Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A variety of basic concepts is used in the study and analysis of logical reasoning. Logical reasoning happens by inferring a conclusion from a set of premises. [3] Premises and conclusions are normally seen as propositions. A proposition is a statement that makes a claim about what is the case.
Naturalistic fallacy – inferring evaluative conclusions from purely factual premises [105] [106] in violation of fact-value distinction. Naturalistic fallacy (sometimes confused with appeal to nature) is the inverse of moralistic fallacy. Is–ought fallacy [107] – deduce a conclusion about what ought to be, on the basis of what is.
Premises and conclusions are the basic parts of inferences or arguments and therefore play a central role in logic. In the case of a valid inference or a correct argument, the conclusion follows from the premises, or in other words, the premises support the conclusion. [ 41 ]
Logical form replaces any sentences or ideas with letters to remove any bias from content and allow one to evaluate the argument without any bias due to its subject matter. [1] Being a valid argument does not necessarily mean the conclusion will be true. It is valid because if the premises are true, then the conclusion has to be true.
propositional logic, Boolean algebra, Heyting algebra: is false when A is true and B is false but true otherwise. may mean the same as (the symbol may also indicate the domain and codomain of a function; see table of mathematical symbols).
When a valid argument is used to derive a false conclusion from a false premise, the inference is valid because it follows the form of a correct inference. A valid argument can also be used to derive a true conclusion from a false premise: All tall people are musicians. (Valid, False) John Lennon was tall. (Valid, True)
A premise or premiss [a] is a proposition—a true or false declarative statement—used in an argument to prove the truth of another proposition called the conclusion. [1] Arguments consist of a set of premises and a conclusion. An argument is meaningful for its conclusion only when all of its premises are true. If one or more premises are ...
All men are immortal. (False) Socrates is a man. (True) Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (True) In this case, the conclusion contradicts the deductive logic of the preceding premises, rather than deriving from it. Therefore, the argument is logically 'invalid', even though the conclusion could be considered 'true' in general terms.