enow.com Web Search

Search results

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

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

    Each premise and the conclusion can be of type A, E, I or O, and the syllogism can be any of the four figures. A syllogism can be described briefly by giving the letters for the premises and conclusion followed by the number for the figure. For example, the syllogism BARBARA below is AAA-1, or "A-A-A in the first figure".

  3. List of valid argument forms - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_valid_argument_forms

    In Disjunctive Syllogism, the first premise establishes two options. The second takes one away, so the conclusion states that the remaining one must be true. [3] It is shown below in logical form. Either A or B Not A Therefore B. When A and B are replaced with real life examples it looks like below.

  4. Fallacy of four terms - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_four_terms

    But it can be rewritten as a standard form AAA-1 syllogism by first substituting the synonymous term "humans" for "people" and then by reducing the complementary term "immortal" in the first premise using the immediate inference known as obversion (that is, the statement "No humans are immortal." is equivalent to the statement "All humans are ...

  5. Negative conclusion from affirmative premises - Wikipedia

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

    Example (invalid aae form): Premise: All colonels are officers. Premise: All officers are soldiers. Conclusion: Therefore, no colonels are soldiers. The aao-4 form is perhaps more subtle as it follows many of the rules governing valid syllogisms, except it reaches a negative conclusion from affirmative premises. Invalid aao-4 form: All A is B.

  6. List of fallacies - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

    Syllogistic fallacies – logical fallacies that occur in syllogisms. Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise (illicit negative) – a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion, but at least one negative premise. [11] Fallacy of exclusive premises – a categorical syllogism that is invalid because both of its premises are negative ...

  7. Glossary of logic - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_logic

    A standard form of categorical syllogism in Aristotelian logic, where all three propositions (major premise, minor premise, and conclusion) are universal affirmatives, symbolized as AAA. The form is: All M are P, All S are M, therefore All S are P. [28] [29] [30] Barcan formula

  8. Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_conclusion...

    Affirmative conclusion from a negative premise (illicit negative) is a formal fallacy that is committed when a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion and one or two negative premises. For example: No fish are dogs, and no dogs can fly, therefore all fish can fly.

  9. The False Subtlety of the Four Syllogistic Figures - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_False_Subtlety_of_the...

    An example of a syllogism of the third figure is: All mammals are air-breathers, All mammals are animals, Therefore, some animals are air-breathers. This validly follows only if an immediate inference is silently interpolated. The added inference is a conversion that uses the word "some" instead of "all." All mammals are air-breathers,