Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Another valid form of argument is known as constructive dilemma or sometimes just 'dilemma'. It does not leave the user with one statement alone at the end of the argument, instead, it gives an option of two different statements. The first premise gives an option of two different statements.
One example is the Defining Issues Test (DIT) created in 1979 by James Rest, [39] originally as a pencil-and-paper alternative to the Moral Judgement Interview. [40] Heavily influenced by the six-stage model, it made efforts to improve the validity criteria by using a quantitative test, the Likert scale, to rate moral dilemmas similar to ...
Constructive dilemma [1] [2] [3] is a valid rule of inference of propositional logic. It is the inference that, if P implies Q and R implies S and either P or R is true, then either Q or S has to be true. In sum, if two conditionals are true and at least one of their antecedents is, then at least one of their consequents must be too.
The cut-elimination theorem for a calculus says that every proof involving Cut can be transformed (generally, by a constructive method) into a proof without Cut, and hence that Cut is admissible. The Curry–Howard correspondence between proofs and programs relates modus ponens to function application : if f is a function of type P → Q and x ...
A dilemma (from Ancient Greek δίλημμα (dílēmma) 'double proposition') is a problem offering two possibilities, neither of which is unambiguously acceptable or preferable. The possibilities are termed the horns of the dilemma, a clichéd usage, but distinguishing the dilemma from other kinds of predicament as a matter of usage.
This page was last edited on 25 October 2024, at 21:11 (UTC).; Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License; additional terms may apply.
The following is an example of a false dilemma with the simple constructive form: (1) "If you tell the truth, you force your friend into a social tragedy; and therefore, are an immoral person". (2) "If you lie, you are an immoral person (since it is immoral to lie)".
Moral disengagement is a meaning from developmental psychology, educational psychology and social psychology for the process of convincing the self that ethical standards do not apply to oneself in a particular context. [1] [2] This is done by separating moral reactions from inhumane conduct and disabling the mechanism of self-condemnation. [3]