Edit essay and add 3 more pages

Introduction

This class helped me to solve out and answer the very many questions in human’s mind or activities that most people accept responsibility by trying to figure out on their own, the kind of environment that they reside in and how they interact with one another. Studying philosophy helps people to understand how things work, consider them in order and reason about the obvious situations in life, the ones, which make sense, and the hardest things that linger in the human mind. There are different fields of studying philosophy; there is the field of ethics and reliability, scientific technology, religion or human spirit and the real nature. Theory helps to get knowledge about the history of things and how they came up, it is also useful for the people who do research especially in religion studies; they need to develop thoughts and reasoning on how to discover the proper reason for why must religion do things.

What I have learned

In this class I have learned many things, I have developed to be a person of critical thoughts and discovered how to engage in ideas and answer questions. I acquired a unique way to understand other people’s opinions, though am not special than the others, I have a skill that many do not have, that is, I make a decision out analytical and evaluation of thoughts and obtain information from other sources and come up with an outstanding outcome which we did in this class too. From philosophy, I have learned the people’s views should be respected by not underestimating my fellow friends for example when we were in our third week you asked us to see each others work and learn from it, when I saw my fellow students work I took it as an opportunity ti learn from others and see how others think and how different our answers were, this helped me to have insight and learn from my mistakes. Also, I have the skill to clearly request for information, consider and compare the various opinions or beliefs that I have, now through this class I can take my mind to any other place and think about how others feel about their religion and how different my religion was from them. I have learned to understand the history of things or why some behave in a unique manner and how they join with the real world in which we reside. The good thing about this class is that it gave me the ability to see things from many different perspectives. One way or another I can communicate to a large group of individuals and address them appropriately by arranging my ideas and narrate to them clearly and fluently to make sure that they get my message. In my view from this class I can say that I am a better person and focus on my abilities and what I need to change to be better than others, everything that I need to do in life I apply to this class by just coming up with discussion and critically think of it, and it becomes possible to deal with life matters too.

Informal logic

In philosophy, there is a study of informal logic which describes the large ways that are applied in consideration using statistical methods and making judgments about a set of statements when trying to give out own opinion, simple logic works to bring out the rules of logic according to the daily reasoning. In this case, we analyzed the informal logic fallacies, which are commonly used, incorrect, or mistake may have occurred when reading an article, when chatting or watching commercials then suddenly questions starts lingering around your head. This simple logic lacks behavior generally, but it is deduced from so many disciplines when studying different fields such as the practical study of arguments, past events of evidence consideration, ways to carry out discussions and the many meaning of the term argument. Therefore, a fallacy or mistake is an untrue statement that splits down an argument through representing in an incorrect way and pull out wrong relevance to facts. These informal fallacies are used to amuse other people, and some are not noticeable when it appears that an error is noticeable and it depends on formal logic then this is described as the informal logical fallacies in which reasoning relates to inductive reasoning and the drawing of deductions is taken from what we experience in reality. For example, fast food is high in fat; fast food has little nutritional value then the conclusion is, if I eat fast food, I will be unhealthy. On the other hand, abductive reasoning is obtained scientifically, and it is concerned with relatively related subjects but the outcome may relate with the rationale, example cats do like fish, butter is a cat then the conclusion follows butter like fish. (Deleuze, & six Guattari, 2014).

Understanding the media

Informal logic has improved my reasoning and understanding of the media in that it has generated a logic in me, in the way I consider and make judgments on arguments that occur in commonly spoken words. Some cases come up outlining the occurrence of particular forms of reasoning, but instead, the primary objective is how to define and analyze arguments in the social broadcasting. Nowadays the community has involved itself in the mass media, which can be of benefit and also not beneficial to the society, it only depends on what is being transmitted and the value of it. When am watching an advertisement, photography or either drawing I can apply deductive reasoning using informal logic which is so easily to persuade depending on the type of creativity used, then I’m able to understand how these deductions are achieved and the influence of the human mind. For example, an advertisement about the quality of a product which are very competitive in the market, the ads can be very influential in that they can distinct a product function but make it more informal. It may be deduced that using a particular product it can be more beneficial compared to the other, by applying words such as faster, good scent or more rapid growth and others, and that’s how they end up pulling more customers and society. (Sinnott-Armstrong & Fogelin, 2014).

Understanding global religions

Through informal logic have been able to grasp the religions globally, in reference to the topic of holy communion and the importance of marriage, the evidences provided regarding the argument, that when a person enters into sexual union with another person but his spouse is alive, it is violation of marriage vows, I’m able to understand that when an individual engages into marriage should commit himself to the what he/she promised to, if the promise is broken and individual goes astray there is always violence, therefore my understanding is that when a spouse commits adultery which he/she ought not to engage brings violence to the family, the next argument is about the holy communion; any individual in a state of mortal sin should not take holy communion, if I deduce this using the criteria whether a sin is mortal I can understand, a person must be aware of adultery, be consent in doing it, and then involve himself willingness, therefore, the arguments placed for marriage are correct using the evidence or following the outcomes that come after.

Formal Logic

Formal logic is a form of reasoning that bases conclusions from the inferences. It is also concerned about how the components of an argument relate to each other and how these components interact to guarantee the validity of the argument. An argument is one’s position on an issue, which is usually supported by a couple of facts. The argument process is purely philosophical and mathematical, where the evidence fully justifies the eventual conclusion. It bases the validity of the premises on the validity of the inferences made. A premise is an assertion that is often presented that is not supported by other assertions. With this form of logic, the chain of reasoning is assumed to be valid if the conclusions follow from the premises. Therefore if the conclusion is supported by all the premises available, it is correct. Formal logic is synonymous with the deductive reasoning, where the conclusions are gotten from the premises given. Formal logic can, however, give wrong conclusions if the premises given are false. This is because it does not assess the validity of the claims but only draws the conclusion from the premises.

Formal and informal logic

Formal logic has various patterns and symbols. The first one is modus ponens. It is a means of correlating two different things. This means that the existence of one thing entirely depends on the influence of another. For example, if it rains, the vent will be canceled. Therefore because it is raining now, the event has to be canceled. The next symbol is modus tollens. This means that when a situation is real, the reverse must reflect the exact opposite of the situation. For example, in the argument, if he is a doctor, he will be able to treat her. He has not been able to treat her; therefore he is not a doctor. The next pattern is the chain argument. This is the argument that supports the relationship between two or more factors. It describes the occurrence of one factor as caused by the other’s situation. For example, Ally is taller that Cate and Cate is taller than Diana. The logical conclusion would be Ally is taller than Diana. The next pattern is the disjunctive syllogism where the argument presents two options for one to choose. For example, the argument, Ally will either get an A or B in class. Therefore the conclusion is, if Ally does not get a B, she will get an A.

Informal logic is the logic of the argument. It is where analysis, evaluation, and interpretation of the argument is done in real life situations or a natural language. It does not rely on the premises given to make a conclusion; rather it depends on these and other factors to be proven as true so that a logical conclusion is made. An example is, my friend who lives in New York is rich. Since live in New York, I ride in limos and buy expensive clothes. Everyone in New York is, therefore, rich. The conclusion is not solely based on the premises given, but by other factors such as my economic state.

Comparison between formal and informal logic

There are significant differences between informal and formal logic. Formal logic uses deductive reasoning whereas informal reasoning uses inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is a chain of reasoning that involves reasoning from the general to particulars. It is where a precise conclusion is drawn from the general premises given. Formal logic utilizes this in formulating the arguments since there must be a proper correlation between the premises to provide a logical conclusion. Inductive reasoning refers to reasoning from particulars to generals, and the premises provide some degree of support for the conclusion. Informal logic uses this reasoning to formulate it arguments since it applies the practice of everyday reasoning, in conjunction with the premises presented to make a logical conclusion. It does not follow a set method of making the conclusion but considers the aspects of everyday life as an influence to the conclusion made.

Formal logic deals with propositions that have absolute truths and inferences with standard validity. It bases the conclusion on these propositions and validates the argument based on the clear relatedness of the propositions. The informal logic, on the other hand, uses more than just the premises given to form a conclusion. This form of logic was intended to be applied in everyday life situations. It therefore also uses some other knowledge as the basis to form the conclusion. It analyzes the grounds and reasons for conclusions. It looks at the reasons presented support, justify or in some way demonstrate the conclusion. It involves questions of degree, probability, plausibility and persuasiveness. The informal logic does not have a strict mechanism to validate its arguments. It uses generic qualities such as the quality of support used to justify the claims presented, the nature of the evidence and the strengths of the premises. These justify whether a conclusion is logical or not.

Formal logic is more structured than informal logic. Formal logic relies on the formation of patterns between the premises and the support of the conclusion from the premises so that it can validate an argument. The informal logic is freer, as it does not only rely on the premises but also other influences to make logical conclusions. The methods of validating the argument are also vague since they encompass qualities like the strength of the premises and the nature of the argument to validate the argument.

The informal and formal logic also have significant similarities. Both these lines of reasoning can provide the wrong conclusions if the premises provided are false. In the case of formal logic, since it derives its conclusions from the premises presented, the provision of one or several false premises could make the conclusion wrong even though the logic is correct. An example is, all slaves were illiterate, and W.E.B Dubois was a slave. The correct conclusion would be that W.E.B Dubois was illiterate; however, this is not true. The informal logic also bases its arguments partly on the premises given and can provide a wrong conclusion when used. Take the example; the planet Venus produces light at night. The sun gives light. The logical conclusion would be that all heavenly bodies give light; however, this is not true as Venus is a planet and is incapable of producing light. Therefore for both lines of logic, the wrong information may give the wrong argument.

Both of these logic are used to come to a correct conclusion based on the premises given. They are both geared to ensuring that the person evaluates all the information and utilizes it to form a feasible conclusion. The approaches to ensuring that the conclusion is logical are different; however, they all fulfill the intended objective.

Formal and informal logic can be applied in many sectors. For example, it can be used in science during research. The deductive reasoning in formal logic can be used in the application of the theories whereas the inductive reasoning in informal logic is used in the creation of inferences.

Uses of formal logic in the media

Formal logic is used in the media to capture the news and predict various outcomes of events. The media’s role is to provide information to the public. To do this, it must relate various events so that it can create a comprehensive story. Journalists doing a story on a critical topic gather their information from many general sources and piece it together to provide a general and comprehensive story. They also provide predictions and assess various events to come up with a final stand on issues. An example of the application of formal logic in the media is when covering a scandal. They join the evidence present about the scandal and base a conclusion from the evidence. For example, in CNN a while back, the media house had used the information about the terror attacks in the African Country Kenya to come up with the headline that Kenya was a hotbed of terrorism.

Uses of formal logic in religion

Formal logic has been used in religion to come up with various doctrines. It relates the information, gotten from the Holy Books and Scriptures to come up with a conclusive argument. A good example is the Christian belief on how to get eternal life. The Bible states that for one to receive eternal life, they must acknowledge Christ in their lives and live good lives according to the guidelines stressed by the Bible. Therefore, if one does not do these things, they can never receive eternal life. Such beliefs serve as the motivation for them to conform to the set-out guidelines by their spiritual books.

How did this make me critical thinker?

Formal logic has helped me in the studding of critical thinking. Critical thinking is the ability to objectively analyze and evaluate a situation before forming a judgment on the matter. Formal logic allowed me to understand, analyze, evaluate and articulate arguments. These skills are essential for critical thinking. With the use of formal reasoning, one analyzes the relationship between the presented premises so that they can make a logical conclusion based on these premises. They can validate an argument and find a missing premise, thereby giving them the ability to evaluate events and situations to determine their validity before coming to a conclusion.

Also, I have developed to be a critical thinker, have gained skills that lead to critical thought, also have an advanced sequence of thinking skills that help me make an analytical judgment and be more reasonable than emotional. Throughout this class, I learned how to process information and ideas and come up with real and analytical conclusions for that purpose. Have been able to apply what critical thinking entails into daily life; which can be from different working places, from magazines or newsletters, or what people talk about related to the private

life and social and political matters. Have been helped to develop a proper knowledge of interpreting and assess the argument. In real life, I can solve problems and make significant decisions out of it, the outcomes of every of every discussion I make amounts high. When making these decisions, I possibly collect information from different sources and analyze it using the skills have then I make clear outcomes. That is not enough after implementing any decision I also review later to make changes where necessary. Whenever using critical thinking, some issues occupy my mind; that is questions such as who, what, where, when, why and how, and if I can answer them concerning any argument then the results will be more precise and skillful.

Another reason is that I don’t make conclusions without having the correct proves, I encounter possible course of action differently from my classmates which I got a low score on miserably. The way I encounter it intervenes my communication styles, I make clear, precise and developed statements anytime I am communicating. Also, I in our assignment we read all these articles and journals; that now I am able to connect all that I have read and compare our meetings and evaluate to improve my level of knowledge. Being a critical thinker I can do analysis without assistance from anybody, I can draw information or any problem that I come across and make suggestions by evaluating each of them and then makes final conclusions from it, it may seem difficult or wrong sometimes but once the skills are acquired it becomes possible to be a good critical thinker.

Finally, I’m a critical thinker because I can evaluate myself and try to stop doing what is wrong and focus on always doing is right regardless when I am supervised or even independent, then I can develop my original ideas without relying on other people, and this makes me self-confident that I can do it my own and every day I get a chance to improve my thinking level,

How I used Informal & Formal Logic and Critical Thinking In My Everyday Life:

Answer this question

The whole essay must be 15 pages! Not LESS