1 ASSIGNMENT FOUR/PHILOSOPHY 416-84 (LOGIC) ONLINE

BECOMES AVAILABLE TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2020

ASSIGNMENT FOUR DUE VIA CANVAS NO LATER THAN 11:59 P.M. SEPTEMBER 18, 2020
Dr. A. W. Crump, Associate Professor

“Traditional Square of Opposition” and “Validity of Inferences” (Chapter 3)

A Terms and Concepts Relevant to Traditional Square of Opposition (Pages 166-168)

[05 Points)

A. Define Square of Opposition is a diagram that illustrates logically necessary relations

among four kinds of categorical propositions
B. Define Contrary relation expresses only partial oppositions
C. Define Subcontrary relation expresses a kind of partial oppositions
D. Define Subalternation relation represented by two arrows: a downward arrow marked
with the letter T(true), an upward arrow marked with F (false)
E. Define Contradictory relation is the same as that found in the modern square

B. Truth Value of Categorical Propositions, Textbook, Exercise 3.5, Section I,

Statements a, b, and c in Exercises 2 through 6 and 8, Pages 171-172. Exercises 1
and 7 have been completed as examples. [15 Points]

Directions for this Assignment: Use the Traditional Square of Opposition readings
(166-168) and the chart “Truth Values of Categorical Propositions” (in the
Assignment Section) to assist you in finding the correct answers to determine the
Truth Value of these exercises.

*1 is completed as an example:
Categorical Proposition: All fashion fads are products of commercial brainwashing.
Category of Proposition: A
This proposition is given as True. Using the Chart “Truth Values of Categorical
Propositions via Traditional Square of Oppositions” (located in Assignment section), we
find that:
Since a. is an E statement, the truth value is False.
Since b. is an I statement, the truth value is True.
c. is an O statement, so the truth value is False.

2. Categorical Proposition: All fashion fads are products of commercial brainwashing.

Category of proposition: A
This proposition is given false. answer choice C is true “Some fashion fads are not
products of commercial brainwashing.” Since O statement is the contradiction of A
statement, this makes truth value of O statement is opposite of A statement which is false.
Making O statement true.

3. No string operations are cases of entrapment

COP: E
Proposition is given true
A: A statement, truth value is false
B: I statement, truth value is true
C:O statement, truth value is false

4. No strings operations are case of entrapment

COP: I
Proposition is given false
A: A statement, truth value is false
B: I statement truth value is true
C: O statement truth value is true

5. Some assassinations are morally justifiable actions

COP: I
Proposition is given true
A: A statement truth value is true
B: E statement truth value is false
C: O statement truth value is false

6. Some assassinations are morally justified actions

COP: I
Proposition is given false
A: A statement truth value is fasle
B: E statement truth value is true
C: O statement truth value is true

*7 is completed as an example:
Categorical Proposition: Some obsessive compulsive behaviors are not curable diseases.
Category of this Proposition: O. Value of this proposition is True.
Since a. is an A statement, the truth value of this categorical proposition is False.
Since b. is an E statement, the truth value is Undetermined.
Since c. is an I statement, the truth value of this categorial proposition is Undetermined.

8.Some obsessive-compulsive behaviors are not curable

COP: O
Proposition is given false
A: A statement truth value is true
B: E statement truth value is undetermined
C: I statement truth value is true
C. Determine Validity of Inferences from Traditional Square of Opposition
Statements, Exercise 3.3, Section II, Page 155-156. [40 Points]

Use the “Traditional Square of Opposition” standpoint (explained on 167-168)

to determine whether the following immediate Inferences/Arguments (2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9,
11, 12, 14, and 15) are valid or invalid.

The inferences with an asterisk from textbook (155-156) are given as examples:
*1. Premise: No sculptures are by Robin are boring creatures.
Conclusion: Therefore, all lunar sculptures by Robin are boing creatures.

Premise Category : E Conclusion Category: A

Square of Opposition Relation (Relation between E and A):: Contrary
Validity of argument: Invalid. Reason: If the category of the premise and the
category of the conclusion are not the same, the argument/inference is Invalid.

2. Premise: It is false that some lunar craters are volcanic formations.

Conclusion: Therefore, no lunar craters are volcanic formations.
PC: I
CC: E
SoOR: Relation between I and E: contradictory E and E is equal
VoA: Valid False I
Reason: Category of the premise and the category of the conclusion are the same which
makes the argument valid

3.Premise: All trial lawyers are people with stressful jobs.

Conclusion: Therefore, some trial lawyers are people with stressful jobs.
PC: A
CC: I
SOOR: Relation between A and I: Subalternation
Reason: Category of the premise and category of the conclusion is not the same, the
argument is invalid

*4. Premise: All dry martinis are dangerous concoctions.

Conclusion: Therefore, it’s false that some dry martinis are not dangerous.

Premise Category: A
Conclusion Category: A Reason: The category of the conclusion is O. BUT, the
statement is false. To make the statement true, we must use the
contradictory of the conclusion. The contradictory of the conclusion (an O
statement) is an A inference, “All dry martinis are dangerous concoctions”.
Square of Opposition Relation (Relationship between A and A is Equal).
Validity of Inference: Valid Reason: Category for Premise and Conclusion are
the same.
 5. Premise: It is false that no jazz musicians are natives of New Orleans.
Conclusion: Therefore, some jazz musicians are not natives of New Orleans.
PC: E
CC: O
VOA: Invalid
SOOR: Relation between E and O is not the same: Sub-alternative

6. Premise: Some country doctors are altruistic healers.

Conclusion: Therefore, some country doctors are not altruistic healers
PC: I
CC: O
VOA: Invalid
SOOR: Relation between I and O is false: subcontrary
I is valid and O is valid the argument can be valid

*7 Premise: No fertility drugs are solutions to every problem.

Conclusion: Thus, it is false that all fertility drugs are solutions to problems.

Premise Category: E Conclusion Category: O

[Note: Conclusion is an A statement, but it is false. The contradictory of A is O
So, Square of Opposition Relation (Relation between E to O) is Subalternative.
Validity of Inference: Invalid (Premise and Conclusion Categories not same).

8. Premise: It is false that no credit cards are things that contain holograms.
Conclusions: Therefore, it is false that all fertility drugs are solutions to every problem.
PC: E
CC: I
VOA: Valid
SOOR: The same relation holds between E and I Contradictory

9. Premise: It is false that some pilots are not colorful daredevils.

Conclusion: Therefore, it is false that some stunt pilots are colorful daredevils.
PC: O
CC: I
SOOR: O and I relation is subcontrary
VOA: Invalid Reason: The category of premise and category of the conclusion are not
the same which makes the argument invalid

*10. Premise: No vampires are avid connoisseurs of garlic bread.

Conclusion: Thus, it’s false that some vampires are avid connoisseurs garlic brd

Premise Category: E Conclusion Category: False I; (Contadictory) True is E

Square of Opposition Relationship: Relation between E and E is Equal).
Validity of Argument/Inference: Valid
11. Premise: No talk radio shows are accurate sources of information.
Conclusion: Therefore, some talk radio shows are not accurate sources of information.
PC: E CC: O
SOOR: Relation between E and O: sub-alternation are invalid but E and O have no relations

12. Premise: Some stellar constellations are spiral-shaped objects

Conclusions: Therefore, no stellar constellations are spiral-shaped objects.
PC: I CC: E
SOOR: Sub-alternation: the relation of I and E is invalid the premises of category and
Conclusion category have no relation

14. Premise: It is false that all weddings are light-hearted celebrations.

Conclusions: Therefore, some soap bubbles are occasions of glee.
PC: A CC: O
SOOR: Valid: The relations of A and O is Contradictory to make the statement true O statement
is an A interference “All weddings are light-hearted celebration” A and A are equal the category
of premise and Conclusion are the same

15. Premise: It is false that some chocolate souffles are desserts containing olives.
Conclusion: Therefore, it is false that all chocolate souffles are desserts containing olives.
PC: I CC: A
SOOR: Relation of I and A are subalternation. Invalid the argument is not the same

***Repeat: For Assignment C, complete Inferences 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, and 15.