Practice Quiz 3 Hurley 4.3 - 4.7.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Reason and Argument Chapter 7 (1/2).

Advertisements

Test the validity of this argument: Some lawyers are judges. Some judges are politicians. Therefore, some lawyers are politicians. A. Valid B. Invalid.

Test the validity of this argument: Some lawyers are judges. Some judges are politicians. Therefore, some lawyers are politicians. A. Valid B. Invalid.

An overview Lecture prepared for MODULE-13 (Western Logic) BY- MINAKSHI PRAMANICK Guest Lecturer, Dept. Of Philosophy.

Deductive Arguments: Categorical Logic

Categorical Logic Categorical statements

Today’s Topics Introduction to Predicate Logic Venn Diagrams Categorical Syllogisms Venn Diagram tests for validity Rule tests for validity.

Critical Thinking Lecture 9 The Square of Opposition By David Kelsey.

Philosophy 103 Linguistics 103 Yet, still, Even further More and yet more, etc., ad infinitum, Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking Dr. Robert Barnard.

Categorical Propositions

Categorical Syllogisms Always have two premises Consist entirely of categorical claims May be presented with unstated premise or conclusion May be stated.

Syllogistic Logic 1. C Categorical Propositions 2. V Venn Diagram 3. The Square of Opposition: Tradition / Modern 4. C Conversion, Obversion, Contraposition.

Immediate Inference Three Categorical Operations

Chapter 9 Categorical Logic w07

SEVENTH EDITION and EXPANDED SEVENTH EDITION

Logic In Part 2 Modules 1 through 5, our topic is symbolic logic. We will be studying the basic elements and forms that provide the structural foundations.

Philosophy 103 Linguistics 103 Yet, still, Even further More and yet more Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking Dr. Robert Barnard.

An argument consists of a conclusion (the claim that the speaker or writer is arguing for) and premises (the claims that he or she offers in support of.

Categorical Propositions To help us make sense of our experience, we humans constantly group things into classes or categories. These classifications are.

CATEGORICAL PROPOSITIONS, CHP. 8 DEDUCTIVE LOGIC VS INDUCTIVE LOGIC ONE CENTRAL PURPOSE: UNDERSTANDING CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISMS AS THE BUILDING BLOCKS OF.

Philosophy 148 Chapter 7. AffirmativeNegative UniversalA: All S are PE: No S is P ParticularI: Some S is PO: Some S is not P.

Venn Diagrams and Categorical Syllogisms

Philosophy 103 Linguistics 103 Yet, still, Even further More and yet more, ad infinitum, Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking Dr. Robert Barnard.

AIM: WHAT IS AN INDIRECT PROOF?

Chapter 18: Conversion, Obversion, and Squares of Opposition

Strict Logical Entailments of Categorical Propositions

4 Categorical Propositions

MLS 570 Critical Thinking Reading Notes for Fogelin: Categorical Syllogisms We will go over diagramming Arguments in class. Fall Term 2006 North Central.

CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISMS

Critical Thinking Lecture 9 The Square of Opposition

Midterm Practice Famous Fallacies, TFTD, Hurley

Practice Quiz 3 Hurley 4.3 – 4.6.

Copyright © 2014, 2010, 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Section 3.4, Slide 1 3 Logic The Study of What’s True or False or Somewhere in Between 3.

Critical Thinking: A User’s Manual

The Traditional Square of Opposition

Midterm Practice Famous Fallacies, TFTD, Hurley

Introduction to Categorical Logic PHIL 121: Methods of Reasoning February 18, 2013 Instructor:Karin Howe Binghamton University.

Categorical Propositions Chapter 5. Deductive Argument A deductive argument is one whose premises are claimed to provide conclusive grounds for the truth.

2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary

PHIL 151 Week 8.

Categorical Propositions, con't

Testing for Validity with Venn Diagrams

5 Categorical Syllogisms

Venn Diagrams 1= s that are not p; 2= s that are p; 3= p that are not s S P.

Today’s Topics Introduction to Predicate Logic Venn Diagrams

5.1 Standard Form, Mood, and Figure

Famous Fallacies, TFTD, Hurley

5 Categorical Syllogisms

Logic In Part 2 Modules 1 through 5, our topic is symbolic logic.

Rules and fallacies Formal fallacies.

Famous Fallacies, TFTD, Hurley

4.1 The Components of Categorical Propositions

Categorical Propositions

Philosophy 1100 Class #8 Title: Critical Reasoning

Critical Thinking Lecture 9 The Square of Opposition

3.5 Symbolic Arguments.

Philosophy 1100 Title: Critical Reasoning Instructor: Paul Dickey

4 Categorical Propositions

Categorical propositions

4 Categorical Propositions

“Only,” Categorical Relationships, logical operators

5 Categorical Syllogisms

Symbolic Logic 2/25/2019 rd.

Chapter 6 Categorical Syllogisms

X X X X Logical relations among categorical propositions S P S P S P

12cm Area 64cm2 Area 100cm2 ? ? Area ?cm2 12cm Area 36cm2

12cm Area 64cm2 Area 100cm2 ? ? Area ?cm2 12cm Area 36cm2

3.5 Symbolic Arguments.

4 Categorical Propositions

Practice Quiz 3 Hurley 4.3 – 4.6.

Presentation transcript:

Practice Quiz 3 Hurley 4.3 - 4.7

For the quiz … I will provide you with a categorical proposition, like… No apples sold in Minnesota are mushy weapons I’ll ask you for its quality qualifier quantity quantifier copula distribution letter name terms

1 Consider: No non-A are B (T) Obversion Some non-A are B. (F) All A are non-B. (Und.) All non-A are non-B. (T) Some non-A are not B. (T) No B are non-A. (T)

2 Consider: All A are non-B. (F) Contraposition All A are non-B. (F) All non-B are A. (Und.) No non-A are B. (Und.) All B are non-A. (F) Some non-A are not B. (T)

3 Consider: Some A are not non-B. (T)  Some A are B. Contraposition (T) Contrary (F) Conversion (T) Obversion (T) Subcontrary (Und.)

4 Consider: Some non-A are B. (F)  Some B are non-A. Subcontrary (T) Conversion (Und.) Contraposition (Und.) Conversion (F) Contraposition (F)

5 Assume Aristotle (Traditional standpoint). Consider: Some A are non-B. (F)  Some A are not non-B. (F) Illicit, contrary Illicit, subalternation Subcontrary Illicit, subcontrary Contraposition

6 No S are P. (Aristotelian standpoint) After filling in the diagram … Area 2 is shaded, and there is a circled X in area 1. Areas 1 and 3 are shaded. Area 1 is shaded, and there is a circled X in area 2. There is an X in area 2. Area 1 is shaded, and there are no other marks.

7 All S are P. (Boolean standpoint) After filling in the diagram … Areas 1 and 3 are shaded. Area 2 is shaded, and there are no other marks. Area 1 is shaded, and there is a circled X in area 2. There is an X in area 2. Area 1 is shaded, and there are no other marks.

8 Shade area 2 and place an X in area 1. Which of the following would be valid inferences: shaded area 2. an X in area 3. an X in area 1. shaded 1. no X’s or shadings.

9 Shade area 1 and place an X in area 2. Which of the following would be valid inferences: shaded area 2. an X in area 3. shaded area 1, and X in area 2. shaded 1. no X’s or shadings.

10 Assume Aristotle (Traditional standpoint). Consider: No non-A are B. (T)  Some non-A are not B. (F) Illicit, subalternation Illicit, contradictory Contradictory Illicit, subcontrary Conversion

11 Assume Bool (Modern standpoint). Consider: No A are B. (T)  Some A are B. (F) Existential fallacy Illicit, contradictory Contradictory Illicit, subcontrary Conversion

12 Assume Bool (Modern standpoint). Consider: No A are B. (T)  All A are B. (F) Existential fallacy Illicit, contrary Contradictory Illicit, subcontrary Conversion

13 Assume Aristotle (Traditional standpoint) All square circles are happy shapes.  Some square circles are happy shapes. Existential fallacy Valid, contradictory Valid, subcontrary Invalid, subalternation Invalid, contrary