enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Hypothetical syllogism - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_syllogism

    An invalid hypothetical syllogism either affirms the consequent (fallacy of the converse) or denies the antecedent (fallacy of the inverse). A pure hypothetical syllogism is a syllogism in which both premises and the conclusion are all conditional statements. The antecedent of one premise must match the consequent of the other for the ...

  3. Negative conclusion from affirmative premises - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_conclusion_from...

    The inability of affirmative premises to reach a negative conclusion is usually cited as one of the basic rules of constructing a valid categorical syllogism. Statements in syllogisms can be identified as the following forms: a: All A is B. (affirmative) e: No A is B. (negative) i: Some A is B. (affirmative) o: Some A is not B. (negative)

  4. Term logic - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_logic

    Depending on the position of the middle term, Aristotle divides the syllogism into three kinds: syllogism in the first, second, and third figure. [14] If the Middle Term is subject of one premise and predicate of the other, the premises are in the First Figure. If the Middle Term is predicate of both premises, the premises are in the Second Figure.

  5. List of valid argument forms - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_valid_argument_forms

    In syllogistic logic, there are 256 possible ways to construct categorical syllogisms using the A, E, I, and O statement forms in the square of opposition. Of the 256, only 24 are valid forms. Of the 24 valid forms, 15 are unconditionally valid, and 9 are conditionally valid.

  6. Fallacy of exclusive premises - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_exclusive_premises

    The fallacy of exclusive premises is a syllogistic fallacy committed in a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative. [1] Example of an EOO-4 type invalid syllogism. E Proposition: No cats are dogs. O Proposition: Some dogs are not pets. O Proposition: Therefore, some pets are not cats. Explanation of Example 1:

  7. File:Syllogism diagrams.pdf - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Syllogism_diagrams.pdf

    Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Donate

  8. Baroco - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baroco

    Diagram of a Baroco syllogism. In Aristotelian logic, baroco is a mnemonic word used to memorize a syllogism. Specifically, it has the first proposition universal and affirmative, but the second and third particular and negative, and the middle term the attribute in the two first. For example, Every virtue is attended with discretion.

  9. List of rules of inference - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rules_of_inference

    Rules of inference are syntactical transform rules which one can use to infer a conclusion from a premise to create an argument. A set of rules can be used to infer any valid conclusion if it is complete, while never inferring an invalid conclusion, if it is sound.