Critical Thinking Lecture 10 The Syllogism By David Kelsey.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
THE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
Advertisements

Basic Terms in Logic Michael Jhon M. Tamayao.
Venn Diagram Technique for testing syllogisms
KEY TERMS Argument: A conclusion together with the premises that support it. Premise: A reason offered as support for another claim. Conclusion: A claim.
An overview Lecture prepared for MODULE-13 (Western Logic) BY- MINAKSHI PRAMANICK Guest Lecturer, Dept. Of Philosophy.
Deductive Arguments: Categorical Logic
1 Philosophy 1100 Title:Critical Reasoning Instructor:Paul Dickey Website:
Deduction: the categorical syllogism - 1 Logic: evaluating deductive arguments - the syllogism 4 A 5th pattern of deductive argument –the categorical syllogism.
Today’s Topics Introduction to Predicate Logic Venn Diagrams Categorical Syllogisms Venn Diagram tests for validity Rule tests for validity.
Rules for Valid Syllogisms
Critical Thinking Lecture 9 The Square of Opposition By David Kelsey.
Philosophy 1100 Today: Hand Back “Nail that Claim” Exercise! & Discuss
Introduction to Ethics Lecture 9 The Challenge of Cultural Relativism By David Kelsey.
Categorical Syllogisms Always have two premises Consist entirely of categorical claims May be presented with unstated premise or conclusion May be stated.
Chapter 9 Categorical Logic w07
Chapter 16: Venn Diagrams. Venn Diagrams (pp ) Venn diagrams represent the relationships between classes of objects by way of the relationships.
Critical Thinking: A User’s Manual
Patterns of Deductive Thinking
Categorical Syllogisms

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.
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
Introduction to Ethics Lecture 9 The Challenge of Cultural Relativism By David Kelsey.
Reasoning and Critical Thinking Validity and Soundness 1.
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.
MLS 570 Critical Thinking Reading Notes for Fogelin: Categorical Syllogisms We will go over diagramming Arguments in class. Fall Term 2006 North Central.
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.
0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) All dogs have two heads. 2. All tigers are dogs. ___________________________________ 3. All tigers have two.
LOGICAL REASONING FOR CAT 2009.
CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISMS
The construction of a formal argument
Critical Thinking Lecture 9 The Square of Opposition
Chapter 13: Categorical Propositions. Categorical Syllogisms (p. 141) Review of deductive arguments –Form –Valid/Invalid –Soundness Categorical syllogisms.
Chapter 17: Missing Premises and Conclusions. Enthymemes (p. 168) An enthymeme is an argument with an unstated premise or conclusion. There are systematic.
Invitation to Critical Thinking Chapter 6
DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS The aim of this tutorial is to help you learn to recognize, analyze, and evaluate deductive arguments.
Fun with Deductive Reasoning
Syllogisms and Three Types of Hypothetical Syllogisms
SYLLOGISTIC REASONING PART 2 Properties and Rules PART 2 Properties and Rules.
Chapter 6 Evaluating Deductive Arguments 1: Categorical Logic Invitation to Critical Thinking First Canadian Edition.
Critical Thinking: A User’s Manual
Chapter 14: Categorical Syllogisms. Elements of a Categorical Syllogism (pp ) Categorical syllogisms are deductive arguments. Categorical syllogisms.
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.
Rules for Valid Syllogisms
Deductive reasoning.
a valid argument with true premises.
Deductive Logic, Categorical Syllogism
THE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
5 Categorical Syllogisms
Today’s Topics Introduction to Predicate Logic Venn Diagrams
Chapter 3: Reality Assumptions
Chapter 3 Philosophy: Questions and theories
Rules for Valid Syllogisms
Rules and fallacies Formal fallacies.
5 Categorical Syllogisms
Philosophy 1100 Class #8 Title: Critical Reasoning
Philosophy 1100 Title: Critical Reasoning Instructor: Paul Dickey
Chapter 6 Categorical Syllogisms
Reason and Argument Chapter 7 (2/2).
Critical Thinking Lecture 9 Translating a Categorical Claim into Standard Form By David Kelsey.
Critical Thinking Lecture 11 The Syllogism
Critical Thinking Lecture 10 The Syllogism
Presentation transcript:

Critical Thinking Lecture 10 The Syllogism By David Kelsey

The syllogism A syllogism: is a two premise deductive argument. –A syllogism is intended to be valid and it is either sound or unsound. Socrates is mortal: The moon orbits the Earth:

Categorical syllogisms A categorical syllogism is: –A syllogism –Each of its claims is a ____________________. –It has three terms, which occur exactly twice in exactly two of the claims.

The terms of a syllogism There are three terms in a categorical syllogism: each term occurs in two different propositions of the argument. –The major term: is the term that occurs as the __________ Call this P (for predicate.) –The minor term: is the term that occurs as the ___________ Call this S (for subject.) –The middle term: is the term that occurs in ____________ Call this M (for middle)

3 arguments: which is the Categorical Syllogism? Which is the categorical syllogism? 1. –All cats are mammals –Not all cats are domestic –Thus, not all mammals are domestic. 2. –All valid arguments are good arguments. –Some valid arguments are boring arguments. –Thus, some good arguments are boring arguments. 3. –Some people on the committee are not students. –All people on the committee are local people. –Thus, some local people are non-students.

The rules method of testing the validity of a categorical syllogism The rules method gives us three simple rules. –If a categorical syllogism breaks any of the three rules then it isn’t valid. The three rules are: –1) The number of negative claims in the premises must be the same as the number of negative claims in the conclusion. Which standard form claims are affirmative and which are negative? So can an argument have 2 negative premises? –2) At least one premise must distribute the middle term. –3) Any term that is distributed in the conclusion must be distributed in its premises.

Distributing a term The 2nd and 3rd rules of the rules method mention a claim’s distributing a term: Claims distribute terms: A categorical claim’s terms are either distributed or undistributed. –A claim distributes a term if and only if the claim says something about every member of the class the term names. –Consider an A claim: All Monkey’s are mammals Does the claim say something about every monkey? Does the claim say something about every mammal? –Now let’s do the same for an E, I and O claim:

4 rules about distribution 4 distribution rules: each rule tells us whether or not a categorical claim distributes a term. –This can be found in Moore and Parker, chapter 8. Anyone know which page? –1) An A claim distributes ____________. All _________ are ___________: –2) an E claim distributes ___________. No __________ are _________: –3) An I claim distributes ___________. Some ____________ are ______________. –4) An O claim distributes only its ___________. Some ___________ are not ___________

2 examples Drummers, keyboard players & Singers: 1. All drummers are keyboard players. 2. Some keyboard players are not singers. 3. Thus, some drummers are not singers. –This example breaks rule Bars and Pizza Places: 1. No Pizza places are bars. 2. Some bars are restaurants. 3. Thus, some pizza places are restaurants. –This example breaks rule

One final example Futsal, soccer and surfing: –1. No futsal players are surfers. –2. All futsal players are soccer players. –Thus, 3. No soccer players are surfers. This syllogism breaks which rule?