Deductive argument refers to a type of reasoning in which the conclusion necessarily follows from premises. If for example, the premises in deductive argument is true in the sense it strongly supports the conclusion, then it can be said the conclusion must necessarily be true. Deductive arguments have 3 parts which include; major premise, minor premise and a conclusion. Major premise is a deductive argument that has both major and middle terms. The middle term is found in the premises of the argument and not the conclusion. The major term is found in both major premise and the conclusion. It is very important to note major term forms predicate of the assumption. Minor premise follows major premise in deductive argument as the second premise. It has both minor and middle terms. Minor terms for the subject of inference.
Example of deductive argument
P1: All reptiles are coldblooded animals
P2: A snake is a reptile
C: Therefore a snake is a cold blooded animal
In the statement above, the major premise is that All reptiles are cold blooded animals. In the argument, the term Reptiles is the middle term while terms coldblooded animals form the major term. Therefore, the minor remise is a snake is a reptile. Within it, the minor term is snake. In the conclusion, a snake is a cold blooded animal; the term snake is subject term while a cold blooded animal is predicate term. The conclusion necessarily follows from premises.
Deductive argument qualifies as sound if the premises is true and the argument must be valid. An argument is valid if its supposition follows from the premise.
Pyhrronian Comprehensive Doctrine of Scepticism
The doctrine contents arguments in differing ways have basis on idea of dispute. This is due to the fact philosopher’s arguments revolve around what humans cannot and can know. The arguments never seem to come to an end because upon conclusion of one argument, another comes up and the debate goes on. With this in mind, phyrronism argues no claim can be made to any kind of knowledge since such claims can be overturned and no such thing like indefeasible knowledge exists (Sinnott-Armstrong 71). As such, there is completely nothing that humans can claim they have certainty over. Therefore, ordinary epistemology is useless and a waste of time. The only solution that exists to the problem according to pyhrrorism is to live free of examination of claims to knowledge. This kind of life entails accepting things as they seem and living.
According to pyhrronism, the main difficulty philosophers experience in the attempt at developing knowledge seems to arise from the fact knowledge is dependent on the technique whose intention is the justification of our beliefs. The circularity of the argument, for example, contends certain arguments presented arrive at conclusions by making the assumption the truth of that which they are set out to prove. For example, if the argument made by an individual supports A on basis of B, then it turns out so as to accept the truth B, the individual needs to accept the truth A, then such argument becomes circular and does not arrive to any concrete truth because of the claim that a given argument can be true if only it is supported by another truth which relies on the truth of another argument (Sinnott-Armstrong 73).
Descartes Dream Argument
Descartes, in the first meditation presents his dream argument where he claims when he sleeps, there are times when he thinks he is awake since he feels the presence of real things while in truth, he is asleep and dreaming. Further, Descartes contends in some instances, while in a dream, he sits by a fire in his room and he is able to feel the warmth generated by the fire. The truth is that he is asleep on his bed. According to Descartes, the feeling is synonymous to what he feels while he is awake. The fact he feels the fire does not provide basis of differentiating whether he is dreaming or awake.
His dreaming argument attempts to show one cannot trust their senses as they convey a feeling of fire while none exists. It is as well difficult to accept the fact the fire exists when he feel it while awake as one cannot be certain whether they are dreaming or awake.
Descartes Meditations aim at construction of a rigorous and systematic system of knowledge. This is through employment of scientific approach that enables him to construct a body of knowledge free of doubt. The argument of dreams helps discard all sense based and purported knowledge so as to reconstruct it upon a foundation that s more secure. To attain this new knowledge body, Descartes begins to assess all he knows to be true. He starts by doubting everything so as to clear the slate and develop indubitable and certain beliefs. When this is attained, he then constructs a strong foundation for edifice knowledge.
Descartes on God’s existence
Descartes makes the argument that God is a tremendous perfect being, he must exist because of being in perfection. According to Descartes, God is an all-powerful and independent being who is powerful and a perfect being that can be fathomed. He states since being contains more reality rather than nothingness, and goes is a perfect being, God must exist. According to Descartes, for God not to exist, he would not be a supreme perfect being.
Criterion is clearness and distinctness plays an important role in attachment to existence of God. According to Descartes, the knowledge of existence of God is not just present and available to the mind, but it is clear and sharply detached from other discernments, distinct. It is just that God can be perceived as the supreme perfect being that exists.
The Cartesian Circle refutes the argument made by Descartes regarding existence of God on the claims Descartes’ perspective is circular. This is due to the fact Descartes infers presence of God from distinct and clear insights that construe dependability of distinct and clear insights from existence of God (Rose 77). When Descartes makes the argument that one can be certain of God’s existence only when they perceive the notion in a distinct and clear manner, the argument has circular reasoning. This is especially true when both arguments are believed to be true. Appearance of circularity therefore arises from deficiency in precision of his statements rather than error of reasoning (Rose 80).
At Essays Experts, we offer the best academic research writing services that you can always rely on for fulfilling grades. By simply placing an order with us, you are guaranteed original and top notch academic papers for any assignment.
Rose, E., L. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. International Phenomenological
Society, Vol. 26, No.1, pp. 77- 80, 1965.
Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter. Pyrrhonian Skepticism. New York: Oxford University Press, pp.
71-73, 2004. Print