IC 1

1. Can an argument have no conclusion in philosophy? NO

2. Can a sound argument have a false conclusion? NO

3. Write one proposition about this classroom. ANSWERS MAY VARY

4. How do we define a proposition in philosophy? A STATEMENT ABOUT THE WORLD

5. Can a valid argument have a false conclusion? (There is only one correct answer.) YES

6.
All cats are reptiles.
Bugs Bunny is a cat.
So Bugs Bunny is a reptile.

What is the conclusion in the argument above? SO BUGS BUNNY IS A REPTILE

7. What are the premises in the argument above? ALL CATS ARE REPTILES AND
BUGS BUNNY IS A CAT

8. Either Colonel Mustard or Miss Scarlet is the culprit.

Miss Scarlet is not the culprit.
Hence, Colonel Mustard is the culprit.

This argument is valid. Does that tell us if it is sound? NO

1. Can a sound argument have a false premise? NO

2. Can a sound argument be invalid? NO

IC 2
Here’s an argument from St. Anselm. It’s his famous Ontological Argument. It aims to prove that
God exists.
1. 1. God is that than which nothing greater can be thought.
2. 2. A God that exists is greater than one that doesn’t.
3. 3. If God does not exist, God is not that than which
nothing greater can be thought.
4. 4. From 3 and 1, we can use a rule called modus tollens to
infer that God does exist.
5. 5. Thus, God exists.
Question 1
Here's your question: Number 5 is called what in this argument? Think of the parts of an
argument. THE CONCLUSION
Question 2
The inference called ‘modus tollens’ is truth preserving. If the premises are true, the conclusion
must be true. That means the inference is what? Look at our course concepts. VALID
Question 3
 The claim that God is that than which nothing greater can be thought is a statement about
the world. That means premise 1 is a what? A PROPOSITION
Question 4
If all the premises in this argument are true and the argument is valid, then the
argument is what? SOUND
Question 5 The claims in numbers 1 through 4 are evidence to
support Anselm’s conclusion. That means they are called what? PREMISES
Question 6
Suppose I say “All bachelors are unmarried men. That’s true by definition.” What sort of
proposition is the first one? ANALYTIC
Question 7
Here’s a common fallacy: If it rains, I’ll get wet. I’m wet. Thus, it
must have rained. Thinking only of the meaning of validity, why isn’t this argument valid? All you
need to do is tell me the definition of validity. VALID ARGUMENTS HAVE A TRUTH-
PRESERVING STRUCTURE AND THIS ARGUMENT DOESN’T HAVE ONE.
Question 8
Here’s another common fallacy: If it rains, I’ll get wet. It did not rain. Thus, I will not get wet.
Now that you know this inference is fallacious, you also know the argument is unsound. How do
you know that? Use course concepts. IT’S INVALID
Question 9
The claim that God exists is a claim about the world. That means this claim is called
what? PROPOSITION
Question 10
Why can’t this be an argument? “God exists.” Think back to last week, or look at the meaning of
an argument. AN ARGUMENT NEEDS A PREMISE AND A CONCLUSION; THIS IS LACKING
AT LEAST ONE.

IC 3
1: Does Kant think Anselm proves God exists in a way that should satisfy the atheist? NO

2: If I assume my conclusion is true to prove that my conclusion is true, I beg the

question. YES/TRUE

3: Suppose I say "If you study, then you'll pass." Is the "If you study" part of the conditional the
consequent? NO

4: Suppose again that I say, 'If you study, then you'll pass." The "then you'll pass" is the
consequent. YES

5: Since Kant says that assuming God exists makes it easy to prove God exists, a question-
begging argument can be valid. (Think about it. This one might surprise you.) YES

6. If Anselm’s first premise is a statement about how the world is, then the argument is what,
according to Kant? QUESTION-BEGGING
7. Does Kant try to prove that God does not exist? NO

8. Does Kant say the word 'God' does not mean 'that than which nothing greater can be
conceived'? NO

9. Arguments to prove God exist are attempting to answer a metaphysical question. YES

10. Write a conditional statement. ANSWERS MAY VARY

IC 4
1. Descartes tries to prove that there is a God. YES/TRUE
2. Descartes says that he has the idea of perfection within himself. That is to serve as
evidence to support his conclusion. This means that "I have the idea of perfection within me" is
a premise in Descartes's argument. YES
3. A statement whose truth value is neither determined by the meaning of the words within it
and nor the rules of logic is called a synthetic proposition. YES
4. Does Descartes tell us whether he thinks the proposition 'The greater never comes from
the lesser' is analytic or synthetic? NO
5. Which of these is it more reasonable to see as analytic? “All true squares have 4 identical
internal angles, each measuring 90 degrees”
6. Which of those is it more reasonable to see as synthetic? or “ My middle finger is longer
than my index finger.”
7. Is it reasonable to think that “Descartes believes God is perfect” is analytic? NO
8. Which statement is the conclusion in Descartes’s argument? SOMETHING PERFECT
EXISTS; THUS IS IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO CONCLUDE THAT GOD EXISTS;
SOMETHING INFINITE EXISTS
9. Does Descartes say God is all-loving in this reading? NO
10. What does analytic mean? TRUE OR FALSE BY DEFINITION
IC 5

1. If Hobbes is right in saying that there is a false premise in the argument, Descartes's
argument is invalid. FALSE/NO

2. In the reading I have given you, does Hobbes directly say that some buckets are perfect?
NO
3. In the reading I have given you, does Hobbes directly say some pens are infinitely large?
NO
4. If Hobbes had said Descartes's conclusion does not follow from his premises, Hobbes
would have been trying to show Descartes's argument is what? INVALID/UNSOUND
5. Which of these is Hobbes challenging? The structure of Descartes’ argument or the
content of the argument? CONTENT
6. The claim that Descartes doesn't prove that the greater never comes from the lesser is a
statement about the world. Thus, we call it what? PROPOSITION
7. Why doesn’t Descartes’s argument beg the question? ONE BEGS THE QUESTION IF
ONE ASSUMES ONE'S CONCLUSION IS TRUE IN ORDER TO PROVE ONE'S
CONCLUSION IS TRUE.
8 Hobbes’s thought experiment is evidence in his argument. That means we call it what?
PREMISE

2. 9. “We got the notion of perfection from God” is not settled only by the meanings of the
words involved; and it is not solved by the rules of logic either. We thus call this proposition
what? SYNTHETIC
3. 10.“An argument whose conclusion does not follow from the premises is invalid” is true by
definition. That means we call this proposition what? ANALYTIC

IC 6

1. Suppose that Plantinga thinks the structure of Anselm's argument

needs to be changed to be valid. That means he would think the
argument was initially unsound. YES/TRUE
2. If Plantinga seeks to prove that God exists, he is doing epistemology. FALSE/NO
3. If Plantinga seeks to prove that it is rational to believe that God exists, he is doing
metaphysics. FALSE/NO
4. Can Plantinga's argument be valid but unsound? YES
5. "It is rational to believe that God exists" is a statement about
the world. We thus call it what? A PROPOSITION
6. Here is a counter-argument to Plantinga:
a. A maximally great being exists in all possible worlds.
b. It is possible that there is no maximally great being.
c. If it is possible that there is no maximally great being, there is
at least one world in which that being does not exist.
d. If a maximally great being does not exist in one world, it is not maximally great.
e. Thus, there is no maximally great being.

What is the conclusion in the above argument? E

7. What are the premises in the argument linked to question 6. A THROUGH D
8. In what form is c in the above argument? CONDITIONAL
9. Are all premises propositions? YES
10. Can the argument linked to Question 6 be valid but unsound? YES
IC 7

1. If it is true by definition that God is a maximally great being, then the proposition "God is a
maximally great being" is what kind of proposition? Use course concepts. ANALYTIC
2. If we must investigate the world to determine whether there is a God, then the proposition
"God exists" is what kind of proposition? Use course concepts and don't say 'metaphysical.'
SYNTHETIC
3 and 4. Here is a conditional proposition. "If you want to leave, then you may not." What is the
antecedent? What is the consequent? 3 - IF YOU WANT TO LEAVE; 4 - THEN YOU MAY
NOT.
5. Which is it more reasonable to see the proposition linked to 3 and 4 as: synthetic?
6. Is it possible for the argument that concludes with "God exists" and the argument that
concludes with "God does not exist" both to be sound (assuming all the meanings and whatnot
are held constant)? NO
7. Can both of those arguments be valid? YES
8. Question-begging arguments can be valid. YES
9. Are all propositions premises? NO
10. Hobbes thinks Descartes’s argument is valid, but unsound. That means he thinks which of
the following applies to the argument? C – it contains at least one false premise
Synthetic Propositions: Propositions whose truth value is not

determined solely by the concepts

involved.