1
00:00:00,070 --> 00:00:07,440
[Music]

2
00:00:03,999 --> 00:00:07,440


3
00:00:04,009 --> 00:00:11,010
Scientists often gather data through

4
00:00:07,430 --> 00:00:11,010


5
00:00:07,440 --> 00:00:14,340
observation experiments, archival studies

6
00:00:11,000 --> 00:00:14,340


7
00:00:11,010 --> 00:00:17,520
and so on. But they are rarely satisfied

8
00:00:14,330 --> 00:00:17,520


9
00:00:14,340 --> 00:00:20,070
with data alone. Scientists want to draw

10
00:00:17,510 --> 00:00:20,070


11
00:00:17,520 --> 00:00:21,960
conclusions from those data. They want to

12
00:00:20,060 --> 00:00:21,960


13
00:00:20,070 --> 00:00:24,590
use the data to show that certain

14
00:00:21,950 --> 00:00:24,590


15
00:00:21,960 --> 00:00:27,869
theories are right and others are wrong.

16
00:00:24,580 --> 00:00:27,869


17
00:00:24,590 --> 00:00:29,699
To understand science, then, it will be

18
00:00:27,859 --> 00:00:29,699


19
00:00:27,869 --> 00:00:31,830
important to understand when it is

20
00:00:29,689 --> 00:00:31,830


21
00:00:29,699 --> 00:00:35,340
legitimate and when it is illegitimate.

22
00:00:31,820 --> 00:00:35,340


23
00:00:31,830 --> 00:00:38,070
To draw a specific conclusion from what

24
00:00:35,330 --> 00:00:38,070


25
00:00:35,340 --> 00:00:40,040
we already know we need to understand

26
00:00:38,060 --> 00:00:40,040


27
00:00:38,070 --> 00:00:42,570
the difference between good and bad

28
00:00:40,030 --> 00:00:42,570


29
00:00:40,040 --> 00:00:45,210
arguments; and that is why, in this

30
00:00:42,560 --> 00:00:45,210


31
00:00:42,570 --> 00:00:49,469
lecture, we will take a look at logic--the

32
00:00:45,200 --> 00:00:49,469


33
00:00:45,210 --> 00:00:53,340
study of argumentation. Let us first

34
00:00:49,459 --> 00:00:53,340


35
00:00:49,469 --> 00:00:56,160
introduce some terminology. An argument

36
00:00:53,330 --> 00:00:56,160


37
00:00:53,340 --> 00:00:59,399
consists of two parts: the premises and

38
00:00:56,150 --> 00:00:59,399


39
00:00:56,160 --> 00:01:02,219
the conclusion. The premises are the

40
00:00:59,389 --> 00:01:02,219


41
00:00:59,399 --> 00:01:06,290
things we presuppose and the conclusion

42
00:01:02,209 --> 00:01:06,290


43
00:01:02,219 --> 00:01:08,479
is what we conclude from those premises.

44
00:01:06,280 --> 00:01:08,479


45
00:01:06,290 --> 00:01:12,240
So let's look at an example:

46
00:01:08,469 --> 00:01:12,240


47
00:01:08,479 --> 00:01:15,990
No medieval King had absolute power over

48
00:01:12,230 --> 00:01:15,990


49
00:01:12,240 --> 00:01:20,670
his subjects. Louis 7 of France was a

50
00:01:15,980 --> 00:01:20,670


51
00:01:15,990 --> 00:01:23,070
medieval King. So Louis 7 of France did

52
00:01:20,660 --> 00:01:23,070


53
00:01:20,670 --> 00:01:26,549
not have absolute power over his

54
00:01:23,060 --> 00:01:26,549


55
00:01:23,070 --> 00:01:29,579
subjects. Here the first two lines are

56
00:01:26,539 --> 00:01:29,579


57
00:01:26,549 --> 00:01:33,360
the premises and a final line introduced

58
00:01:29,569 --> 00:01:33,360


59
00:01:29,579 --> 00:01:35,670
by the word "so" is the conclusion. In this

60
00:01:33,350 --> 00:01:35,670


61
00:01:33,360 --> 00:01:38,159
argument we assume that medieval kings

62
00:01:35,660 --> 00:01:38,159


63
00:01:35,670 --> 00:01:40,740
did not have absolute power and that

64
00:01:38,149 --> 00:01:40,740


65
00:01:38,159 --> 00:01:43,200
Louis 7 was a medieval King. And we

66
00:01:40,730 --> 00:01:43,200


67
00:01:40,740 --> 00:01:47,329
conclude that he did not have absolute

68
00:01:43,190 --> 00:01:47,329


69
00:01:43,200 --> 00:01:50,070
power. As a second piece of terminology

70
00:01:47,319 --> 00:01:50,070


71
00:01:47,329 --> 00:01:53,549
we will make a distinction between valid

72
00:01:50,060 --> 00:01:53,549


73
00:01:50,070 --> 00:01:55,610
and invalid arguments. A valid argument

74
00:01:53,539 --> 00:01:55,610


75
00:01:53,549 --> 00:01:58,469
is an argument in which the conclusion

76
00:01:55,600 --> 00:01:58,469


77
00:01:55,610 --> 00:02:01,680
really follows from the premises.

78
00:01:58,459 --> 00:02:01,680


79
00:01:58,469 --> 00:02:04,320
Our example about Louis 7 is an example

80
00:02:01,670 --> 00:02:04,320


81
00:02:01,680 --> 00:02:07,380
of a valid argument. The conclusion

82
00:02:04,310 --> 00:02:07,380


83
00:02:04,320 --> 00:02:10,410
really follows from the premises. It

84
00:02:07,370 --> 00:02:10,410


85
00:02:07,380 --> 00:02:12,780
makes sense to draw this conclusion from

86
00:02:10,400 --> 00:02:12,780


87
00:02:10,410 --> 00:02:15,930
these premises.

88
00:02:12,770 --> 00:02:15,930


89
00:02:12,780 --> 00:02:19,020
As an example of an invalid argument we

90
00:02:15,920 --> 00:02:19,020


91
00:02:15,930 --> 00:02:22,140
can take this: No medieval King had

92
00:02:19,010 --> 00:02:22,140


93
00:02:19,020 --> 00:02:25,080
absolute power over his subjects. Louis

94
00:02:22,130 --> 00:02:25,080


95
00:02:22,140 --> 00:02:27,630
seven of France was a great horseman. So

96
00:02:25,070 --> 00:02:27,630


97
00:02:25,080 --> 00:02:31,950
Louis seven of France did not have

98
00:02:27,620 --> 00:02:31,950


99
00:02:27,630 --> 00:02:34,530
absolute power over his subjects. We just

100
00:02:31,940 --> 00:02:34,530


101
00:02:31,950 --> 00:02:37,550
can't draw that conclusion from those

102
00:02:34,520 --> 00:02:37,550


103
00:02:34,530 --> 00:02:41,220
premises. So this argument is not valid.

104
00:02:37,540 --> 00:02:41,220


105
00:02:37,550 --> 00:02:42,480
It's invalid. Note that whether an

106
00:02:41,210 --> 00:02:42,480


107
00:02:41,220 --> 00:02:44,100
argument is valid or not

108
00:02:42,470 --> 00:02:44,100


109
00:02:42,480 --> 00:02:46,700
has nothing to do with whether the

110
00:02:44,090 --> 00:02:46,700


111
00:02:44,100 --> 00:02:49,709
premises or the conclusions are true.

112
00:02:46,690 --> 00:02:49,709


113
00:02:46,700 --> 00:02:52,200
Perhaps Louis 7 really was a great

114
00:02:49,699 --> 00:02:52,200


115
00:02:49,709 --> 00:02:54,420
horseman. Then all the premises and the

116
00:02:52,190 --> 00:02:54,420


117
00:02:52,200 --> 00:02:58,019
conclusion of that argument are true and

118
00:02:54,410 --> 00:02:58,019


119
00:02:54,420 --> 00:03:01,170
yet the argument is invalid because the

120
00:02:58,009 --> 00:03:01,170


121
00:02:58,019 --> 00:03:04,350
conclusion just doesn't follow from the

122
00:03:01,160 --> 00:03:04,350


123
00:03:01,170 --> 00:03:06,840
premises. On the other hand it's also

124
00:03:04,340 --> 00:03:06,840


125
00:03:04,350 --> 00:03:10,620
possible to have false premises and a

126
00:03:06,830 --> 00:03:10,620


127
00:03:06,840 --> 00:03:12,180
valid argument. For instance: No medieval

128
00:03:10,610 --> 00:03:12,180


129
00:03:10,620 --> 00:03:14,760
King had absolute power over his

130
00:03:12,170 --> 00:03:14,760


131
00:03:12,180 --> 00:03:17,850
subjects. Victor Gijsbers was a

132
00:03:14,750 --> 00:03:17,850


133
00:03:14,760 --> 00:03:20,360
medieval king. So Victor Gijsbers did not

134
00:03:17,840 --> 00:03:20,360


135
00:03:17,850 --> 00:03:24,180
have absolute power over his subjects.

136
00:03:20,350 --> 00:03:24,180


137
00:03:20,360 --> 00:03:25,590
This argument is perfectly valid even

138
00:03:24,170 --> 00:03:25,590


139
00:03:24,180 --> 00:03:30,140
though the assumption that I am a

140
00:03:25,580 --> 00:03:30,140


141
00:03:25,590 --> 00:03:33,000
medieval King is, as far as I know, false.

142
00:03:30,130 --> 00:03:33,000


143
00:03:30,140 --> 00:03:35,610
We can now introduce our final piece of

144
00:03:32,990 --> 00:03:35,610


145
00:03:33,000 --> 00:03:38,820
terminology: The distinction between two

146
00:03:35,600 --> 00:03:38,820


147
00:03:35,610 --> 00:03:42,269
kinds of arguments. Deductive arguments

148
00:03:38,810 --> 00:03:42,269


149
00:03:38,820 --> 00:03:44,340
and inductive arguments. A deductive

150
00:03:42,259 --> 00:03:44,340


151
00:03:42,269 --> 00:03:46,310
argument is an argument in which the

152
00:03:44,330 --> 00:03:46,310


153
00:03:44,340 --> 00:03:49,350
truth of the premises

154
00:03:46,300 --> 00:03:49,350


155
00:03:46,310 --> 00:03:52,500
absolutely guarantee the truth of the

156
00:03:49,340 --> 00:03:52,500


157
00:03:49,350 --> 00:03:54,480
conclusion. It's just not possible for

158
00:03:52,490 --> 00:03:54,480


159
00:03:52,500 --> 00:03:56,870
the premises to be true and the

160
00:03:54,470 --> 00:03:56,870


161
00:03:54,480 --> 00:03:59,430
conclusion to be false.

162
00:03:56,860 --> 00:03:59,430


163
00:03:56,870 --> 00:04:01,799
Teturning to our original example, we can

164
00:03:59,420 --> 00:04:01,799


165
00:03:59,430 --> 00:04:03,150
see that this is a deductive argument. It

166
00:04:01,789 --> 00:04:03,150


167
00:04:01,799 --> 00:04:04,950
is true

168
00:04:03,140 --> 00:04:04,950


169
00:04:03,150 --> 00:04:07,530
the medieval Kings did not have absolute

170
00:04:04,940 --> 00:04:07,530


171
00:04:04,950 --> 00:04:10,620
power; and if it is true that Louis 7 was

172
00:04:07,520 --> 00:04:10,620


173
00:04:07,530 --> 00:04:13,200
a medieval King, then it must be true

174
00:04:10,610 --> 00:04:13,200


175
00:04:10,620 --> 00:04:15,600
that he did not have absolute power.

176
00:04:13,190 --> 00:04:15,600


177
00:04:13,200 --> 00:04:18,030
Or, in other words, if he did have

178
00:04:15,590 --> 00:04:18,030


179
00:04:15,600 --> 00:04:22,680
absolute power then one of those two

180
00:04:18,020 --> 00:04:22,680


181
00:04:18,030 --> 00:04:24,510
premises must be wrong. I'll come to the

182
00:04:22,670 --> 00:04:24,510


183
00:04:22,680 --> 00:04:27,090
definition of inductive arguments in a

184
00:04:24,500 --> 00:04:27,090


185
00:04:24,510 --> 00:04:28,980
moment, but first I want to point out two

186
00:04:27,080 --> 00:04:28,980


187
00:04:27,090 --> 00:04:33,120
interesting features of deductive

188
00:04:28,970 --> 00:04:33,120


189
00:04:28,980 --> 00:04:36,479
arguments: First if you use deductive

190
00:04:33,110 --> 00:04:36,479


191
00:04:33,120 --> 00:04:40,080
arguments you can't make any new

192
00:04:36,469 --> 00:04:40,080


193
00:04:36,479 --> 00:04:42,240
mistakes. The only way for the conclusion

194
00:04:40,070 --> 00:04:42,240


195
00:04:40,080 --> 00:04:45,780
of a deductive argument to be false is

196
00:04:42,230 --> 00:04:45,780


197
00:04:42,240 --> 00:04:47,970
if one of your assumptions is false, so

198
00:04:45,770 --> 00:04:47,970


199
00:04:45,780 --> 00:04:50,310
if you already believe something false

200
00:04:47,960 --> 00:04:50,310


201
00:04:47,970 --> 00:04:52,940
then your conclusion may end up being

202
00:04:50,300 --> 00:04:52,940


203
00:04:50,310 --> 00:04:56,610
false. But if your assumptions are true

204
00:04:52,930 --> 00:04:56,610


205
00:04:52,940 --> 00:04:57,570
your conclusions are guaranteed to be

206
00:04:56,600 --> 00:04:57,570


207
00:04:56,610 --> 00:05:00,930
true as well.

208
00:04:57,560 --> 00:05:00,930


209
00:04:57,570 --> 00:05:03,570
So deductive arguments never introduce

210
00:05:00,920 --> 00:05:03,570


211
00:05:00,930 --> 00:05:06,060
falsehoods if they weren't already there.

212
00:05:03,560 --> 00:05:06,060


213
00:05:03,570 --> 00:05:08,250
And that makes them very strong and good

214
00:05:06,050 --> 00:05:08,250


215
00:05:06,060 --> 00:05:13,320
arguments to use, because they're not

216
00:05:08,240 --> 00:05:13,320


217
00:05:08,250 --> 00:05:16,130
very risky. Second logicians found out

218
00:05:13,310 --> 00:05:16,130


219
00:05:13,320 --> 00:05:18,180
already more than 2,000 years ago--and

220
00:05:16,120 --> 00:05:18,180


221
00:05:16,130 --> 00:05:20,880
Aristotle played an important role here--

222
00:05:18,170 --> 00:05:20,880


223
00:05:18,180 --> 00:05:23,820
that whether a deductive argument is

224
00:05:20,870 --> 00:05:23,820


225
00:05:20,880 --> 00:05:26,130
valid or not can be determined just by

226
00:05:23,810 --> 00:05:26,130


227
00:05:23,820 --> 00:05:29,460
looking at the form of the argument and

228
00:05:26,120 --> 00:05:29,460


229
00:05:26,130 --> 00:05:32,610
ignoring its content. Even if you know

230
00:05:29,450 --> 00:05:32,610


231
00:05:29,460 --> 00:05:35,430
nothing about medieval kings and Louis 7

232
00:05:32,600 --> 00:05:35,430


233
00:05:32,610 --> 00:05:39,389
you can still see that our example

234
00:05:35,420 --> 00:05:39,389


235
00:05:35,430 --> 00:05:44,550
argument is valid. How? Because there's

236
00:05:39,379 --> 00:05:44,550


237
00:05:39,389 --> 00:05:47,940
this form: No A is B. C is A. So C is not B.

238
00:05:44,540 --> 00:05:47,940


239
00:05:44,550 --> 00:05:51,599
Where A is "medieval King," B is "someone

240
00:05:47,930 --> 00:05:51,599


241
00:05:47,940 --> 00:05:53,669
with absolute power," and C is "Louis 7" But

242
00:05:51,589 --> 00:05:53,669


243
00:05:51,599 --> 00:05:55,470
we can put anything we like in the place

244
00:05:53,659 --> 00:05:55,470


245
00:05:53,669 --> 00:05:58,500
of those letters and the argument will

246
00:05:55,460 --> 00:05:58,500


247
00:05:55,470 --> 00:06:02,070
remain valid. For instance, let's choose A

248
00:05:58,490 --> 00:06:02,070


249
00:05:58,500 --> 00:06:05,190
"Is a Dutchman" B "is humble" and C "is Victor

250
00:06:02,060 --> 00:06:05,190


251
00:06:02,070 --> 00:06:07,260
or Gijsbers" Then we have: No Dutchman

252
00:06:05,180 --> 00:06:07,260


253
00:06:05,190 --> 00:06:10,050
is humble. Victor Gijsbers is a

254
00:06:07,250 --> 00:06:10,050


255
00:06:07,260 --> 00:06:12,840
Dutchman. So Victor Gijsbers is not

256
00:06:10,040 --> 00:06:12,840


257
00:06:10,050 --> 00:06:15,270
humble. Which is another valid argument.

258
00:06:12,830 --> 00:06:15,270


259
00:06:12,840 --> 00:06:18,720
Although of course the first premise is

260
00:06:15,260 --> 00:06:18,720


261
00:06:15,270 --> 00:06:20,610
false and so is the conclusion. So we can

262
00:06:18,710 --> 00:06:20,610


263
00:06:18,720 --> 00:06:22,800
see whether a deductive argument is

264
00:06:20,600 --> 00:06:22,800


265
00:06:20,610 --> 00:06:24,840
valid simply by looking at its form

266
00:06:22,790 --> 00:06:24,840


267
00:06:22,800 --> 00:06:27,810
without knowing anything about its

268
00:06:24,830 --> 00:06:27,810


269
00:06:24,840 --> 00:06:30,000
content. And that is really important

270
00:06:27,800 --> 00:06:30,000


271
00:06:27,810 --> 00:06:31,910
because that means that we can see

272
00:06:29,990 --> 00:06:31,910


273
00:06:30,000 --> 00:06:35,370
whether something is a good argument

274
00:06:31,900 --> 00:06:35,370


275
00:06:31,910 --> 00:06:38,150
without making any prior theoretical

276
00:06:35,360 --> 00:06:38,150


277
00:06:35,370 --> 00:06:40,860
assumptions about the content matter. If

278
00:06:38,140 --> 00:06:40,860


279
00:06:38,150 --> 00:06:42,870
we believe that scientists first

280
00:06:40,850 --> 00:06:42,870


281
00:06:40,860 --> 00:06:44,520
collect data and then come to a

282
00:06:42,860 --> 00:06:44,520


283
00:06:42,870 --> 00:06:47,310
conclusion about which theories are

284
00:06:44,510 --> 00:06:47,310


285
00:06:44,520 --> 00:06:50,610
right and wrong, this is exactly what we

286
00:06:47,300 --> 00:06:50,610


287
00:06:47,310 --> 00:06:53,340
would expect. We only need the data and

288
00:06:50,600 --> 00:06:53,340


289
00:06:50,610 --> 00:06:56,189
some valid arguments which can be shown

290
00:06:53,330 --> 00:06:56,189


291
00:06:53,340 --> 00:06:58,770
to be valid independent of any theories

292
00:06:56,179 --> 00:06:58,770


293
00:06:56,189 --> 00:07:02,610
or ideas, and then we draw our

294
00:06:58,760 --> 00:07:02,610


295
00:06:58,770 --> 00:07:08,069
conclusions. It would be great if science

296
00:07:02,600 --> 00:07:08,069


297
00:07:02,610 --> 00:07:09,560
worked like that. Unfortunately, and I bet

298
00:07:08,059 --> 00:07:09,560


299
00:07:08,069 --> 00:07:13,199
you saw that coming,

300
00:07:09,550 --> 00:07:13,199


301
00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:14,759
science doesn't work like that. And it

302
00:07:13,189 --> 00:07:14,759


303
00:07:13,199 --> 00:07:17,340
doesn't work like that because the most

304
00:07:14,749 --> 00:07:17,340


305
00:07:14,759 --> 00:07:21,960
important arguments in science are not

306
00:07:17,330 --> 00:07:21,960


307
00:07:17,340 --> 00:07:23,909
deductive. They are inductive. Remember

308
00:07:21,950 --> 00:07:23,909


309
00:07:21,960 --> 00:07:26,389
that a deductive argument is an argument

310
00:07:23,899 --> 00:07:26,389


311
00:07:23,909 --> 00:07:29,099
such that the truth of the premises

312
00:07:26,379 --> 00:07:29,099


313
00:07:26,389 --> 00:07:33,150
absolutely guarantees the truth of the

314
00:07:29,089 --> 00:07:33,150


315
00:07:29,099 --> 00:07:34,590
conclusion. An inductive argument is an

316
00:07:33,140 --> 00:07:34,590


317
00:07:33,150 --> 00:07:36,659
argument where the truth of the premises

318
00:07:34,580 --> 00:07:36,659


319
00:07:34,590 --> 00:07:39,719
gives good reason to believe the

320
00:07:36,649 --> 00:07:39,719


321
00:07:36,659 --> 00:07:43,560
conclusion but does not absolutely

322
00:07:39,709 --> 00:07:43,560


323
00:07:39,719 --> 00:07:44,300
guarantee its truth. Again let's look at

324
00:07:43,550 --> 00:07:44,300


325
00:07:43,560 --> 00:07:46,830
an example:

326
00:07:44,290 --> 00:07:46,830


327
00:07:44,300 --> 00:07:49,139
None of the medieval texts we have

328
00:07:46,820 --> 00:07:49,139


329
00:07:46,830 --> 00:07:52,770
studied argues against the existence of

330
00:07:49,129 --> 00:07:52,770


331
00:07:49,139 --> 00:07:55,610
God, so no scholar in the Middle Ages

332
00:07:52,760 --> 00:07:55,610


333
00:07:52,770 --> 00:07:58,770
argued against the existence of God.

334
00:07:55,600 --> 00:07:58,770


335
00:07:55,610 --> 00:08:00,629
That's a valid argument if it's true

336
00:07:58,760 --> 00:08:00,629


337
00:07:58,770 --> 00:08:03,120
that none of the texts we have makes

338
00:08:00,619 --> 00:08:03,120


339
00:08:00,629 --> 00:08:05,879
this argument, and we have a lot of texts,

340
00:08:03,110 --> 00:08:05,879


341
00:08:03,120 --> 00:08:08,210
and it's quite plausible that nobody in

342
00:08:05,869 --> 00:08:08,210


343
00:08:05,879 --> 00:08:12,389
that time actually made this argument.

344
00:08:08,200 --> 00:08:12,389


345
00:08:08,210 --> 00:08:14,580
But it's indeed only plausible. It could

346
00:08:12,379 --> 00:08:14,580


347
00:08:12,389 --> 00:08:18,449
be that the argument was made but

348
00:08:14,570 --> 00:08:18,449


349
00:08:14,580 --> 00:08:20,969
somehow it wasn't transmitted to us. So

350
00:08:18,439 --> 00:08:20,969


351
00:08:18,449 --> 00:08:23,089
in an inductive argument. The truth of

352
00:08:20,959 --> 00:08:23,089


353
00:08:20,969 --> 00:08:26,580
the premises makes the conclusion likely,

354
00:08:23,079 --> 00:08:26,580


355
00:08:23,089 --> 00:08:29,219
but it doesn't guarantee it. And that's

356
00:08:26,570 --> 00:08:29,219


357
00:08:26,580 --> 00:08:31,560
generally the case in science. We have

358
00:08:29,209 --> 00:08:31,560


359
00:08:29,219 --> 00:08:34,140
some limited data. We want to draw a

360
00:08:31,550 --> 00:08:34,140


361
00:08:31,560 --> 00:08:36,570
general conclusion from those, and our

362
00:08:34,130 --> 00:08:36,570


363
00:08:34,140 --> 00:08:39,419
data makes the conclusion likely but

364
00:08:36,560 --> 00:08:39,419


365
00:08:36,570 --> 00:08:41,789
they don't make it certain. So, in science,

366
00:08:39,409 --> 00:08:41,789


367
00:08:39,419 --> 00:08:44,760
we are continually making inductive

368
00:08:41,779 --> 00:08:44,760


369
00:08:41,789 --> 00:08:48,240
arguments. And, as we will see in the next

370
00:08:44,750 --> 00:08:48,240


371
00:08:44,760 --> 00:08:52,459
lecture, induction is a lot more

372
00:08:48,230 --> 00:08:52,459


373
00:08:48,240 --> 00:08:52,459
problematic than deduction.