Syllogisms Basic Argumentation.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Reason and Argument Chapter 1. Claims A claim takes the form of a proposition. A proposition has a similar relation to a sentence as a number does to.

Advertisements

Structuring and Analyzing Arguments: The Classical and Toulmin, Models Junior AP English September 23, 2008.

Venn Diagram Technique for testing syllogisms

Rules of Inferences Section 1.5. Definitions Argument: is a sequence of propositions (premises) that end with a proposition called conclusion. Valid Argument:

1 Valid and Invalid arguments. 2 Definition of Argument Sequence of statements: Statement 1; Statement 2; Therefore, Statement 3. Statements 1 and 2 are.

LogicandEvidence Scientific argument. Logic Reasoning –Deductive –Inductive.

Inductive and Deductive Reasoning Geometry 1.0 – Students demonstrate understanding by identifying and giving examples of inductive and deductive reasoning.

Adapted from Discrete Math

Propositional Logic.

MATERI II PROPOSISI. 2 Tautology and Contradiction Definition A tautology is a statement form that is always true. A statement whose form is a tautology.

Who Defined the Study of Philosophy and Logic? ________,___________,__________ These three philosophers form the basis of what is known as__________________.

Deductive Reasoning Chapter 2 Lesson 4.

Persuasive Appeals Logos AP LANGUAGE AND COMPOSITION.

 ESSENTIAL QUESTION  How can you use reasoning to solve problems?  Scholars will  Use the Law of Syllogism  Use the Law of Detachment UNIT 01 – LESSON.

Question of the Day!  We shared a lot of examples of illogical arguments!  But how do you make a LOGICAL argument? What does your argument need? What.

DEDUCTIVE REASONING MOVES FROM A GENERALIZATION THAT IS TRUE OR SELF-EVIDENT TO A MORE SPECIFIC CONCLUSION DEDUCTIVE REASONING.

Mike McGuire MV Community College COM 101 A Closer Look at Logos Syllogism, Enthymeme, and Logical Fallacies ENGL102 Ordover Fall 2008.

2.2.1 Analyze Conditional Statements and Proof Chapter 2: Reasoning and Proof.

Do Now. Law of Syllogism ◦ We can draw a conclusion when we are given two true conditional statements. ◦ The conclusion of one statement is the hypothesis.

Chapter 17: Missing Premises and Conclusions. Enthymemes (p. 168) An enthymeme is an argument with an unstated premise or conclusion. There are systematic.

Section 2.3: Deductive Reasoning

Chapter 14: Categorical Syllogisms. Elements of a Categorical Syllogism (pp ) Categorical syllogisms are deductive arguments. Categorical syllogisms.

Elements of Argument Logic vs. Rhetoric. Syllogism Major Premise: Advertising of things harmful to our health should be legally banned. Minor Premise:

Do Now Look at each pattern or conjecture and determine whether each conjecture is valid. 1.2, 6, 14, 30, 62, 126 Conjecture: Each element is two more.

Indirect Argument: Contradiction and Contraposition

Venn Diagram Technique for testing syllogisms

Deductive reasoning.

2-4 Deductive Reasoning Objective:

Deductive Reasoning, Postulates, and Proofs

2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary

Propositional Logic.

a valid argument with true premises.

Deductive Logic, Categorical Syllogism

Demonstrating the validity of an argument using syllogisms.

Syllogism – logical reasoning from inarguable premises; the conclusion is unarguable if the syllogism is structured correctly. Example: Because Socrates.

Deductive Reasoning Geometry 2-3.

5 Categorical Syllogisms

Argumentation and Persuasion

} { Using facts, definitions, accepted properties and the

Principles of Computing – UFCFA3-30-1

Syllogism, Enthymeme, and Logical Fallacies

Sec. 2.3: Apply Deductive Reasoning

3 Logic The Study of What’s True or False or Somewhere in Between.

2.4 Deductive Reasoning.

2-1 Conditional Statements

Logical Inferences: A set of premises accompanied by a suggested conclusion regardless of whether or not the conclusion is a logical consequence of the.

New Rhetoric Journal PDN: read the sentence below and identify what techniques the authors used to support their claim. Come up with as many techniques.

Drill: Tuesday, 10/18 2. Determine if the conditional “If x is a number then |x| > 0” is true. If false, give a counterexample. OBJ: SWBAT analyze.

…or, “Stop your lippy attitude.”

Propositional Logic.

Conditional Original IF-THEN statement.

Arguments have Logic.

Toulmin Model AP Lang. & Comp. Ch. 3

Definitions: Evidence-Based Claims- 1.) the ability to take detailed

Riding the bus.

What are the descriptive assumptions?

6.4 Truth Tables for Arguments

Key Terms: Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning

To solve problems by looking for a pattern

2-4 Deductive Reasoning Deductive Reasoning: Using facts, rules, definitions, or properties to reach logical conclusions. Law of Detachment: A form.

Syllogisms and Enthymemes.

Key Terms: Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning

TODAY’S OBJECTIVE: Standard: MM1G2

7.NS.1 Positive and Negative Numbers

2-4 Deductive Reasoning Vocab:

Propositional Logic 1) Introduction Copyright 2008, Scott Gray.

How to Argue About Stuff Logically & Make People Think You’re Right

Recall that if the antecedent (LHS) of a conditional statement is true, then it will be true if and only if its consequent (RHS) is also true. Therefore,

Presentation transcript:

Syllogisms Basic Argumentation

Definition A syllogism is two statements or propositions, one major and one minor, that combine to produce a conclusion.

Example #1 Major Proposition: Every automobile has a seat for its driver. Minor Proposition: Baby strollers have no seats for drivers. Conclusion: Baby strollers are not automobiles

Major and Minor If both the major and minor propositions are true, and if they lead logically to the conclusion, then the syllogism is both VALID and TRUE. But the word “valid” pertains only to the logic; it has nothing to do with whether the propositions are true. Some valid syllogisms may not be true.

Example #2 Major Proposition: All textbooks are yellow. Minor Proposition: I own several textbooks. Conclusion: All of my textbooks are yellow.

Positive vs. Negative Syllogisms can be trusted to be valid only when both propositions are positive Negative syllogisms usually do not work because they do not contain common elements on which to build a conclusion—even if both propositions are true. They merely state elements that are not present.

Example #3 Major Proposition: No banks hand out free money. Minor Proposition: Most students do not hand out free money. Conclusion: Most students are banks.

Assumptions Sometimes it is necessary to add a fourth or even a fifth statement if there are unstated assumptions in the logic of the syllogism.

Example #4 Major Proposition: Minor Proposition: Conclusion: I will starve if I do not receive support. Minor Proposition: My parents will not support me. Conclusion: I will starve. Unstated Assumption: My parents are the only possible source of support.