Strict Logical Entailments of Categorical Propositions

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Conditional Statements
Advertisements

Deductive Arguments: Categorical Logic
Operations (Transformations) On Categorical Sentences
Conditional Statements Geometry Chapter 2, Section 1.
Section 2.2.  Conditional statements are logical statements with a hypothesis and conclusion.  If an animal is a bird, then it has feathers. HypothesisConclusion.
Today’s Topics Introduction to Predicate Logic Venn Diagrams Categorical Syllogisms Venn Diagram tests for validity Rule tests for validity.
EXAMPLE 2 Write four related conditional statements Write the if-then form, the converse, the inverse, and the contrapositive of the conditional statement.
Critical Thinking Lecture 9 The Square of Opposition By David Kelsey.
EDUCTION.
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
2.2 Conditional Statements Goal: Students will be able:  To recognize conditional statements and their parts.  To write converses, inverses, and contrapositives.
Philosophy 103 Linguistics 103 Yet, still, Even further More and yet more Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking Dr. Robert Barnard.
CSCI 115 Chapter 2 Logic. CSCI 115 §2.1 Propositions and Logical Operations.
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.
Categorical Propositions All S is P No S is P Some S is P Some S is not P.
Analyzing Conditional Statements A _______________________________ is a logical statement that has two parts, a hypothesis and a conclusion.
Deductive versus Inductive Reasoning Consider the following two passages: Argument #1 Mr. Jones is a member of the Academy of Scholarly Fellows and only.
The Science of Good Reasons
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
Conditional Statements Conditional Statement: “If, then” format. Converse: “Flipping the Logic” –Still “if, then” format, but we switch the hypothesis.
Philosophy 103 Linguistics 103 Yet, still, Even further More and yet more, ad infinitum, Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking Dr. Robert Barnard.
Inference Logic.
Chapter 18: Conversion, Obversion, and Squares of Opposition
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.
5-4 Inverses, Contrapositives, and Indirect Reasoning
CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISMS
Conditional Statements Geometry Chapter 2, Section 1.
2-3 Conditional Statements- Related What are the three related conditional statements? How are the three related conditional statements made?
Critical Thinking Lecture 9 The Square of Opposition
Relationships of Equivalences February Observe Relationship How two things relate to each other Mathematical A=A or ~A=~A Logically A=A, E=E,
Midterm Practice Famous Fallacies, TFTD, Hurley
Chapter 13: Categorical Propositions. Categorical Syllogisms (p. 141) Review of deductive arguments –Form –Valid/Invalid –Soundness Categorical syllogisms.
Practice Quiz 3 Hurley 4.3 – 4.6.
Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 6
Chapter 19: Living in the Real World. Introductory Remarks (p. 190) The joy and misery of ordinary English is that you can say the same thing in many.
Inverse, Contrapositive & indirect proofs Sections 6.2/6.3.
The Traditional Square of Opposition
2.1, 2.2 and 5.4: Statements and Reasoning. Conditional is an if-then statement that contains two parts. The part following the if is the Hypothesis.
Categorical Propositions Chapter 5. Deductive Argument A deductive argument is one whose premises are claimed to provide conclusive grounds for the truth.
Deductive Reasoning. Inductive: premise offers support and evidenceInductive: premise offers support and evidence Deductive: premises offers proof that.
Truth Tables, Continued 6.3 and 6.4 March 14th. 6.3 Truth tables for propositions Remember: a truth table gives the truth value of a compound proposition.
Arguments with Quantified Statements
Conditional Statements
2. The Logic of Compound Statements Summary
PHIL 151 Week 8.
Further Immediate Inferences: Categorical Equivalences
Today’s Topics Introduction to Predicate Logic Venn Diagrams
Famous Fallacies, TFTD, Hurley
Chapter 8 Logic Topics
Practice Quiz 3 Hurley
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
4 Categorical Propositions
Categorical propositions
4 Categorical Propositions
“Only,” Categorical Relationships, logical operators
X X X X Logical relations among categorical propositions S P S P S P
Evaluating Deductive Arguments
4 Categorical Propositions
Practice Quiz 3 Hurley 4.3 – 4.6.
Presentation transcript:

Strict Logical Entailments of Categorical Propositions Immediate Inferences Conversion Obversion Contraposition

Conversion Simply Switch Positions of the Terms No Cats are Dogs E SP No Dogs are Cats E PS Valid operation for E and I statements

Obversion 1. Change the Quality 2. Form the complement of the predicate term All Popes are Men No Popes are non-men women?

In stating the complement of the predicate class, choose in the way that makes the best sense for the example. No sky-divers are people who wear glasses. All sky-divers are non-people who wear glasses ? ? All sky-divers are people who do not wear glasses.

Obversion is valid for all four forms (use ~ to mean “non”) A SP E S~P E SP A S~P I SP O S~P O SP I S~P

These operations can be combined No cats are dogs No dogs are cats -conversion All dogs are non-cats - obversion

But some moves are invalid, e.g., All dogs are non-cats (true) All non-cats are dogs (false) Conversion is not valid for A or O statements; nothing follows from converting an A or an O.

Contraposition Obversion of the Converse of an Obverse Since conversion is not valid for A or O, contraposition is not valid for E or I Why is that? Because if you begin with an E, obverting makes it an A, which cannot be converted validly

Obverse: No Popes are Women Contraposition Obverse of the converse of an obverse All Popes are Men Obverse: No Popes are Women Converse: No Women are Popes Obverse: All Women are non-Popes

Contraposition State the complement of each term and 2. Switch the position of the terms All dogs are mammals All non-mammals are non-dogs

Switch position of terms Conversion Valid for E and I only Change quality; state complement of the predicate Obversion valid for all forms Contraposition Form the complement of both terms, and switch position Valid: A, O

Logical relationships between statement forms The Square of Opposition A E I O

CONTRADICTORIES: opposite in truth-value A: universal affirmative O: particular negative E: universal negative I: particular affirmative CONTRADICTORIES: opposite in truth-value

CONTRARIES: A, E A: universal affirmative E: universal negative Cannot both be true, but can both be false. No dogs are birds T All dogs are birds F No women are presidential candidates All women are presidential candidates CONTRARIES: A, E Both false.

I, O: SUBCONTRARIES I: particular affirmative O: particular negative Cannot both be false, but can both be true (“some” means “there is at least one”) Some Senators are Republicans true Some Senators are not Republicans true Some cats are Great Danes false Some cats are not Great Danes true I, O: SUBCONTRARIES

A: universal affirmative I: particular affirmative E: universal negative O: particular negative If a universal statement is true, the particular of the same quality is necessarily true as well. SUBALTERNATION

A: universal affirmative I: particular affirmative E: universal negative O: particular negative If a particular statement is false, the universal of the same quality must also be false –necessarily. SUPERALTERNATION

The Square of Oppositions A contrary E t subalternation contradiction superalternation f I subcontrary O

Logical relations of Categorical Propositions Conversion, Obversion, Contraposition (generate immediate inferences) Square of Oppositions Allowed inferences from one propositional form to another