Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In logic, an inverse is a type of conditional sentence which is an immediate inference made from another conditional sentence. More specifically, given a conditional sentence of the form P → Q {\displaystyle P\rightarrow Q} , the inverse refers to the sentence ¬ P → ¬ Q {\displaystyle \neg P\rightarrow \neg Q} .
The inverse is "If a polygon is not a quadrilateral, then it does not have four sides." In this case, unlike the last example, the inverse of the statement is true. The converse is "If a polygon has four sides, then it is a quadrilateral." Again, in this case, unlike the last example, the converse of the statement is true.
In logic, a set of symbols is commonly used to express logical representation. ... for example “āGā” denotes the Gödel number of G. (Typographical note ...
For example: If you are a ski instructor, then you have a job. You are not a ski instructor. Therefore, you have no job. [1] That argument is intentionally bad, but arguments of the same form can sometimes seem superficially convincing, as in the following example offered by Alan Turing in the article "Computing Machinery and Intelligence":
Confusion of the inverse, also called the conditional probability fallacy or the inverse fallacy, is a logical fallacy whereupon a conditional probability is equated with its inverse; that is, given two events A and B, the probability of A happening given that B has happened is assumed to be about the same as the probability of B given A, when there is actually no evidence for this assumption.
OR-AND-invert gates or OAI-gates are logic gates comprising OR gates followed by a NAND gate. ... An example of a 3-1 OAI-gate is shown in the figure below. [1]
In traditional logic, the process of switching the subject term with the predicate term is called conversion. For example, going from "No S are P" to its converse "No P are S". In the words of Asa Mahan: "The original proposition is called the exposita; when converted, it is denominated the converse.
This is the inverse of the naturalistic fallacy. 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.