Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Philosopher of language Peter Strawson (1919–2006) advocated the use of the term "statement" in sense (2) in preference to proposition.Strawson used the term "statement" to make the point that two declarative sentences can make the same statement if they say the same thing in different ways.
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).
Logical constants determine whether a statement is a logical truth when they are combined with a language that limits its meaning. Therefore, until it is determined how to make a distinction between all logical constants regardless of their language, it is impossible to know the complete truth of a statement or argument. [2]
Logical reasoning is norm-governed in the sense that it aims to formulate correct arguments that any rational person would find convincing. The main discipline studying logical reasoning is logic . Distinct types of logical reasoning differ from each other concerning the norms they employ and the certainty of the conclusion they arrive at.
A condition X is necessary for Y if X is required for even the possibility of Y. X does not bring about Y by itself, but if there is no X, there will be no Y. For example, oxygen is necessary for fire. But one cannot assume that everywhere there is oxygen, there is fire. A condition X is sufficient for Y if X, by itself, is enough to bring about Y.
Repetition makes statements easier to process relative to new, unrepeated statements, leading people to believe that the repeated conclusion is more truthful. The illusory truth effect has also been linked to hindsight bias , in which the recollection of confidence is skewed after the truth has been received.
If one realizes that one is being asked to concede the original point, one should refuse to do so, even if the point being asked is a reputable belief. On the other hand, if one fails to realize that one has conceded the point at issue and the questioner uses the concession to produce the apparent refutation, then one should turn the tables on ...
It does not make sense. (da: 7.9%; sv: 28.0%) Paraphrase (d) is in fact the only possible interpretation of (1); this is possible due to the lexical ambiguity of har "have" between an auxiliary verb and a lexical verb just as the English have ; however the majority of participants (da: 78.9%; sv: 56%) gave a paraphrase which does not follow ...