I will talk about Deductive validity and patterns of argument, proved beyond
reasonable doubt, Shown to be more likely than not on the balance of evidence
and lastly summarizing the presentation in a few sentences.
Firstly, I will talk about some patterns or structures of argument that will be deductively
valid whatever its subject matter.
There are three cases in particular.
Case I
If A then B and if B then C and if C then D, so if A then D
If the consumption of petrol by cars across the world is not significantly reduced soon,
exhaust emissions will continue to damage the ozone layer. If this happens the
incidence of skin cancer will increase considerably and if this happens deaths from skin
cancer will increase, so if worldwide petrol consumption is not reduced skin cancer
deaths will increase.
This type of structure forms a chain of conditional sentences. It’s a series of connected
premises. where the First thing is connected to a second, and the second to a third, so
the first is ultimately also connected to the third.
This was the example from our book. Now I am gonna give you my personal example.
But no matter what, I again eat chatpate and the cycle repeats.
Case II
Now the second case is
Basically, the argument states that, given a first thing, a second thing is true. It then
AFFIRMS that the first thing is true. So, the second thing must also be true. If A then B
and A is true, so B must be true,
Eg - “If you have a driver’s license, then you must have taken the driver’s test.
You do have a driver’s license. So, you must have taken the driver’s test.
Let’s take example of Shiraf’s dog Nemo again,
If Nemo wags his tails, then he is happy.
