN ONE WORD OR PHRASE IS USED IN 2 DIFF WAYS IN AN ARGUMENT

EXERCISE IS GOOD FOR HEALTH

MARRRY JUST BROKE UP AND SHE HAS HER HERAT BROKEN

SO SEE NEED TO GET SOME EXRCISE

PHILOSPHERS SAYS THAT LIFE IS ULTIMATLY A MYSTORY

MY SISTER LOVES TO CURL UP WITH A GOOD MISTORY

SHE MUST TRULY ENJOY LIFE

 APPEAL TO MAJORITY

THIS FALLACY OCCURS WHEN SOMEONE ARGUES THAT A PROPOSITION MUST BE TRUE OR INVALID
BECAUSE A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE BELIEVE IT OR BECAUSE EVERYBODY IS SAYING SO

THE SLIPPERY SLOPE

IT OCCURS WHEN IT IS CLAIMED THAT A PARTICULAR EVENT WILL LEAD A CHAIN OF A REACTIONS OF
NEGATIVE EVENTS WITHOUT SUFFICENT EVIDENCE.

EX—STUDENT -USE SMARTOHONE—LEAD TO DECAREASE-ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE—THEN LEAD

TO LOWER ACADAMIC ISSUES LEAD TO COLLAPSE OF EDUCATION [Link] SLIPPERY AS IT
ASSUMES A DOMINO EFFECT WIHOUT PROVIDING EACH STEP IN CHAIN.

APPEAL TO EMOTIONS

ARGUMENTS ARE MADE TO INVOKE FEELINGS RATHER THSN PROVIDING LOGICAL REASONING.
EX—U SHOULD AGREE WITH THE POLICY BECAUSE IT WILL MAKE OUR COUNTRTY PRUD .

THE FALLACY OF DIVISION

THE FALLACY OF DIVISION IS A TYPE OF INFORMAL FALLACY IN WHICH ONE CAN ASSSUMES THAT
WHAT IS TRUE OF A WHOLE MUST ALSO BE TRUE OF ITS ALL PARTS

COMPANY OF SOFT DRINKS MAKING GOOD PROFIT SO COCOCOLS ALSO BUT IT MA BE WRONG

 Strawman fallacy

When someone is misrepresents their opponents arguments to make it easier to attack rather than
address the actual argument for example if a person a argues for strictly environmental regulation
person B might represent it by wanting no industry development at all

 Red hearing fallacy

Reading hearing policy is a fellcy that involves diverting attention away from the main issue by
introducing an unrelated or unrelevant topic example in a debate about school funding if one person
argues for encouraging resources to improve education quality the other person bring up unreleted
issues like personal habits of teachers

 Appeal to ignorance--- If we are unable to prove anything then we will consider true the
things which are in our front.. ex—no one has given any evidence that ex planet has no life
this means ex planet has life
 Appeal to inappropriate authority- or unqalified authority-- this fallacy occurs when an
argument relies on an authority that is not relevant or trustworthy in the given context

Sachin tendelukar—advice about hockey—is a faacy of aboe because he can give advice on cricket

Post hoc fallacy---after this ,therefore because of this—aisa krnne se aisa hua—strech legsand won
race

 Hasty generalization or black or white thinking----options ko restrict kar diya jjaye---

Ex—give me 1000 rupee or humari dosti tuti

Ad hoc---not a really fallacy—a new explination

 Argumentum ad hominem--- It is avoiding the genuine discussion of the topic at hand by

attacking the character’s motives or other attributes of the opponent or personal attack
 Appeal to force----using threat to do my work for accept our thingf
 Fallacy of accident—opp to hasty generalization
 Appeal to peaty----sympathic hoti hai----ye 10hrs padta hai please nta iska rf karwa
  Ad populum--- It involves concluding a proposition to be true because many or all people
believe it
 Ad verecundiam—fell see the use of authority in arguments or authoritative arguments

Ad ignoirantiam—It involves assuming a proposition to be true simple because it has not been
proved false or to be false simply because it has not been proved true