Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
In syllogistic logic, there are 256 possible ways to construct categorical syllogisms using the A, E, I, and O statement forms in the square of opposition. Of the 256, only 24 are valid forms. Of the 24 valid forms, 15 are unconditionally valid, and 9 are conditionally valid.
The study of arguments using categorical statements (i.e., syllogisms) forms an important branch of deductive reasoning that began with the Ancient Greeks. The Ancient Greeks such as Aristotle identified four primary distinct types of categorical proposition and gave them standard forms (now often called A, E, I, and O).
An invalid hypothetical syllogism either affirms the consequent (fallacy of the converse) or denies the antecedent (fallacy of the inverse). A pure hypothetical syllogism is a syllogism in which both premises and the conclusion are all conditional statements. The antecedent of one premise must match the consequent of the other for the ...
A syllogism is an argument that consists of at least three sentences: at least two premises and a conclusion. Although Aristotle does not call them " categorical sentences", tradition does; he deals with them briefly in the Analytics and more extensively in On Interpretation . [ 4 ]
In traditional logic, a proposition (Latin: propositio) is a spoken assertion (oratio enunciativa), not the meaning of an assertion, as in modern philosophy of language and logic. A categorical proposition is a simple proposition containing two terms, subject (S) and predicate (P), in which the predicate is either asserted or denied of the subject.
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 ]
Illicit major is a formal fallacy committed in a categorical syllogism that is invalid because its major term is undistributed in the major premise but distributed in the conclusion. This fallacy has the following argument form: All A are B; No C are A; Therefore, no C are B; Example: All dogs are mammals; No cats are dogs; Therefore, no cats ...