//
you're reading...
Logic & Scientific Philosophy

Logic Argument #1 – Ramona

In 2001, Gurbaj Singh Multani’s ceremonial dagger, a kirpan, fell out of its cloth holder in the school yard. The school in Montreal banned Gurbaj from bringing his kirpan to school because it was considered a weapon. Gurbaj argued that it was not a weapon but a religious symbol, since he is an orthodox Sikh he is required to wear it all times.

1: It can be a potential threat to others around him

2: Weapons are not to be brought into public places

/ potential threats are better off remaining out of public places

 After tons and tons of court cases the Supreme Court of Canada ruled unanimously that the ban of kirpans was a violation against his religious freedom. Canada is after all a very multicultural country, which is why we all feel the acceptance in practicing our own religions even when not in our native countries. I definitely agree that it is great and fair that we are allowed to do so but this seems to be a little bit problematic. The logic behind the premise is that it could be either an innocent display of identity or it could be a potential threat, depending on who views what. The premises are valid to the conclusion but the conclusion can not be the only statement. The conclusion depends on if the facts are actually true and it may or may not be, depending on different peoples’ opinions.

.

Advertisements

Discussion

No comments yet.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: