enow.com Web Search

Search results

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

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_ponens

    Modus ponens is a mixed hypothetical syllogism and is closely related to another valid form of argument, modus tollens. Both have apparently similar but invalid forms: affirming the consequent and denying the antecedent. Constructive dilemma is the disjunctive version of modus ponens. The history of modus ponens goes back to antiquity. [4]

  3. List of valid argument forms - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_valid_argument_forms

    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 ...

  4. Hypothetical syllogism - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_syllogism

    A mixed hypothetical syllogism has four possible forms, two of which are valid, while the other two are invalid. A valid mixed hypothetical syllogism either affirms the antecedent (modus ponens) or denies the consequent (modus tollens).

  5. Disjunctive syllogism - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disjunctive_syllogism

    In classical logic, disjunctive syllogism [1] [2] (historically known as modus tollendo ponens (MTP), [3] Latin for "mode that affirms by denying") [4] is a valid argument form which is a syllogism having a disjunctive statement for one of its premises. [5] [6] An example in English: I will choose soup or I will choose salad. I will not choose ...

  6. Affirming the consequent - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

    Of the possible forms of "mixed hypothetical syllogisms," two are valid and two are invalid. Affirming the antecedent (modus ponens) and denying the consequent (modus tollens) are valid. Affirming the consequent and denying the antecedent are invalid. [7]

  7. List of rules of inference - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rules_of_inference

    The column-11 operator (IF/THEN), shows Modus ponens rule: when p→q=T and p=T only one line of the truth table (the first) satisfies these two conditions. On this line, q is also true. Therefore, whenever p → q is true and p is true, q must also be true.

  8. Modus tollens - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_tollens

    Every use of modus tollens can be converted to a use of modus ponens and one use of transposition to the premise which is a material implication. For example: If P, then Q. (premise – material implication) If not Q, then not P. (derived by transposition) Not Q. (premise) Therefore, not P. (derived by modus ponens)

  9. Rule of inference - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_inference

    This is the modus ponens rule of propositional logic. Rules of inference are often formulated as schemata employing metavariables . [ 2 ] In the rule (schema) above, the metavariables A and B can be instantiated to any element of the universe (or sometimes, by convention, a restricted subset such as propositions ) to form an infinite set of ...