Valid Patterns, Fallacies, and Paradoxes

Valid Patterns

Valid patterns of reasoning are applicable for deductive reasoning.

Please see the page here: https://philosophy.hku.hk/think/arg/valid2.php

Fallacies

Please see the Fallacies page on this blog. 

Paradoxes

Philosophical paradoxes are statements or situations that seem contradictory or illogical on the surface, yet can reveal deeper truths about the nature of reality, logic, and language. Some famous examples include the Liar's Paradox, the Sorites Paradox, and the Grandfather Paradox. 

The Liar's Paradox:

Description:

A statement that claims its own falsehood, creating a self-contradictory situation.

Example:

"This sentence is false." If the statement is true, it must be false, and if it's false, it must be true.

Significance:

This paradox highlights the limitations of self-referential statements and the complexities of truth and falsehood

Some thoughts on critical thinking

Potentially true until proven false

People may not be able to make a valid or strong argument.  Some of the things they say may not be true.  These do not make what they wish to say false though.  Their conclusion could still be true.

Burden of proof

The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi, shortened from Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat – the burden of proof lies with the one who speaks, not the one who denies) is the obligation on a party in a dispute to provide sufficient warrant for its position.

Improving understanding through arguments

In discussion with others, rather than proving someone else's argument wrong, it is more beneficial to reflect on our own belief, assumptions and reasoning.

Other thoughts

What other thoughts do you have?  

Do you think critical thinking is useful?