The notes in this file are written and compiled by COMRADE OLA' to help everyone in

preparation towards the upcoming PHL 104 test. When we are done with the classes this
semester, the file will be updated. Thanks

08/04/24

PHL 104

INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY II: CRITICAL THINKING, ARGUMENT & EVIDENCE.

Prof. Famakinwa

OUTLINE:

GENERAL INTRODUCTION
THEORIES OF MEANING & THE USE OF LANGUAGE
DISAGREEMENTS
ARGUMENTS
FALLACIES

THEORIES OF MEANING:

This problem arises from Philosophy of Language. Philosophy of Language is the root of
Philosophy, as a matter of fact, Philosophy of Language is the root of analytic Philosophy.

Group 1:
Heaven helps those who help themselves.
God exists.
Spirit is spiritual.

Group 2:
Stealing is wrong.
Lying is bad
Group 3:
There is a table in the room
The car has a blue color
There is a car in the garage

Group 4:
Pegasus
Angels
Spirits

Group 5:
5 + 5 = 10
2+2=4
3+3=7

Group 6:
Good
Bad
Wrong
Right

Group 7:
Pencil
Fire
Elephant
Cat
Cup.

There is a philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein, who wrote a book called 'Tractatus,

Logico-Philosophicos'. In this book, Wittgenstein emphasizes the importance or centrality of
language to Philosophy. According to him, the problems of Philosophy will disappear once the
language of philosophers are properly examined. In his view, the problems of Philosophy are
not about substantive issues in it but about the language. According to him, all philosophy is a
critique of language. Hence, Philosophy can then be defined as logical and conceptual analysis
i.e what we need to do is to check the logic of our language.

With a view to knowing the meaning of words and expressions in group 1 to 7 above,
philosophers of language formulate different theories. Among the theories are:

1: THE PICTURE THEORY OF MEANING

2: THE REFERENTIAL THEORY OF MEANING
3: THE USED THEORY OF MEANING
4: THE EMOTIVE THEORY OF MEANING
5: THE PRESCRIPTIVE THEORY OF MEANING.
The picture theory of meaning: formulated by Wittgenstein in his work. According to this
theory, a word or proposition is meaningful if it says something about the reality or if it pictures
reality. For a word to have meaning, it must say something about the physical world. Any word
or expression or proposition that does not fulfill this proposition is meaningless. In order to
explain this point, Wittgenstein present three kinds of propositions which are: (i) propositions
with sense; (ii) senseless propositions; (iii) nonsensical propositions.

(i) A proposition with sense is type of proposition that fulfill the condition mentioned in the
picture theory of meaning. They are verifiable through sense experience. For instance:
-Water boils at 100° C
-There is a table in the room

(ii) Senseless propositions are propositions that are meaningful in view of their capacity to
measure reality accurately. Propositions such as 2+2= 4, 3 + 3 = 6 are senseless propositions
because numbers are not part of the structures of the universe. The knowledge of 2,3 is derived
not through the senses, although it's senseless, it's not nonsensical.

(iii) Nonsensical propositions are propositions that do not picture reality and at the same time
not useful in measuring reality. They are not verifiable in experience.

Olayinka U. Okunola,
COMRADE OLA’

15/04/24

Examples of nonsensical propositions include: heaven helps those who help themselves, spirit
is spiritual, God does not exist.

Interestingly, Wittgenstein later reject his own Picture theory of meaning in his book,
"Philosophical Investigation ". He therefore proposed another theory of meaning which is the
USED THEORY OF MEANING.

Wittgenstein is of the view that the picture theory of meaning is problematic on the following
grounds:
- It's possible for a word to be meaningful even if doesn't picture reality
- it's argued that the picture theory of meaning is too narrow because meaningfulness or
meaninglessness could be achieved without any reference to reality.
- it's also argued that the relationship between a word and the word refers to is arbitrary .
USED THEORY OF MEANING: The used theory of meaning says that the meaning of a word or
a proposition is defined by the way it's used in a particular linguistic community. According to
Wittgenstein, language is like a game and every game has it own rules. Any participant in any
game is expected to follow the rules of the game because without such rules, there is no game.

Similarly, every language has its own rules and without such rules, set by the native speakers,
there won't be communication. Therefore, the meaning of a word or statement is defined by the
way it's used in a particular linguistic community or environment.

Both the picture theory of meaning and the used theory of meaning influenced some scholars in
the philosophy of language. Such scholars are referred to as 'logical positivists".

Hence, the LOGICAL POSITIVIST SCHOOL came under the influence of Wittgenstein's picture
theory of meaning and the used theory of meaning. The primary aim of logical positivist school
are:

- to develop theories of meaning that will promote science and eliminate metaphysical, ethical
and religious claims through the logical analysis of language.

- to protect science and its methodology. The logical positivist school is of the view that the
method of science is the best for understanding the universe.

- to develop the power of logic (the standard of correct reasoning ) that will permit the definition
of abstraction and to describe the structures of permissible inferences.

WHY THEY EMPHASIZE THE POWER OF LOGIC IN THE ANALYSIS OF LANGUAGE.

- Because the language of logic is universal. Logic speaks the same language everywhere in
the word.

- the language of logic is with precision. Denial of any statement in logic leads to self
contradiction.

In view of these, the logic positivist school under the influence of Wittgenstein formulated their
own criterion of meaning known as verification principle.

The verification principle is a denial of any form of meaningfulness to any statement that's not
verifiable through the senses. The verification principle says that a sentence or a
statement/proposition is meaningful if and only if the proposition expresses what is either
analytic or empirically verifiable.

THE REFERENTIAL THEORY OF MEANING

It says that the meaning of a word or expression lies in what it points out in the physical world.
According to this theory, a word is defined by what it refers to in the world. In summary, a word
or expression is meaningful if it refers to a particular object in the physical world. Any word that's
not part of the structure of the universe is not meaningful. A word is only meaningful if it
references something within the universe.

Olayinka Okunola
Comrade Ola'

17/04/24

DEFINITIONS:

What is definition?

Definition is a form of explanation of words or expressions. A definition has two parts [1]
definiendum and, [2] definiens.
Definiendum refers to a word or particular expression being defined. Simply put, definiendum
refers to the concept defined, while definiens refers to what defines a word or expression being
defined. Furthermore, a definition clarifies the meaning of a word or expression.

A definition states sense in which a word is used in a (linguistic) environment. For instance,
consider the examples below:
- a triangle is a three-sided figure. While triangle is the definiendum, a three sided figure is the
definiens.
- A father is a male parent. While father is the definiendum, a male parent is the definiens.
- Water is two molecules of hydrogen and a molecule of oxygen. While water is the definiendum,
two molecules of hydrogen and a molecule of oxygen is the definiens.
What kinds of definition do we have? There are different kinds of definition, and among such
are:
- stipulative definition: this is a definition that announces a decision to use a word or an
expression in a particular way in a piece of work. The structure of this definition is as follows: in
this essay, by X I shall mean so, so, so, so; or, in this book, by OA I shall mean objective
assessment; or, in this article, by Christmus I shall mean someone who is neither a Christian not
a Muslim; or, in this work, by the word spinster, I shall mean a man with three legs.
- reportive definition: this is a definition that tells how words or expressions are actually used. It
is descriptive, that is, it tells how a word is actually used in a linguistic environment. There are
three types of this definition, which are: [1] lexical definition, which is a definition that reports or
describes the ordinary meaning of a word as it is used in a particular linguistic environment,
e.g., water is a colorless, odorless and tasteless liquid [2] technical definition, which is a
definition that refers to the definition of a word or expression in a special sense as stated by
professionals in a particular discipline or field of study, e.g., scientifically, water is H²O; and [3]
historical definition, which refers to the meaning of a word or expression in the past, that is, how
it is defined in the past. For instance, bourgeoisie means a gentleman in the past, but now a
man or woman with a lot of economic power or wealth that enables him/her to own and control
the means of production, and by means of such, controls the labour power of others.
- enumerative definition: to define like enumeration, is to provide a complete list of all the items
named or referred to by the definiendum. The list must be complete without remainder, and
must include all items covered by the word and exclude items not covered. For instance, it is
possible to define states in Nigeria enumeratively by mentioning all the states in Nigeria.
- synonyms: this occurs when the definiendum is defined by a word that is equivalent in
meaning. E.g., defective - faulty.
- exemplary definition(definition by examples): to define by (mentioning) examples is to define a
word by a paradigm case it suggests with the use of a typical example of what is being defined.
There are, at least, two types of definition by examples [1] ostensive definition, which is to
define by pointing at a concrete object the word refers to or by displaying the object the word
refers to and then make a verbal pronouncement [2] definition by examples, in this, what is
needed to be done is to state some examples of the definiendum, not to state or mention the
complete list of the definiendum.
- what are bad definitions?

Note: one in logic means some, and this shows that logic is not the same thing with common
sense.

Olayinka Okunola
Comrade Ola'

22/04/24

BAD DEFINITIONS/HOW DEFINITIONS GO BAD

Examples of bad definitions

CIRCULAR DEFINITION

A bad definition could be circular. A definition is circular if the definiendum appears in the
definien. A circular definition explains a word or concept but using the same word in its
explanation. For instance:
- A chairman is a man who chairmans a meeting.
- A father is a man who fathers at least a child.
- A good man is a man that is good to everyone.

NARROW/BROAD DEFINITION

A definition should not be too narrow or too broad. A definition is too narrow if it excludes too
much and too broad if it includes too much.

Narrow
- Talent is the ability to compose a beautiful song.
Broad
- A chair is a piece of furniture.

METAPHORICAL DEFINITION

A good definition should not be metaphorical. For instance:

- A lion is the king of jungle.

- Rice is the beauty of the stomach.

IRRELEVANT POINTS

a good definition should avoid mentioning irrelevant points. For instance:

- A human being is a rational animal who weighs 30kg

- A splinter is an unmarried.

Olayinka OKUNOLA
Comrade Ola'

24/04/04

DISAGREEMENTS

DR OYELAKIN

In the use of language to express oneself, disagreement occurs.

When can we say that disagreement occurs?

We've found out that to define disagreement by its polar concept, agreement will end us in
begging the question. We beg the question when we employ a yet to be defined concept to
define another concept. In that case, employing agreement to define disagreement is to rest a
question about the definition of agreement, hence, a question is begged. ( The fallacy of petitio
principii )

Two people disagree when it's not the case that both of them can be right at the same time on a
particular issue. It means that when one speaker is right, the other must be wrong. They may
both be wrong but they can not both be right. This is because when both of them are right, there
is no disagreement.

Examples:

- Jingo says I claim 2 + 2 = 4

- Bongo says I already know you are always wrong, 2 + 2 = 7.

- Jingo says that object is circular.

- Bongo says no, that object is round.

- Comrade Ola' says I attended an exam today, it's PHL 101, the exam was very difficult.
- Bongo says every student passes the exam.

- Jingo was an effective commander.

- Comrade Ola' says he was often incompetent.

- Comrade Ola' says "Things Fall Apart" was written by Chinua Achebe
- Loveth says no, it's written by Comrade Ola'.

- Comrade Ola' says 2 + 2 = 6

- Esther says 2 + 2 = 8

- Esther says Lagos is in Ghana

- Comrade Ola' says Lagos is in Nigeria

For there to be a disagreement, there must be a level of agreement. This level of agreement is
called common ground.

Olayinka OKUNOLA
Comrade Ola'
25/04/24

Examples

- Comrade Ola' : 2+2=6

- Bongo : 2+2=8

- Jingo: Lagos is in Sierra Leone

- Comrade Ola': Lagos is in Morocco

In example 1, There's is a disagreement between Bongo and Comrade Ola' because it is

impossible for 2+2 to be both 6 and 8 at the same time. It follows that if 2+2=6, it can not be
equal to 8 at the same time.

Therefore, there is a disagreement on what 2+2 is between Comrade Ola' and bongo even
though in the example under consideration, it appears that both of them can be wrong.

In example 2, the case follows the same way.

Disagreement can only occur on a common ground.

TYPES OF DISAGREEMENT

- Verbal Disagreement
- Factual Disagreement
- Evaluative Disagreement
- Interpretive Disagreement.

- Comrade Ola' : Water is H2°

- Jingo: I understand you failed Biology, water is actually H1°

- Comrade Ola': Obafemi Awolowo University was established in 1962 at Ile Ife.
- Bongo: Obafemi Awolowo University was established in 1967 at Iragbiji, Osun state.

FACTUAL DISAGREEMENT: This Disagreement raises the questions that have to do with
facts. And the examples above are of factual empirical issue. Any Disagreement that's of factual
evidences like place, time, history, scientific experiment fall under factual disagreement. Every
factual disagreement can be resolved by fact.

Examples:
- Jingo: "Things Fall Apart " was written by Wole Soyinka
- Comrade Ola': "Things Fall Apart " was written by Chinua Achebe

- Comrade Ola': Lagos is the capital of Imo state

- Bongo: You are wrong, the actual capital of Imo State is Enugu.

- Comrade Ola': There is life in Jupiter

- Jingo: Comrade Ola', why are you always wrong? There is no life in Jupiter.

- Comrade Ola': Nigeria gained independence in 1992.

- Jingo: You are always wrong, Nigeria actually gained independence in 2000.

Olayinka OKUNOLA
Comrade Ola'

DISAGREEMENT

VERBAL DISAGREEMENT

- Comrade Ola' says the government is fight the war against corruption in Nigeria.
- Bongo says no, the government is not fighting a war against corrupt citizens.

It appears that the disagreement between Comrade Ola' and Bingo us about matters of fact i.e
is there or is there no war? A close look will reveal it is not. Bongo may challenge Comrade
Ola' that which troop was matched out to operate against corrupt people, the gun they are
carrying and so on. Comrade Ola' replied that there are no troops but there is a war against
corruption. At this point , we can see that the disagreement is about the word "war". Comrade
Ola' uses the word war as a moral or legal crusade and as far as Comrade Ola' is concerned,
the government is fighting a war in prosecuting corrupt people even though no military
operations are involved. But for Bongo, there is a war only when military operations are
involved.

A verbal disagreement is over a particular term which each arguer/party uses in a different
sense, hence, the disagreement.

- Comrade Ola': General Olayinka lied about his education. He had been impeached several
times, newspapers, Femi Falana, politicians have all impeached him.
- Jingo: You are ignorant and wrong, General Olayinka has never been impeached, no motion
has ever been passed in the national assembly to remove him from office.
The above is a verbal disagreement. The word in dispute is "impeach". Jingo uses the word
"impeach" in a technical sense with a technical meaning, to impeach is to pass a motion in the
house of assembly to remove an officer. Comrade Ola' however uses the word "impeach" to
mean criticism. It's true that many Nigerians have criticized General Olayinka, in that sense,
Jingo is right that if impeachment is used in a technical sense, then, General Olayinka has not
been impeached. But if it's true that many Nigerians have criticized General Olayinka's attitude,
then in that sense, Comrade Ola' is also right. This means that, when we want to argue we
have to request our opponent to define their terms.

- Jingo: PHL 104 is a difficult course, I study it 10 hours a day.

- Comrade Ola': I disagree with you completely, PHL 104 is not a difficult course, I study it 15
hours a day and many students pass it.

- Jingo: Comrade Ola' is a materialist, he loves luxury and wealth.

- Bingo: Comrade Ola', though loves luxury and wealth, he is not a materialist, he believes in
the existence of Almighty Allāh.

Olayinka OKUNOLA
Comrade Ola'

02/05/24

EVALUATIVE DISAGREEMENT: Evaluative Disagreement has three variants which are:

- Evaluative Aesthetic Disagreement.

- Evaluative Ethical Disagreement.
- Evaluative Pragmatic Disagreement.

- Evaluative Ethical Disagreement.

People might disagree about fact but agree about value.

Examples:

- Comrade Ola': I was in Ilorin yesterday, many Amotekun guys were arrested, they quarreled
with other people, they took law into their own hands, so, their arrest was good and just.
- Bongo: Yes, I was also in Ilorin yesterday, I saw the arrest of the Amotekun guys, it's also true
that they quarreled with others, however, I don't think their arrest was just because they were
not the only ones fighting.

- Comrade Ola': Drug abuse is harmful to health, it causes all manners of sicknesses. Besides,
drug abuse drains the abuser's pocket, I therefore conclude that drug abuse ought to be
eradicated from society.
- Jingo: Yes, some experiments have shown that drug abuse is against health and that abusers
spend a lot of money which they could have spent on food to buy drugs. But I don't agree with
you that drug abuse ought to be abolished, every Individual should be left free to decide
whether he or she wants to die and how he or she wants to die.

- Comrade Ola': Capital punishment should be abolished. It's the most barbaric form of
punishment that ever exist.
- Jingo: No, you are wrong, capital punishment is one of the ways civilized people deal with
serious crimes.

Evaluative Ethical Disagreement is a disagreement about whether an action, a person, an

institution is good or bad, right or wrong, responsible or irresponsible, just or unjust, fair or
unfair, ought to or ought not, should or shouldn't amongst others. It's about the moral nature of a
person, action and Institution.

- Evaluative Aesthetic Disagreement

- Comrade Ola': Terminator 3 is the most interesting movie that I have ever watched. It depict
the advancement in Science and Technology and computers can do what humans can do and
even better
- Bingo: I disagree with you, it's not an interesting movie at all, bedsides, it portrays the human
race as weak and subservient to what they created.

An Evaluative Aesthetic Disagreement applies to poems, movies, plays, music, paintings,

animals, people, plants amongst others. It's a disagreement about whether these things are
beautiful or ugly, interesting or dull, pleasant or unpleasant, desirable or undesirable,
harmonious or otherwise. The disagreement depends on our standards, our standard of beauty,
interest, dullness, goodness.

Olayinka OKUNOLA,
Comrade Ola'
06/05/24

EVALUATIVE PRAGMATIC DISAGREEMENT

An evaluative pragmatic disagreement is a dispute about whether a particular measure, a policy,

an institution is desirable or adequate. It may be a question of efficiency or that of being
effective. For instance, we sometimes disagree about whether INEC is doing his work
successfully or not or whether the instruments we use are adequate for the purpose or not or
whether or not education policy.

These are pointers to evaluative pragmatic disagreement.

Examples:

- Comrade Ola' : the best way to stop corruption in Nigeria is to kill everyone in the country.
- Bongo: I disagree with you, the best way to stop corruption is to provide a good life for every
Nigerian citizen.

In the example above, what is it that suggests that the Disagreement is an evaluative pragmatic
disagreement? THE BEST WAY which is talking about the adequate measure in which
corruption could be stopped. When you are given a particular question, read and read it again
so that you can do simple interpretations.

The disagreement is about the best method to stop corruption. This talks about the adequate
method to stop corruption.

- Jingo : INEC carries out it duty in a very unsatisfactory manner.

- Comrade Ola' : I can see your problem, your candidate did not win the last general election.
INEC is the best thing that ever happened to Nigeria, because it works,
INEC does it works satisfactorily.

- Jingo : The most successful ministry is the ministry of Women Affairs. This is because many
jobless and poor women have been assisted. Broken homes have been helped and peace has
been restored to many homes.
- Bongo : The most successful ministry in Nigeria is the ministry of foreign affairs. This is
because the ministry has been seen to project a good image of Nigeria in the community
nations, this has an all-round advantage for Nigeria. In addition to that, the ministry has help to
connect many Nigerians in the diaspora and thereafter, boosting the economy of Nigeria at
home.

The dispute evaluates performances by claiming that one is more successful than the other.
It is used to pay attention to the key term which is THE MOST SUCCESSFUL . The most
successful is the term that indicates the disputes between the speakers.

- Comrade Ola' : The most qualified candidate for this job must not only be a graduate but he or
she must also be a chartered accountant.
- Bongo : To be qualified for that job, there is no need for a degree certificate neither does the
applicant need to be a chartered accountant, this is because the job is just for a technician

MOST QUALIFY is what we should pay attention to in the above disagreement.

INTERPRETATIVE DISAGREEMENT

Olayinka U. Okunola,
Comrade Ola'

08/0424

INTERPRETATIVE DISAGREEMENT

In a verbal disagreement, you will have a word that each party is trying to use in an argument.

Interpretative disagreement is a disagreement about the meaning or significance of an event,

a work, the behavior of a person, real or fictional. Interpretative disagreement is about how
those things should be understood. It is to be found in Law, geology, history, literature, drama
and so on.

For instance,

• It may be asked what is the meaning of the law of libel?

• Should we understand the law literally or understand it according to the intention of the
lawmakers?
• What for instance is the significance of the civil war in Nigeria?
• What does the government's policy of price hike in petroleum products indicate?
Disagreement that arises in answering any of these questions is classified as
interpretative disagreement.

EXAMPLES:
COMRADE OLA': Federal government granted amnesty to the Niger-Delta militant boys; this
was done in order to maintain peace and unity in the country.
BONGO : You are always wrong. Government granted amnesty in order to allow for an
uninterrupted access to the crude oil in the area.

JINGO : civil war was fought between 1967 and 1970 in Nigeria. It was fought to actualise the
creation of the Biafra nation.
COMRADE OLA' : Civil war of 1967 and 1970 in Nigeria was not actually for the creation of the
Biafra nation but to establish the Ojukwu presidential dynasty.

COMRADE OLA' : During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Nigerian government distributed
palliative measures to the public to cushion the effect of the pandemic. This shows that the
government is very sensitive to the plight of Nigerians especially during the pandemic period.
BONGO : COVID-19 palliative was not to cushion the effect of the pandemic but to distract
Nigerians from observing and noticing how huge amounts of money were diverted to private
accounts.

JINGO: a key female minister was just removed from her position in Nigeria because of financial
misappropriation. This means that the government is sincerely serious about fighting corruption.
BONGO : It is true that she was removed for financial misappropriation but are you aware that
shortly before the saga, she broke up her intimate relationship with one of the key people in the
presidential cabinet?

COMRADE OLA : Government has licensed Dangote refinery to commence petrol refinery. This
is to show that the government indeed, wants to make Nigeria a better place for the masses.
ADEYEMI : I used to think you are current and intelligent. Dangote was licensed to refine but do
you know that key people in this government are shareholders in the Dangote refinery project.
How best would they recoup profit from their investments?

Comrade Ola’

13/05/24

HOW CAN WE RESOLVE INTERPRETATIVE DISAGREEMENTS?

To resolve am interpretative disagreement there some criteria to be followed and they are:

• possibility. (Is it possible)

• test of coherence (is that interpretation coherent? Does it cohere with the circumstances?)
• Fairness ( is the interpretation fair? Some interpretations are fallacious) you have to be fair in
terms of interpretation.
• test of unification (how unify is that interpretation? Is it an interpretation that captures the whole
situation?)
• whether it is interesting or not.

CASES OF MULTIPLE DISAGREEMENT

Comrade Ola’: General Ola withdrew his troops from the battle field, he did that to strategize
and attack the enemy. His action is commendable.
Bongo: No, General Ola withdrew his troops to show the weakness in the army and the
inadequacy of ammunition, his action is shameful

Jingo: The poem Stanley means motteser was written by David Rubad, it is an interesting
poem which shows the complexity and richness of Africa.

Captain Peace: Stanley means motteser was written by Tonley Ojaido the Dullest and scariest
poem ever which only displays the dangers and inferiority of Africa to the white people

- It is possible to disagree over fact value and interpretation.

- There may be agreement over facts and value but there maybe disagreement over
interpretation.

COMRADE OLA: The embattled ex Kogi state governor has finally agreed to be prosecuted in
court. This implies that EFCC is efficient and that there is no sacred cows in Nigeria.

MUHAMMAD: Well let us assume that it is true. It only implies that EFCC is a toothless dog and
it shows that power play in government.

Olayinka Okunola
COMRADE OLA

Comrade Ola' cares always!