SHS

Introduction to the Philosophy of

the Human Person
Quarter 1 – Module 6
USING LOGIC TO EVALUATE TRUTH
AND OPINION AS METHOD OF
PHILOSOPHIZING

1
Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person
Quarter 1 – Module 6: USING LOGIC TO EVALUATE TRUTH AND OPINION
AS METHOD OF PHILOSOPHIZING

Republic Act 8293, section 176 states that: No copyright shall subsist in
any work of the Government of the Philippines. However, prior approval of the
government agency or office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for
the exploitation of such work for a profit. Such agency or office may, among other
things, impose as a condition the payment of royalties.

Borrowed materials (i.e., songs, stories, poems, pictures, photos, brand

names, trademarks, etc.) included in this book are owned by their respective
copyright holders. Every effort has been exerted to locate and seek permission to
use these materials from their respective copyright owners. The publisher and
authors do not represent nor claim ownership over them.

Regional Director: Gilbert T. Sadsad

Assistant Regional Director: Jessie L. Amin
Regional EPS: Sheila C. Bulawan
Division EPS: Presyl A. Bello

Development Team of the Module

Writer: ROMMEL U. QUIÑONES - Homapon HS, SDO Legazpi City
Editor: JESSIE MARIE MATA MORCOSO - Pawa HS, SDO Legazpi City
ALVIN A. SARIO, PhD - University of Santo Tomas, Legazpi
Reviewers: GERRY A. BAJARO - Oro Site HS, SDO Legazpi City
JESON D. BALINGBING – Pag-asa NHS, SDO Legazpi City
ROMEO A. TUSI - Pawa HS, SDO Legazpi City
Illustrator: VIAN GABRIEL SPES B. QUINONES
Layout Artist:
Cover Photo: ROMMEL U. QUIÑONES - Homapon HS, SDO Legazpi City

2
INTRODUCTION
Did you experience an instance when you speak about
something with certainty for having such firsthand
information and someone made a statement saying “You’re
wrong” or “that’s not true” or “that’s incorrect” which are
commonly heard when someone disagrees with you. On the
other hand, have you been into situations when after
speaking about something you know to be factual; you were
told that “well that is your opinion” or “your opinion is well

taken” which are also commonly heard when someone disagrees with you.

In both instances, we can see that being right is important for some
people, even if they are wrong and that on one end and the other, one must be
taken as true or correct. Most often than not they fail to recognize that there is a
big difference between facts on the one hand, and truth, opinion, belief, taste,
and preference on the other. Moreover, just because we dislike or disapprove of
something does not make it wrong. Nevertheless, every person enjoys the right
to express opinions without being despised and personally stricken.

As a student and belonging to what we call millennials, this digital age

poses a great challenge as we are flooded with plentiful of information from
different platforms where news and information of all sorts are either “true” or
“fake”. In our search for relevance, the question that matters is that “what makes
something true” more relevant than ever in this era of alternative facts and fake
news. It may sound odd that in science, law, and many other fields, there is no
such thing as proof, there are only conclusions drawn from facts and
observations.

This lesson shall provide you with one of the means to evaluate situations
as being true or opinion. This lesson shall deal with truth and opinion as what it
means and how we establish it as we delve into inductive and deductive
reasoning and the instances to avoid misinformation.

1
OBJECTIVES
At the end of this module, you should be able to:
1. Appreciate the subject matter of Logic as method of
philosophizing
2. Evaluate one’s ideas, propositions and arguments whether
valid or invalid
3. Identify and avoid arguments which are fallacious or
erroneous

VOCABULARY
Now, that you know your targets for the day, have a glimpse
of the new words below which may appear in this module.
ARGUMENT - The act or process reasoning in a coherent series
of statements or facts intended to establish a point of to persuade
someone of something.
DEDUCTIVE - An argument that proceeds to provide a guarantee
of the truth of the conclusion provided that the argument’s
premises are true.
FACT - An instance of occurrence presented as having
objective reality
FALLACY - An often plausible or defective argument from false or invalid
inference
INDUCTIVE - An argument that is intended to be strong enough that the
premises provide support to be true, then it would be unlikely that
the conclusion is false.
OPINION - Judgment or belief about something which is not conclusive
REASONING - The act of the mind drawing inferences or conclusions from
premises or propositions through the use of reason
THEORY - An ideal set of facts or principles forming a body of knowledge
TRUTH - A factual occurrence in accord with reality and is something that
can be proven to be true .

2
PRE-TEST
TRUE OR FALSE
Read and understand carefully the questions and answer the
questions asked. Write your answer in your notebook.

1. The sun shines from the East and sets in the West. This claim is an example
of inductive reasoning which is best explained by one of the statements
below. Which do you think it is?
A. It is based on the theories presented by scientists.
B. Randomly, the sun can be considered to set and shine on different ends
C. We can observe that the sun follows the same pattern everyday orderly
D. It is an accepted claim that we cannot dispute and asked about

2. “When the sun comes up, the rooster crows. When the rooster crows, the
hen lays an egg.” What happens when the sun comes up?
A. It won't rain. C. Everybody wakes up.
B. The hen lays an egg. D. The farm gets loud.

3. John is stronger than Mike, but Luke is stronger than John. Mike is stronger
than Luke. Given that the first sentence is true. Following deductive
reasoning, what is the underlined statement?
A. True B. False C. Insufficient Data D. None of the
above
4. Rejecting a claim or an argument by criticizing the person who makes it
rather than the claim itself is known as the fallacy argumentum ad hominem.
Which among these statements best express this fallacy?
A. Keep your mouth shut or else you will be persecuted.
B. Keep your feet on the ground, neither you step on someone or something
else
C. Don’t you tell me what is right, isn’t it that you are keeping a mistress for
years?
D. I am silent about these issues since I am not knowledgable about it.

5. When one instead making a claim resort to force or threat of force to advance
his proposition is committing the fallacy argumentum ad baculum. Which
among these statements best express this fallacy?
A. Keep your mouth shut or else you will be persecuted.
B. Keep your feet on the ground, neither you step on someone or something
else
C. Don’t you tell me what is right, isn’t it that you are keeping a mistress for
years?
D. I am silent about these issues since I am not knowledgeable about it.

3
 6. Reasoning is based from observation. It is the sole source of information and
truth.
A. Only the 1st statement is true C. Only the 2nd statement is true
B. Both statements are true D. Both statements are false

7. Ideas are said to be as the building block of knowledge. What best explains
this claim?
A. Ideas are that which represent reality C. Ideas are product of
imagination
B. Ideas are part of the system of truth D. Ideas are captured by the mind

8. Propositions are sentences. But, not all sentences are propositions.

A. Only the 1st statement is true C. Only the 2nd statement is true
B. Both statements are true D. Both statements are false

9. When we reason out, we use evidence to judge or persuade others of the

truth.
Which among these statements is true about it.
A. Mayon is an active volcano because of its numerous eruptions
B. Mayon is my favorite photoshoot area because it captures my heart.
C. Mayon is a an active volcano because of the legend of furious Oragon.
D. Mayon derived its name from Daragang Magayon.

10. When a judgment is made and it coincides with reality, it is true and, if not, it
is false. What do you think of this statement?
A. True B. False C. Doubtful D. Insufficient Data

LEARNING ACTIVITY 1
Let’s answer the Learning Activity below. Make an
assumption from the following situations and justify your
answer by providing the reasons behind.
The first situation is already answered to guide you. Good
luck.
Situation Assumption Reason/Clarification
It follows that from his
Drinking lots of soda and Eating
Dan most likely to consumption of sweet
candies cause Diabetes. Dan
have Diabetes in the candies and cola this
loves to eat sweet candies and
future will have bad effects
drink cola.
in his body
1. There were 10 birds in the tree.
Ben shot 1 bird and fell in the
ground.
2. Eddie only drinks beer on his
free days.
Tomorrow is his day off from
work.

4
 3. James is taller than Manuel.
Manuel is shorter than Ana.

4. Henry’s two friends got their

driver’s license when they
turned 16.
He will turn 16 next month.

5. If you are 18 years old or older,

you can vote. You can vote.
I.

Guide Questions:

1. How do you find the activity? Is it fun to make guess?

2. Did you find your assumptions an exciting way of the turn of events?
3. Were your assumptions mostly inspired by your life experiences?

Assumptions are indeed rooted in your kind of reasoning. When it comes

to reasoning, a statement can be considered as a truth or merely an opinion.
Mostly, these rely on observations and experiences or information we
accumulated whether from the news, books, movies, and other sources. What is
crucial here is our capacity and ability to distinguish between what is true and
what is an opinion with our critical abilities that are necessary to avoid being
manipulated easily.

LEARNING ACTIVITY 2
Let’s continue with this activity. Have you tried Rebus
Puzzles? These puzzles use visuals that put a different spin
or twists on words or parts of words to come up with the
hidden or new meaning.
Figure out the word or phrase for each of these puzzles and
write it in the line provided below. Enjoy!
.

B
SECRET
R
DECI SION BREED ED SECRET
E SECRET
D

split decision 1. 2. 3.

5
 JACK AGE AGE AGE talk GET n GO

4. 5. 6. 7.

L
HEAD
O
V ECO NOMY
HEELS
E

8. 9. 10.

Guide Questions:

1. Did you enjoy working with the puzzles? Were you able to find the answer
or meaning hidden in the puzzles easily?
2. What technique did you use in interpreting the puzzles? Did it work
successfully?
3. Can you establish the reasons for your answers?

Answering puzzles like Rebus requires you to think analytically, and

therefore require a great deal of your attention and focus to arrive at the
conclusion. These types of puzzles are very thought-provoking and require you to
hone your reasoning skills to obtain the answer.

This lesson shall provide you the means to evaluate and assess whether
the statement or information you might have is true or if it just an opinion. Let us
proceed with the lesson.

6
DEEPENING
As students, the knowledge and
ability to identify and differentiate
between truth and opinion aids in
developing one’s critical and analytical
skills. These two concepts are often
woven together as we are confronted
with vast information. It is therefore
imperative that as students, you can
unravel the threads of what is true from
what is mere belief; that is if you
successfully navigate the overflow of
media you will encounter in your lifetime.

To converse with the effects of misinformation, this lesson shall explore

the themes of philosophizing. The reason, as the highest human capacity,
became a critical issue in arguments especially in establishing what truth to be
upheld and opinion to be respected. The essence of reasoning is the search for
truth. Yet as always, truth isn’t as simple as we’d like to believe it is served in a
platter. For as far back as the history of human knowledge, philosophers have
debated whether absolute truth exists. Although we’re still waiting for an answer,
this doesn’t have to stop us from improving how we think by understanding a little
more.
Logic: A method of Philosophizing

Truth as the object of thinking is difficult to be acquired. Knowing the truth

lies generally in reasoning and Logic as the branch of Philosophy which deals
with thinking, not just thinking but “correct thinking,” is the tool of philosophy shall
provide one with the necessary skills to think critically. The aim of logic is correct
thinking, and thinking consists mainly of reasoning. The function of logic is to
investigate the various types of arguments and the rules which govern their
consistency.

St. Thomas Aquinas on his Comments on the on the Posterior Analytics of

Aristotle said that what Logic examines are the three acts of the reason or the
mind namely: simple apprehension, judgment and reasoning. These acts of the
mind are the main themes one must be acquainted with so as to be fruitful in
situations that might involve critical thinking skills. Below is the schematic flow of
these acts of the mind.

7
 MENTAL ACT MENTAL EXPRESSION EXTERNAL SIGN

APPREHENSION IDEA TERM

JUDGEMENT ENUNCIATION PROPOSITION

REASONING ARGUMENT SYLLOGISM

“Mortal” Ideas/Terms
Apprehension Ideas or concepts are
“Man” “Pedrol”
produced in the mind

Enunciation/ Propositions
Judgment The mind affirms or
“Pedro is a man.” “Man is mortal.” denies an idea by way of
another idea.

Argument/Syllogism
The mind proceeds to
Reasoning “Man is mortal.” affirm whether the two
Pedro is a man. concepts or propositions
Therefore, Pedro is mortal can go together to produce
another truth

Understanding Arguments

The purpose of logic, as the science that evaluates arguments, is thus to

develop methods and techniques that allow us to distinguish good arguments
from bad. As apparent from the above definition, the term ‘‘argument’’ has a very
specific meaning in logic. It does not mean, a mere verbal fight, as one might
have with one’s parent, spouse, or friend.
An argument is a set of statements, one or more of the statements are
called the premises which attempt to provide the reason to believe for deciding
that some other statement which is called the conclusion is true. A statement is a
sentence that is either true or false—in other words, typically a declarative

8
sentence or a sentence component that could stand as a declarative sentence.
The same is true with syllogism, that these statements are called propositions.
As you go on with the lesson, you will be looking at some ways to evaluate
arguments, but for now, let us learn first on how to identify an argument since it is
important to be able to identify arguments and understand their structure,
whether or not you agree with conclusion of the argument. Here is the illustration:

All crimes are violations of the law.

Premises
Robbery is a crime.
Conclusion Therefore, robbery is a violation of the law.

PREMISES Claimed Evidences

What is claimed to follow

CONCLUSION from the evidences

Deductive and Inductive Arguments

A deductive argument is an argument such that the premises provide (or
appear to provide) complete support for the conclusion. An inductive argument is
an argument such that the premises provide (or appear to provide) some degree
of support (but less than complete support) for the conclusion.

Here are the major distinctions of the two types of arguments.

Deduction Induction
• Deduction moves from idea to • Induction moves from observation to idea
observation
• Deduction moves from more • Induction moves from more specific to
general to more specific more general
• Deductive arguments have • Have some measure of the probability that
irrefutable conclusions the argument is true—based on the
assuming that all the premises strength of the argument and the evidence
are true to support it.
• If the premises are true in • If the premises are true in induction, the
deduction, the conclusion is true conclusion is probably true
• Deduction has theories that • Induction makes observations that lead to
predict an outcome, which is generalizations for how that thing works
tested by experiments
• Deduction is hard to use in • Induction is used all the time in everyday
everyday life because it requires life because most of the world is based on
a sequential set of facts that are partial knowledge, probabilities, and the
known to be true. usefulness of theory as opposed to its
absolute validity

9
Recognizing Arguments

The first among the schemes one has to take is to identify whether an
argument is present. This is to ask whether there is a statement that someone is
trying to establish to be true by grounding it on some other statements. If it is
known, then there is an argument present. If not, then there is no argument
present
It is crucial for one that before refuting or counter reacting a statement, the
point of argument must be perceived first for it will be the point from where the
counter statement must be based. If none, the statement is merely an
explanation. Looking at the illustration above, the point of argument is established
since both the premises settled on the idea of “crime”. This is called in syllogism
as the middle term which is the issue of the argument.
Another scheme that can help in identifying arguments is knowing certain
key words or phrases that are premise indicators or conclusion indicators. One of
the most important tasks in the analysis of arguments is being able to distinguish
premises from conclusion. If what is thought to be a conclusion is really a
premise, and vice versa, the subsequent analysis cannot possibly be correct.
Frequently, arguments contain certain indicator words that provide clues in
identifying premises and conclusion. Some typical conclusion indicators are:
therefore wherefore entails that hence
thus consequently we may infer it must be that
whence it follows that implies that as a result

If an argument does not contain a conclusion indicator, it may contain a

premise indicator. Any statement following one of these indicators can usually be
identified as a premise. Some typical premise indicators are:
since as indicated by because for
in that given that seeing that for the reason that
inasmuch as owing to so inferred from

Validity and Soundness of Arguments

Validity relates to how well the premises support the conclusion. A valid
argument is an argument whose conclusion cannot possibly be false, assuming
that the premises are true. Another way of putting this is as a conditional
statement: A valid argument is an argument in which if the premises are true, the
conclusion must be true. To test an argument for validity we begin by assuming
that all premises are true, and then we determine if it is possible, in light of that
assumption, for the conclusion to be false. Here is an example:

All television networks are media companies. ---- if this is true

ABS CBN is a television network. ---- and this is true
Therefore, ABS CBN is a media company. ---- this must be true

10
 A good argument is not only valid, but also sound. Soundness is defined in
terms of validity, so since we have already defined validity, we can now rely on it
to define soundness. A sound argument is a valid argument that has all true
premises, which means the conclusion of a sound argument will always be true.
Why? Because if an argument is valid, the premises transmit truth to the
conclusion on the assumption of the truth of the premises.
Sound Sound Sound
= +
Argument Argument Argument

The concepts of validity and soundness that we have introduced apply

only to the class of what are called “deductive arguments”. A deductive argument
is an argument whose conclusion is supposed to follow from its premises with
absolute certainty, thus leaving no possibility that the conclusion doesn’t follow
from the premises.

Fallacies
When we form arguments or examine others’ arguments, we need to be
cognizant of possible fallacies. A fallacy can be defined as a flaw or error in
reasoning. At its most basic, a logical fallacy refers to a defect in the reasoning of
an argument that causes the conclusion(s) to be invalid, unsound, or weak. The
existence of a fallacy in a deductive argument makes the entire argument invalid.
The existence of a fallacy in an inductive argument weakens the argument

Kind of Fallacy Description Example

Person A: To end the drug
problem in the country, the big-
Argumentum ad
This fallacy occurs when one time drug lords should be put to
Baculum
appeals to force or the threat jail, Mr. President.
of force to bring about the Person B: I am your president,
Appeal to force or
acceptance of a conclusion. don’t order me around. If you
Appeal to the Stick
don’t like my programs, leave the
country!
This fallacy occurs when an Oh, Officer, there's no reason to
arguer attempts to support a give me a traffic ticket for driving
Argumentum ad
conclusion by merely evoking without a helmet because I was in
Misericordiam
pity from the reader or a hurry since I bought medicine for
listener. This pity may be my wife.
Appeal to Pity
directed toward the arguer or
some third party.
Person A: I’m against the
Argumentum ad presidents’ scheme on war on
This fallacy occurs when an
Hominem tu quoque drugs.
author attacks his opponent
Person B: Dilawan!!!
instead of his opponent’s
Appeal to the Person A: The president is the
argument.
Person best president we ever had.
Person B: DDS!!!

11
 This fallacy is committed
when someone manipulates “80% of people believe the death
Argumentum ad
peoples' emotions to get penalty to be implemented,
Populum
them to accept a claim as therefore, the death penalty is
being true. It attempts to moral”
Appeal to Emotion
prove an argument as correct “I have a lot of Likes on my FB
(Bandwagon)
simply because many people post. That means I'm right.”
believe it to be so.

It occurs when the premise

of the argument supports a
Ignoratio Elenchi “If you do not trust the PNP
specific conclusion but not
members, we dissolve the PNP”
the one the author draws.
Missing the Point “if you do not trust the government,
This conclusion must be
tanggalin natin ang gobyerno”
significantly different from the
conclusion that is drawn.

This fallacy occurs when the

premises of an argument People for centuries attempt to
Argumentum ad
state that nothing has been provide conclusive evidence for the
Ignorantiam
proved since the conclusion claims of astrology, and no one
is supported by something has ever succeeded. Therefore, we
Appeal to
which is argued to be true must conclude that astrology is a
Ignorance
because one cannot prove it lot of nonsense
false.

Argumentum ad This fallacy occurs when the

Person A: This virus not that
verecundiam cited authority or witness is
contagious as we think of it.
not trustworthy. This fallacy is
Person B: What makes you say
Appeal to committed when the person
that? Are you a doctor or a
Unqualified in question is not a legitimate
specialist?
Authority authority on the subject.

This fallacy occurs whenever

the arguer creates the illusion
Fashion magazines don’t hurt
that inadequate premises, by
Petitio Principii women’s self-esteem because
restating the conclusion as a
women’s confidence is intact after
premise, or by reasoning in a
Begging the reading the magazine.
circle. This happens when
Question “I'm always right because I'm
the author’s premise and
never wrong.”
conclusion say the same
thing.

This occurs when the

Non sequitur This man is a criminal. He must be
conclusion does not follow
“It does not a drug addict!
logically from the previous
follow”
explanation or statement.

12
 The fallacy of false cause
occurs whenever the link
between premises and The chess team gets better grades
Post Hoc conclusion depends on some than the basketball team, therefore
False Cause imagined causal connection playing chess makes you smarter
that probably does not exist. than playing basketball.
This fallacy assumes that
association equals causation.

It occurs when the arguer

diverts the attention of the
Person A: Marcos is no hero—just
reader or listener by
look at all the atrocities that
changing the subject to a
occurred during martial law.
Red Herring different but sometimes
Person B: Well what about
subtly related one. The basic
Hacienda Luisita, and all the other
idea is to "win" an argument
killings that happened after Marcos
by leading attention away
was ousted?
from the argument and to
another topic.

This fallacy occurs when an

arguer distorts an opponent’s Person A: I think everyone has a
argument for more easily right to a fair trial
Straw Man attacking it, attempts to shift Person B: You bleeding-heart
to a different conflict where liberals think that policemen are
the opponent is perceived to murderers and that criminals
be weak and attack him should just run free.
there.

It occurs when the Women nowadays should not wear

conclusion of an argument kinky and provocative clothing. It
rests upon an alleged chain will lead to an increase in sex-
reaction and there is not related crimes such as sexual
Slippery Slope sufficient reason to think that abuse and rape. This in turn will
the chain reaction will gradually erode the moral fabric of
actually take place and will society and increase crimes of all
inevitably lead to another and sorts. Eventually, a complete
that there is no stopping the disintegration of law and order will
process. occur.

This happens when the

arguer reduces the choices to
False Dilemma or In Philippine politics nowadays, if
only two; it’s either black or
False Dichotomy you utter remarks or say something
it’s white. Either-or
(either/or about a particular occurrence “you
arguments tend to reduce
argument) will be labelled either a DDS or
complex issues to simplistic
Dilawan
choices when there are other
choices possible.

13
 As student who at this point is in search for truth, it is important to study
fallacies to avoid them in your future arguments. Studying fallacies also provides
you with the means in evaluating and critiquing other arguments as well.

Now that you’ve examined some common errors in reasoning, you are
equipped to recognize them when they come your way. In your future essays or
debates, this will serve as your guide to make sure that you don't fall into similar
faulty reasoning. Since you’ve discovered the value of truth, the types of
reasoning, and erroneous reasoning, it’s time to evaluate what you learn.

APPLICATION
Read and analyze the situations given on the 1st column.
Then, identify the type of reasoning and write it in the 2 nd
column; justify your answer and write it in the 3rd column.

An example is already given to set as your guide.

Situations Type of Evaluation of Conclusion

Reasoning
At Homapon High School, if Deductive The conclusion is based on a
you arrived late for five times, Reasoning fact. So, it is deductive
you will receive a sanction. reasoning.
Romeo has been late to school
five times; therefore he will
receive a sanction.
Whenever Julia has attended a 1. 2.
tutorial session, she notices that
her grades have improved. Julia
attends tutorial sessions and she
concludes her grades will
improve.
If Eduardo decides to go to a 3. 4.
concert tonight, he will miss
football practice. Tonight,
Eduardo went to the concert.
Eduardo missed his football
practice.
Every Wednesday, Lilia’s mother 5. 6.
calls. Today is Wednesday, so
Lilia concludes her mother will
call.
Those who drink alcoholic liquors 7. 8.
beyond the moderate level are
drunkards. Leo drinks alcoholic
liquor beyond moderation.
Therefore Leo is drunkard.

14
 Read and analyze the situations given on the 1st column. Then, identify the type
of fallacy the statements have committed and write it in the 2nd column; justify
your answer and write it in the 3rd column.

An example is already given to set as your guide.

Situation Kind of Explanation

Fallacy

Roosters crow before sunrise. Non Sequitur Because it does not follow
Therefore, roosters cause the sun to that since rooster crow
rise. before sun shines that the
rooster caused it
Since the students have no 9. 10.
questions concerning the topics
discussed in class, the students are
ready for a test.

I know we don't love each other. 11. 12.

But if we don't get married it will
crush my mother’s heart. You know
she has a weak heart. Do you really
want to do that to her?

I have a right to free speech so I 13. 14.

can say what I want and you
shouldn't try to stop me.

If you don’t share this message, 15. 16.

something terrible and disaster
shall fall upon you.

POST TEST

Direction: Read and understand carefully the following

questions. Underline your answer and write it in your
notebook.

1. When we reason out, we use evidence to judge or persuade others of the

truth.
Which among these statements is NOT true about this claim?
A. Mayon is an active volcano because of its numerous eruptions.
B. Mayon is considered as the perfect cone volcano.

15
 C. Mayon is located in Albay.
D. Mayon derived its name from Daragang Magayon.

2. John is stronger than Mike, but Luke is stronger than John. Given the first
sentence is true, following deductive reasoning, what among these statement
is true?
A. Mike is stronger than Luke. C. Mike is stronger than Luke.
B. Luke is stronger than Mike . D. John is stronger than Mike.

3. Which among these statements best express an inductive reasoning?

A. The sun shines from the East and sets in the West.
B. No one is above the law.
C. Animals abelong to Kingdom Animalia.
D. Man is a composite being having body and soul.

4. What conclusion can be reached using inductive reasoning from the

following?
“When the sun comes up, the rooster crows. When the rooster crows, the
hen lays an egg.”
A. It won't rain. C. Everybody wakes up.
B. The hen lays an egg. D. The farm gets loud.

5. “Don’t you tell me what is right, isn’t it that you are keeping a mistress for
years?” What fallacy is committed in this statement?
A. Post Hoc Propter Quoque C. Argumentum ad Baculum
B. Argumentum ad Misericordia D. Argumentum ad Hominem

6. Reasoning is based from investigation. It is the sole source of information

and truth.
A. Only the 1st statement is true C. Only the 2nd statement is true
B. Both statements are true D. Both statements are false

7. Ideas are said to be as the building block of knowledge. Which among these
statements does NOT follow this claim?
A. Ideas are that which represent reality C. Ideas are product of
imagination
B. Ideas are part of the system of truth D. Ideas are separate from reality

7. “Keep your mouth shut or else you will be persecuted.” What fallacy is
committed in this statement?
A. Post Hoc Propter Quoque C. Argumentum ad Baculum
B. Argumentum ad Misericordia D. Argumentum ad Hominem

8. Propositions are sentences. All sentences are propositions.

C. Only the 1st statement is true. C. Only the 2nd statement is true.
D. Both statements are true. D. Both statements are false.

16
9. When we reason out, we use evidence to judge or persuade others of the
truth.
Which among these statements is true about it.
A. Mayon is an active volcano because of its numerous eruptions
B. Mayon is my favorite photoshoot area because it captures my heart.
C. Mayon is a an active volcano because of the legend of furious Oragon.
D. Mayon derived its name from Daragang Magayon.

10. When a judgment is made, it coincides with reality. What do you think of the
statement?
A. True B. False C. Doubtful D. Insufficient
Data

ASSIGNMENT

Complete the chart below. You may ask for help from your
parents/guardians who witnessed your development as a person.
Copy this in your notebook.

AGE THE THINGS I DO BEST THE THINGS I DO LEAST

0-3 years

4-7 years

8-11 years

12 years up

17
Answer Key
Pre-Test Post-Test Learning Activity 1

1. C 1. D Upon the shot birds will be

1. Birds will fly away
frightened
2. B 2. B
It is the only time that Eddie
3. B 3. A 2. Eddie will most likely drink
can be free since its his day
4. C 4. B beer
off
5. A 5. D 3. James and Ana most
6 D 6 A Since Manuel is shorter that
likely are of the same
7. A 7. D Ana and smaller than Manuel
height
8. B 8. A 4. Henry might get his It doesn’t follow that when one
9. A 9. A license when he pass the turms 16 will be given driver’s
10. A 10. D written and drivin test license
5. I might be 18 years old or To vote one should be 18
older years old or older

Learning Activity 2
Learning
1. crossActivity
breed 2 2. half hearted 3. top secret 4. jack in the box
5. middle age 6 small talk 7. get up and go 8. head over heels
9. falling in love 10. growing economy

Guide Questions: (Answers may vary)

Application

Julia’s grades will improve It doesn’t come together

Hasty
once she attends tutorial as that if no questions asked
Inductive Generalization
seen from her previous then students are ready
lessons The argument appeals to
Argumentum
It follows from the fact that the emotion of the partner
ad
Deductive he choose to be in concert asked to consider the
Miserecordiam
that in practice marriage
Linda’s assumption that her The right to speech is not
Inductive mother will call is based from Post Hoc the cause of the claim
experience that he can’t be stopped
It follows from the statement The argument casts
Deductive Argumentum
on being a drunkard threat on those who will
ad Baculum
ignore the message.

18
REFERENCES

Bachhuber, Andrew H.1957. Introduction to Logic. New York: Appleton-Century-

Crofts, Inc.

Dowden, Bradley and Swartz, Norman (n.d.) Truth. Accessed on June 10, 2020
from https://www.iep.utm.edu/truth/

Haig, Khatchadourian. (2011) Truth: Its nature, criteria and conditions. Accessed
on June 10, 2020 from https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/truth-its-nature-criteria-
and-conditions/

Hurley, Patrick J.1999. A Concise Introduction to Logic. Wadsworth. 7th Edition

PDF Copy

Meissler, D. (April 16, 2020) The difference between deductive and inductive
reasoning. Accessed on June 11, 2020 from
https://danielmiessler.com/blog/the-difference-between-deductive-and-
inductive-reasoning/

Nery, Maria Imelda N. (2007). Philosophy of Man. Mandaluyong City: National

Bookstore. Reprint edition

Piñon, Manuel T.1979. Logic Primer. Manila: Rex Publishing House. Revised
edition.

Stumpf, Samuel Enoch and James Fisher. 2008. Socrates to Sartre and Beyond.
New York: McGraw Hills Publishing. International Edition.

The Critical Thinking Workbook. Accessed on June 11, 2020 from

https://www.schrockguide.net/uploads/3/9/.../critical-thinking-workbook.pdf

19