Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A variety of basic concepts is used in the study and analysis of logical reasoning. Logical reasoning happens by inferring a conclusion from a set of premises. [3] Premises and conclusions are normally seen as propositions. A proposition is a statement that makes a claim about what is the case.
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 ...
Logic is traditionally defined as the study of the laws of thought or correct reasoning, [5] and is usually understood in terms of inferences or arguments. Reasoning is the activity of drawing inferences. Arguments are the outward expression of inferences. [6] An argument is a set of premises together with a conclusion.
For the most part this discussion of logic deals only with deductive logic. Abductive reasoning is a form of inference which goes from an observation to a theory which accounts for the observation, ideally seeking to find the simplest and most likely explanation. In abductive reasoning, unlike in deductive reasoning, the premises do not ...
A subfield of linear logic focusing on the study of affine transformations and their implications in logical reasoning. affirmative proposition A proposition that asserts the truth of a statement, as opposed to negating it. [7] [8] [9] affirming the consequent A logical fallacy in which a conditional statement is incorrectly used to infer its ...
Argumentation theory is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be supported or undermined by premises through logical reasoning. With historical origins in logic , dialectic , and rhetoric , argumentation theory includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue , conversation , and persuasion .
Reductio ad absurdum, painting by John Pettie exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1884. In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity"), also known as argumentum ad absurdum (Latin for "argument to absurdity") or apagogical arguments, is the form of argument that attempts to establish a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to absurdity or contradiction.
A statement can be called valid, i.e. logical truth, in some systems of logic like in Modal logic if the statement is true in all interpretations. In Aristotelian logic statements are not valid per se. Validity refers to entire arguments. The same is true in propositional logic (statements can be true or false but not called valid or invalid).