Fun with Deductive Reasoning

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Necessary & Sufficient Conditions Law, Science, Life & Logic.
Advertisements

Hypotheticals: The If/Then Form Hypothetical arguments are usually more obvious than categorical ones. A hypothetical argument has an “if/then” pattern.
Rules of Inferences Section 1.5. Definitions Argument: is a sequence of propositions (premises) that end with a proposition called conclusion. Valid Argument:
An overview Lecture prepared for MODULE-13 (Western Logic) BY- MINAKSHI PRAMANICK Guest Lecturer, Dept. Of Philosophy.
Syllogisms Formal Reasoning.
Euler’s circles Some A are not B. All B are C. Some A are not C. Algorithm = a method of solution guaranteed to give the right answer.
Use a truth table to determine the validity or invalidity of this argument. First, translate into standard form “Martin is not buying a new car, since.
Deductive Validity Truth preserving: The conclusion logically follows from the premises. It is logically impossible for the premises to be true and the.
Deduction: the categorical syllogism - 1 Logic: evaluating deductive arguments - the syllogism 4 A 5th pattern of deductive argument –the categorical syllogism.
Valid Arguments An argument is a sequence of propositions. All but the final proposition are called premises. The last statement is the conclusion. The.
Rules for Valid Syllogisms
Review: Logic. Fallacy: Appeal to Novelty New is better.
2 Basic Types of Reasoning Deductive Deductive Inductive Inductive.
Philosophy 1100 Today: Hand Back “Nail that Claim” Exercise! & Discuss
Logos Formal Logic.
Formal fallacies and fallacies of language
Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions and Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.
Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.
Reasoning
Critical Thinking: A User’s Manual
Patterns of Deductive Thinking
Categorical Syllogisms

Logical Arguments. Strength 1.A useless argument is one in which the truth of the premisses has no effect at all on the truth of the conclusion. 2.A weak.
Deductive versus Inductive Reasoning Consider the following two passages: Argument #1 Mr. Jones is a member of the Academy of Scholarly Fellows and only.
Critical Thinking Lecture 10 The Syllogism By David Kelsey.
Discrete Mathematics CS 2610 August 24, Agenda Last class Introduction to predicates and quantifiers This class Nested quantifiers Proofs.
1 Sections 1.5 & 3.1 Methods of Proof / Proof Strategy.
The Science of Good Reasons
Venn Diagrams and Categorical Syllogisms
Deductive Arguments.
Night 2 Presented by Eric Douma
Logic A: Capital punishment is immoral. B: No it isn’t! A: Yes it is! B: Well, what do you know about it? A: I know more about it then you do! B: Oh yeah?
Definition: “reasoning from known premises, or premises presumed to be true, to a certain conclusion.” In contrast, most everyday arguments involve inductive.
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.
Chapter 15: Rules for Judging Validity. Distribution (p. 152) Several of the rules use the notion of distribution. A term is distributed if it refers.
Deductive Reasoning Rules for Valid Syllogisms. Rules for a valid categorical syllogism 1.A valid syllogism must possess three, and only three, unambiguous.
Chapter 3: MAKING SENSE OF ARGUMENTS
1 DISJUNCTIVE AND HYPOTHETICAL SYLLOGISMS DISJUNCTIVE PROPOSITIONS: E.G EITHER WHALES ARE MAMMALS OR THEY ARE VERY LARGE FISH. DISJUNCTS: WHALES ARE MAMMALS.(P)
Logic – Basic Terms Logic: the study of how to reason well. Validity: Valid thinking is thinking in conformity with the rules. If the premises are true.
CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISMS
The construction of a formal argument
Chapter 13: Categorical Propositions. Categorical Syllogisms (p. 141) Review of deductive arguments –Form –Valid/Invalid –Soundness Categorical syllogisms.
Apologetics: Other Syllogisms Presented by Eric Douma.
6.6 Argument Forms and Fallacies
Chapter 17: Missing Premises and Conclusions. Enthymemes (p. 168) An enthymeme is an argument with an unstated premise or conclusion. There are systematic.
DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS The aim of this tutorial is to help you learn to recognize, analyze, and evaluate deductive arguments.
Syllogisms and Three Types of Hypothetical Syllogisms
Arguments Arguments: premises provide grounds for the truth of the conclusion Two different ways a conclusion may be supported by premises. Deductive Arguments.
Critical Thinking: A User’s Manual
Symbolic Logic ⊃ ≡ · v ~ ∴. What is a logical argument? Logic is the science of reasoning, proof, thinking, or inference. Logic allows us to analyze a.
Critical Thinking Lecture 10 The Syllogism By David Kelsey.
Logic: The Language of Philosophy. What is Logic? Logic is the study of argumentation o In Philosophy, there are no right or wrong opinions, but there.
Deductive Reasoning. Inductive: premise offers support and evidenceInductive: premise offers support and evidence Deductive: premises offers proof that.
L = # of lines n = # of different simple propositions L = 2 n EXAMPLE: consider the statement, (A ⋅ B) ⊃ C A, B, C are three simple statements 2 3 L =
PHIL102 SUM2014, M-F12:00-1:00, SAV 264 Instructor: Benjamin Hole
Rules for Valid Syllogisms
Deductive reasoning.
Chapter 3 Basic Logical Concepts (Please read book.)
a valid argument with true premises.
Deductive Arguments.
Deductive Logic, Categorical Syllogism
5 Categorical Syllogisms
Chapter 3: Reality Assumptions
Rules for Valid Syllogisms
Rules and fallacies Formal fallacies.
5 Categorical Syllogisms
Logical Forms.
Critical Thinking Lecture 10 The Syllogism
ID1050– Quantitative & Qualitative Reasoning
Presentation transcript:

Fun with Deductive Reasoning Syllogisms Fun with Deductive Reasoning

What is a syllogism? A syllogism is a deductive argument comprising three categorical propositions: a major premise, a minor premise and the conclusion. Categorical propositions have four standard forms: A = All S are P E = No S are P I = Some S are P O = Some S are not P

In the mood The mood of a syllogism is defined by which of the forms appear and where. So, for example: All M are P Some S are M Therefore, All S are P has the mood: AIA.

Syllogism overview A categorical syllogism contains only three categorical terms: a major term, minor term and middle term. The major term appears as the predicate in the conclusion, and only once in the major premise (i.e., the first premise). The minor term appears as the subject in the conclusion, and only once in the minor premise (i.e,. the second premise). The middle term appears once in the major premise, once in the minor premise, and once in the conclusion.

Distribution of terms A term is said to be distributed when all members of the class denoted by the term are affected by a proposition. All S are P S is distributed; P is not distributed Example “All cows are mammals” tells us something about cows but nothing about mammals Proposition says something about S but does not state anything about P

Syllogism Examples Correct Syllogism: Major Premise: All mammals are warm-blooded animals. Minor Premise: No lizards are warm-blooded animals. Conclusion: Therefore, no lizards are mammals. Major Premise: All humans are mortal. Minor Premise: All Greeks are human. Conclusion: Therefore, all Greeks are mortal. Descartes’ Syllogism (correct) Major Premise: Existence has to be true if one is thinking. Minor Premise: I am thinking. Conclusion: I think, therefore, I am.

Syllogisms can be Valid or Invalid (reasoning in incorrect order) AND True or False (reasoning from a faulty major premise) If a syllogism is both true and valid then it is said to be sound

Examples of Faulty Syllogisms FALSE Syllogism (not TRUE -- false major premise) Major Premise: Blondes have more fun Minor Premise: Mary is blonde; Jane is brunette Conclusion: Mary has more fun than Jane. INVALID Syllogism (not VALID – order of reasoning is incorrect): Major Premise: All dogs eat meat Minor Premise: Bob (a human) eats meat Conclusion: Bob is a dog.

Corrections Syllogism One: Syllogism Two: The first faulty syllogism proceeds from a FALSE major premise and therefore can be thrown out entirely. Syllogism Two: Major Premise: All dogs eat meat Minor Premise: Rover is a dog. Conclusion: Therefore, Rover eats meat.

Valid or invalid? True or False? Example One: Major Premise: When it snows the streets get wet. Minor Premise: The streets are getting wet. Conclusion: Therefore, it is snowing. Example Two: Major Premise: If you buy a Ferrari, you will instantly be popular. Minor Premise: Ed just bought a Ferrari. Conclusion: Ed will achieve instant popularity. Example Three: Major Premise: When the battery is dead, the car will not start. Minor Premise: The car will not start. Conclusion: Therefore, the battery is dead.

Corrections: Valid and True Example One: Major Premise: When it snows, the streets get wet. Minor Premise: It is snowing. Conclusion: Therefore, the streets are getting wet. Example Two: Example Two proceeds from the beginning from a FALSE major premise (Ferraris give instant popularity) and therefore can be thrown out entirely. Example Three: Major Premise: When the battery is dead, the car will not start. Minor Premise: The battery is dead. Conclusion: Therefore, the car will not start.

Types of valid syllogisms Modus Ponens (Affirming the antecedent) Modus Tollens (Denying the consequent) Hypothetical Syllogism (Chain argument) Disjunctive Syllogism

Modus Ponens If A then B A Therefore, B Examples: If it’s spring, then the birds are chirping It’s spring. The birds are chirping. If a world government doesn’t evolve soon, then wars will continue to occur A world government isn’t going to evolve soon. Wars will continue to occur

Modus Tollens If A then B Not B Not A Example: If it’s spring then the birds are chirping The birds aren’t chirping Therefore, it isn’t spring.

Hypothetical Syllogism If A then B If B then C If A then C Example: If we successfully develop nuclear fusion power, then power will become plentiful and cheap. If power becomes cheap and plentiful, then the economy will flourish. If we successfully develop nuclear fusion power, then the economy will flourish.

Disjunctive Syllogism A or B Not A B Example: Either Romney won in 2012 or Obama did. Romney didn’t win. Obama did win.

Valid or invalid? Download Socrative app or go to Socrative.com Room 769815

Syllogism no-no’s Syllogisms need to follow 6 rules in order to be valid. If they violate one of these rules then that syllogism commits a formal fallacy and is invalid

Rule 1 There needs to be three categorical terms and those terms cannot vary in how they are used A fallacy of equivocation occurs when a term is used in a different way within the course of an argument. So, for example: The priest told me I should have faith. I have faith that my son will do well in school this year. Therefore, the priest should be happy with me. “faith” is being used in two different ways in this argument

Rule 2 The middle term of a valid syllogism is distributed in at least one of the premises. The fallacy of the undistributed middle occurs when this doesn't happen. For instance, the middle term (furry animals) in this syllogism All dogs are furry animals Some cats are furry animals Therefore,some dogs are cats   isn't distributed, and the argument is clearly fallacious

Rule 3 If a term is distributed in the conclusion it must be distributed in at least one of the premises All Protestants are Christians No Catholics are Protestants Therefore, no Catholics are Christians   doesn't work, because the term "Christians" is distributed in the conclusion, but not in the (major) premise.

Rule 3 The fallacy of illicit major occurs (as above) when the major term is distributed in the conclusion, but not in the (major) premise.   The fallacy of illicit minor occurs when the minor term is distributed in the conclusion, but not in the (minor) premise

Rule 4 A valid syllogism can't have two negative premises The fallacy of exclusive premises occurs when a syllogism has two premises that are negative. A negative premise is either an "E" statement ("No S are P") or an "O" statement ("Some S are not P"), and if you've got two of them in your premises, your syllogism isn't valid.

Rule 5 The conclusion of a syllogism must be negative, if either premise is negative The fallacy of drawing an affirmative conclusion from a negative premise occurs if this rule is violated. Similarly, if a conclusion is negative, then one of the premises must be negative (which rule, if broken, constitutes the fallacy of drawing a negative conclusion from an affirmative premise).

Rule 6 No particular conclusion can be drawn from two universal premises This is arguably the most counterintuitive of the rules for validity. An existential fallacy occurs whenever a particular conclusion appears with two universal premises (for example, All M are P, All S are M, Therefore, some S are P).