enow.com Web Search

Search results

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

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

    A syllogism (Ancient Greek: συλλογισμός, syllogismos, 'conclusion, inference') is a kind of logical argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion based on two propositions that are asserted or assumed to be true.

  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. Hypothetical syllogism - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_syllogism

    A mixed hypothetical syllogism has two premises: one conditional statement and one statement that either affirms or denies the antecedent or consequent of that conditional statement. For example, If P, then Q. P. ∴ Q. In this example, the first premise is a conditional statement in which "P" is the antecedent and "Q" is the consequent.

  5. Disjunctive syllogism - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disjunctive_syllogism

    The name "disjunctive syllogism" derives from its being a syllogism, a three-step argument, and the use of a logical disjunction (any "or" statement.) For example, "P or Q" is a disjunction, where P and Q are called the statement's disjuncts. The rule makes it possible to eliminate a disjunction from a logical proof. It is the rule that

  6. Glossary of logic - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_logic

    A logical fallacy in syllogistic logic where a syllogism includes four (rather than the requisite three) distinct terms, making the argument invalid. false dichotomy An informal fallacy that presents two options as the only possibilities when in fact more possibilities exist.

  7. Fallacy of four terms - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_four_terms

    Sometimes a syllogism that is apparently fallacious because it is stated with more than three terms can be translated into an equivalent, valid three term syllogism. [2] For example: Major premise: No humans are immortal. Minor premise: All Greeks are people. Conclusion: All Greeks are mortal.

  8. Stoic logic - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoic_logic

    For example the assertibles in the premises can be more complex, and the following syllogism is a valid example of the second indemonstrable (modus tollens): [31] if both p and q, then r; not r; therefore not: both p and q. Similarly one can incorporate negation into these arguments. [31]

  9. List of rules of inference - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rules_of_inference

    Each logic operator can be used in an assertion about variables and operations, showing a basic rule of inference. Examples: The column-14 operator (OR), shows Addition rule : when p =T (the hypothesis selects the first two lines of the table), we see (at column-14) that p ∨ q =T.