PHIL134- Last Minute (1 Viewer)

[Cyan_phoeniX]

Seeing that nearly every other subject has this, might as well start one for logic.
How are people going with this? I'm kind of nervous about this one. :/

 

[iwannarock]

all i know is i hate the subject and have trouble with the whole concept of formal logic.

i managed to scrape a pass in the mid semester, but looking at the textbook (chapters 5 - 7) now a pass is out of the question.

critical thinking, morality and society and metaphysics seemed like philosphy.

formal logic is out of place.

did i mention i hate it?

 

[Cyan_phoeniX]

how did everyone find the exam? I was surprised, it was actually better than i expected... am i weird?

 

[iwannarock]

when i saw the exam i though "man people that actually know their stuff are absolutely gonna love this".

i didn't know my stuff.

formal logic was my achilles heel.

i mean i couldn't even construct truth trees so thats 15 marks gone there.

im hopin for a conceded pass in this subject.

i hope my marker is nice like last time.

for the mid semester exam they gave me so many marks i didnt deserve to push me over a pass i hope they do it again.

 

[thejosiekiller]

can you explain phil134 a bit more? im thinking of placing it as a subject in my mode of study next yr cause im interested in psychology, but from what ive read no 1 likes it here?

if u were to study for this subject u would be able to pass right? or is it just u didnt have time to study?

 

[Cyan_phoeniX]

can you explain phil134 a bit more? im thinking of placing it as a subject in my mode of study next yr cause im interested in psychology, but from what ive read no 1 likes it here?

if u were to study for this subject u would be able to pass right? or is it just u didnt have time to study?

lol, i loved it! And thats not just because i got a high mark. Although some didn't like it, so it depends on the person

Its very difficult to explain what logic is like. i guess you could say its like english and maths combined, although don't let that turn you off, i hated english. I liked it mainly because if you knew your stuff you would go well. if you read the book and did the exercises you will go very well, theres nothing in the exam that tries to trick you...its not bullshitty english or anything, its like maths in that regard. In fact, most of the stuff in the exams can be found in the book. Its very strange at first. I like maths which is probably why i found it easier to grasp than others (everything sort of snaps together like numbers), although again it depends on the person.

It dosen't really have much to do with psychology though (i do psych and there is little that i saw similar). Philosophy in general may be more closely aligned to psychology. if thats your interest i recommend phil131 (you could do both). I think logic is under philosophy because it is kind of scientific and precise with language. i think it also has relevance in computers, although that bit is sort of mentioned slightly in the book.

Ultimately, it is very difficult to say if you would like it or not. IMO, if you:

1. Like maths (how everything sort of works together).
2. Like a subject that is not overwhelming (you have ONE book, and you use that alone)
3. Consistently work on it (do all the questions and there is little reasons why you shouldnt get a D at least).

then you will like logic.
If you can, borrow the book 'Logic' and read the first 2 chapters to see if its your thing.

I hope that helped :/

 

[thejosiekiller]

thx for that!

 

[hiphophorray123]

sounds interesting i love courses like this, but then again, i don't think i want to risk putting this down in my attempt to get into the 'non-award program' i think i'd want to pick easier subjects like popular culture in order to get the GPA average i need.

 

[doe]

the problem ive found with easy subjects is that its too easy, so a lot of people do well, and unless you're one of those people who always does well academically you end up getting scaled down.

 

[...]

yea, i think i've learnt that easy subjects does not mean easy D/HD

just take maths for example, i got a Cr :O

where as comp114 i only managed a P??

 

[redruM]

cyan, what sort of things do you look at in that subject?

what are the exam questions like?

 

[Cyan_phoeniX]

Don't get me wrong, its not an 'easy' unit where everyone gets high marks. the mid semester was out of 40 and the average was 20s. If you get a good mark you wont be scaled down. As a said, its a unit which u know what they expect and your mind is always focused on one book and not a clutter of other texts.

cyan, what sort of things do you look at in that subject?

what are the exam questions like?

you look at the structure of sentences and assertions. You derive a formula (which represents a sentence) into an equivalent formula. There are symbols you use, 'v' '&' '->' '<->' that represent things such as 'or' 'and' 'if..then' 'if and only if'.
If you did Critical thinking then you will have an advantage. You look at sentences and derive them into PL and QL. which are their own languages. I'll show you an example, but don't get stressed out by how weird it looks!!!!

(This example is copied from the PHIL134 website)


(ii) "x [Fx] : ( (Fa & Fb) & (Fc & Fd)

{1} 1. "x [Fx] Premise
{1} 2. Fa 1 UE
{1} 3. Fb 1 UE
{1} 4. Fa & Fb 2,3 &I
{1} 5. Fc 1 UE
{1} 6. Fd 1 UE
{1} 7. Fc & Fd 5,6 &I
{1} 8. (Fa & Fb) & (Fc & Fd) 4,7 &I


The symbols didn't turn out... " is meant to be an upside-down A. So your deriving the first sentence into the 2nd sentence. Again, don't worry if it looks hard, you learn what it all means. You need an interpretation of the sentence, so ill make F=freaky (predicate). a=Alex, b=Bob,C=Cat, D=Don (names). so, what this complicated sentence says is the very elementary 'All things are feaky, therefore, alex is freaky, bob is freaky, cat is freaky and don is freaky.

If you think that is making something simple look hard:

$x [$y [$z [(((Gx & Gy) & Gz) & (~(x = y) & ~(y = z) & ~(x = z)))
& ("w [Gw ® (w = x) v (w = y) v (w = z )])]]]

$=upside down E, R symbol=->

When G=God. All this means is that 'there are exactly 3 gods'

So this is the kind of stuff you do. if you like maths and how it all seems to 'go together' then you will probably like logic.

Oh, and the text says some rubbish right at the begining which says there is a high fail rate in logic traditionally. don't worry about that, he is just trying to scare you.

 

[Cyan_phoeniX]

even after spacing out the example, it still appears cluttered. For easier view, see the example as 4 columns.

the numbers in brackets, the line number, the formual and the operation.

sorry about that, i tried :/