Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Standard view
Full view
of .
×
0 of .
Results for:
P. 1
Logic

# Logic

Ratings: 0|Views: 55|Likes:

### Availability:

See More
See less

04/17/2013

pdf

text

original

Hypothetical Syllogism
–
one whose major premise is a hypotheticalproposition while its minor premise and conclusion are categorical propositionKinds of Hypothetical syllogismConditional syllogism
–
one whose major premise is a conditional proposition consisting of an antecedent and consequent,while the minor premise affirms or denies either the antecedent or the consequent of the major premise, and the conclusionmerely expresses whatever follows from its affirmation or denial.Rules:1. Posit the antecedent, posit the consequent.2. Negate the consequent, negate the antecedent.3. Posit the consequent, no conclusion.4. Negate the antecedent, no conclusion.Posit the antecedent, posit the consequent = Modus Ponens.The truth of the consequent follows from the truth of the antecedent.Example:(antecedent) (consequent)If someone wins in the million-peso lotto draw, he becomes a millionaire;But Nikki wins in the million-peso lotto draw;Therefore, Nikki becomes a millionaire.Negate the antecedent, negate the consequent = Modus TollensThe falsity of the antecedent follows from the falsity of the consequent.If someone wins in the million-peso lotto draw, he becomes a millionaire;But Nikki does not become a millionaire;Therefore, Nikki does not win in the million-peso lotto draw.Posit the consequent, no conclusion.(antecedent) (consequent)If someone wins in the million-peso lotto draw, he becomes a millionaire;But Nikki becomes a millionaire;Therefore, Nikki wins in the million-peso lotto draw.= Fallacy of Affirming the consequentNegate the antecedent, no conclusionIf someone wins in the million-peso lotto draw, he becomes a millionaire;But Nikki did not win in the million-peso lotto draw;Therefore, Nikki did not become a millionaire.=Fallacy of Rejecting the Antecedent

If you will come, then I will join.Modus Ponens:Modus Tollens:Fallacy of Affirming the consequent:Fallacy of Rejecting the antecedent:If someone gives you flowers, then he loves you.Modus Ponens:Modus Tollens:Fallacy of Affirming the consequent:Fallacy of Rejecting the antecedent:If someone gives you flowers, then he loves you.Modus Ponens:Modus Tollens:Fallacy of Affirming the consequent:Fallacy of Rejecting the antecedent:Disjunctive Syllogism: one whose major premise is a disjunctive proposition consistingof alternatives (disjuncts), while the minor premise affirms or denies any of the disjuncts,and the conclusion merely expresses whatever follows from its affirmation or denial.Posit one alternative, negate the other (ponendo-tollens)The accused is either guilty or not guilty;But he is guilty; (affirmed)Therefore, he is not not guilty. (rejected)The accused is either guilty or not guilty;But he is not guilty; (affirmed)Therefore, he is not guilty. (rejected)Negate one alternative, posit the other (tollendo-ponens)The military operation is either successful or unsuccessful;But it is not successful; (rejected)Therefore, it is unsuccessful. (accepted)The military operation is either successful or unsuccessful;But it is not unsuccessful; (rejected)Therefore, it is successful. (accepted)Conjunctive Syllogism
–
one whose major premise is a conjunctive propositionconsisting of alternatives (conjuncts), while the minor premise affirms or denies any of the conjuncts, and the conclusion merely expresses whatever follows from its affirmationor denial.Posit one alternative, negate the other

The passenger cannot be in the tricycle and in the bus at the same time;But, he is in the tricycle; (affirmed)Therefore he is not in the bus. (rejected)Negate one alternative, no conclusion.The passenger cannot be in the tricycle and in the bus at the same time;But, he is not in the tricycle; (rejected)Therefore he is in the bus. (affirmed)FALLACY
–
is an erroneous reasoning or an incorrect argument-
it came from the Latin word fallere which means “to deceive”
SOPHISM/SOPHISTRY
–
fallacy committed intentionally to deceive or mislead anaudiencePARALOGISM
–
fallacy employed unknowingly or through the ignorance of rulesTWO TYPES OF FALLACY a. formal fallacy
–
involves error in the form, arrangement, technical structure of anargumentb. informal fallacy
–
committed when irrelevant psychological factors are allowed todistort the reasoning processINFORMAL FALLACY FALLACY OF LANGUAGE/AMBIGUITY Equivocation
–
when a word carrying different meanings is used in the same context in a particular argument. This is alsoknown as the Fallacy of Four Terms.Example:Erap, Cory and FVR were captured by the Abu Sayyaf. They were brought to an islandand were informed that they were going to be executed one by one. Cory was the firstin line, and she thought of a way to distract the rebels. She shou
ted. “Earthquake!” The
rebels panicked. Cory took this chance to escape. The rebels, seeing that Cory had fled,
decided that FVR be executed next. FVR did the same thing Cory did, and shouted, “Tidal

Wave!” The rebels scampered, and FVR took the
opportunity to escape. Realizing that he
was the only one left, Erap thought of doing the same; and he shouted: “Fire!”. After
three seconds, Erap dropped dead.2. Amphiboly
–

when the awkward construction of one’s sentence allows a double
meaning caused by inexactness of expressionExample:
Question: What’s the difference between ignorance and apathy?

Reply: I don’t know and I don’t care.

## Activity (0)

### Showing

AllMost RecentReviewsAll NotesLikes