Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
Disjunctive syllogism (sometimes abbreviated DS) has one of the same characteristics as modus tollens in that it contains a premise, then in a second premise it denies a statement, leading to the conclusion. In Disjunctive Syllogism, the first premise establishes two options.
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]
Disjunctive / hypothetical syllogism; ... A set of rules can be used to infer any valid conclusion if it is complete, while never inferring an invalid conclusion, if ...
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). An invalid hypothetical syllogism either affirms the consequent (fallacy of the converse) or denies the ...
Modus tollens is a mixed hypothetical syllogism that takes the form of "If P, then Q. Not Q. Therefore, not P." It is an application of the general truth that if a statement is true, then so is its contrapositive. The form shows that inference from P implies Q to the negation of Q implies the negation of P is a valid argument.
Venn diagram for "A or B", with inclusive or (OR) Venn diagram for "A or B", with exclusive or (XOR). The fallacy lies in concluding that one disjunct must be false because the other disjunct is true; in fact they may both be true because "or" is defined inclusively rather than exclusively.
Using the disjunctive syllogism, the previous four are indeed equivalent. This also gives an intuitionistically valid derivation of ¬ ¬ ( ¬ ¬ ϕ → ϕ ) {\displaystyle \neg \neg (\neg \neg \phi \to \phi )} , as it is thus equivalent to an identity .