Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
More modern logicians allow some variation. Each of the premises has one term in common with the conclusion: in a major premise, this is the major term (i.e., the predicate of the conclusion); in a minor premise, this is the minor term (i.e., the subject of the conclusion). For example: Major premise: All humans are mortal.
A premise or premiss [a] is a proposition—a true or false declarative statement—used in an argument to prove the truth of another proposition called the conclusion. [1] Arguments consist of a set of premises and a conclusion. An argument is meaningful for its conclusion only when all of its premises are true. If one or more premises are ...
Consider the modal account in terms of the argument given as an example above: All frogs are green. Kermit is a frog. Therefore, Kermit is green. The conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises because we can not imagine a possible world where (a) all frogs are green; (b) Kermit is a frog; and (c) Kermit is not green.
A set of premises together with a conclusion is called an argument. [23] [3] An inference is the mental process of reasoning that starts from the premises and arrives at the conclusion. [18] [24] But the terms "argument" and "inference" are often used interchangeably in logic. The purpose of arguments is to convince a person that something is ...
An argument where the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises, intended to provide conclusive proof of the conclusion. deductive consequence See syntactic consequence. [81] deductive validity 1. The property of a deductive argument where, if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. [82] 2.
Logic studies arguments, which consist of a set of premises that leads to a conclusion. An example is the argument from the premises "it's Sunday" and "if it's Sunday then I don't have to work" leading to the conclusion "I don't have to work". [1] Premises and conclusions express propositions or claims that can be true or false. An important ...
In this form, you start with the same first premise as with modus ponens. However, the second part of the premise is denied, leading to the conclusion that the first part of the premise should be denied as well. It is shown below in logical form. If A, then B Not B Therefore not A. [3] When modus tollens is used with actual content, it looks ...
For example, consider the argument that because bats can fly (premise=true), and all flying creatures are birds (premise=false), therefore bats are birds (conclusion=false). If we assume the premises are true, the conclusion follows necessarily, and it is a valid argument.