Ancient Philosophy Handout #1: Logic Overview

Similar documents
SYLLOGISTIC LOGIC CATEGORICAL PROPOSITIONS

6.5 Exposition of the Fifteen Valid Forms of the Categorical Syllogism

MCQ IN TRADITIONAL LOGIC. 1. Logic is the science of A) Thought. B) Beauty. C) Mind. D) Goodness

PHIL 115: Philosophical Anthropology. I. Propositional Forms (in Stoic Logic) Lecture #4: Stoic Logic

Syllogisms in Aristotle and Boethius

logic, symbolic logic, traditional

The Form of Inference

Study Guides. Chapter 1 - Basic Training

Ibn Sīnā on Logical Analysis. Wilfrid Hodges and Amirouche Moktefi

Revisiting the Socrates Example

Selections from Aristotle s Prior Analytics 41a21 41b5

LOGIC ANTHONY KAPOLKA FYF 101-9/3/2010

Unit. Categorical Syllogism. What is a syllogism? Types of Syllogism

Logic Appendix: More detailed instruction in deductive logic

Aristotle s Theory of the Assertoric Syllogism

PHILOSOPHY 102 INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC PRACTICE EXAM 1. W# Section (10 or 11) 4. T F The statements that compose a disjunction are called conjuncts.

The Birth of Logic in Ancient Greek.

GENERAL NOTES ON THIS CLASS

Venn Diagrams and Categorical Syllogisms. Unit 5

Unit 7.3. Contraries E. Contradictories. Sub-contraries

Essence and Necessity, and the Aristotelian Modal Syllogistic: A Historical and Analytical Study

Logic, by Gordon H. Clark. A Review & Essay Rough Draft. We could solve * in the following way: 3x = 15 x = 5. Copyright 2005, 2011 by Vern Crisler

CHAPTER THREE Philosophical Argument

Philosophy 1100: Ethics

IS THE SYLLOGISTIC A LOGIC? it is not a theory or formal ontology, a system concerned with general features of the

Logic: A Brief Introduction. Ronald L. Hall, Stetson University

Baronett, Logic (4th ed.) Chapter Guide

Philosophy of Logic. A tree of logic. 1. Traditional Logic. A. Basic Logic. 2. Orthodox Modern Logic. Chap2 Brief History of Logic

Unit 4. Reason as a way of knowing. Tuesday, March 4, 14

5.6.1 Formal validity in categorical deductive arguments

Chapter 1. What is Philosophy? Thinking Philosophically About Life

Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.1 Deductive and Plausible Reasoning Strong Syllogism

7. Some recent rulings of the Supreme Court were politically motivated decisions that flouted the entire history of U.S. legal practice.

What is an argument? PHIL 110. Is this an argument? Is this an argument? What about this? And what about this?

Overview of Today s Lecture

Lecture 17:Inference Michael Fourman

What is the Nature of Logic? Judy Pelham Philosophy, York University, Canada July 16, 2013 Pan-Hellenic Logic Symposium Athens, Greece

Semantic Entailment and Natural Deduction

In view of the fact that IN CLASS LOGIC EXERCISES

Suppressed premises in real life. Philosophy and Logic Section 4.3 & Some Exercises

Appendix: The Logic Behind the Inferential Test

Categorical Logic Handout Logic: Spring Sound: Any valid argument with true premises.

Informalizing Formal Logic

Artificial Intelligence: Valid Arguments and Proof Systems. Prof. Deepak Khemani. Department of Computer Science and Engineering

Chapter 8 - Sentential Truth Tables and Argument Forms

What would count as Ibn Sīnā (11th century Persia) having first order logic?

Chapter 9- Sentential Proofs

Also, in Argument #1 (Lecture 11, Slide 11), the inference from steps 2 and 3 to 4 is stated as:

Tutorial A03: Patterns of Valid Arguments By: Jonathan Chan

Logic: Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read M.A. CHAPTER IX CHAPTER IX FORMAL CONDITIONS OF MEDIATE INFERENCE

INTERMEDIATE LOGIC Glossary of key terms

Criticizing Arguments

Section 3.5. Symbolic Arguments. Copyright 2013, 2010, 2007, Pearson, Education, Inc.

4.1 A problem with semantic demonstrations of validity

HANDBOOK (New or substantially modified material appears in boxes.)

Reconciling Greek mathematics and Greek logic - Galen s question and Ibn Sina s answer

The basic form of a syllogism By Timo Schmitz, Philosopher

Logic: Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read M.A. Questions

Indeterminate Propositions in Prior Analytics I.41

Logic Book Part 1! by Skylar Ruloff!

HOW TO ANALYZE AN ARGUMENT

Announcements. CS243: Discrete Structures. First Order Logic, Rules of Inference. Review of Last Lecture. Translating English into First-Order Logic

Section 3.5. Symbolic Arguments. Copyright 2013, 2010, 2007, Pearson, Education, Inc.

CRITICAL THINKING (CT) MODEL PART 1 GENERAL CONCEPTS

The antecendent always a expresses a sufficient condition for the consequent

Chapter 3: More Deductive Reasoning (Symbolic Logic)

Philosophy exit exam (Logic: 1-10; Ancient: 11-20; Modern: 21-30; Ethics: 31-40; M&E: 41-50)

Chapter 2. Moral Reasoning. Chapter Overview. Learning Objectives. Teaching Suggestions

Anthony P. Andres. The Place of Conversion in Aristotelian Logic. Anthony P. Andres

Exercise Sets. KS Philosophical Logic: Modality, Conditionals Vagueness. Dirk Kindermann University of Graz July 2014

Deductive Forms: Elementary Logic By R.A. Neidorf READ ONLINE

In this section you will learn three basic aspects of logic. When you are done, you will understand the following:

PHIL2642 CRITICAL THINKING USYD NOTES PART 1: LECTURE NOTES

Part II: How to Evaluate Deductive Arguments

Thinking and Reasoning

PHI 1500: Major Issues in Philosophy

Lecture 3 Arguments Jim Pryor What is an Argument? Jim Pryor Vocabulary Describing Arguments

b) The meaning of "child" would need to be taken in the sense of age, as most people would find the idea of a young child going to jail as wrong.

Module 5. Knowledge Representation and Logic (Propositional Logic) Version 2 CSE IIT, Kharagpur

Recall. Validity: If the premises are true the conclusion must be true. Soundness. Valid; and. Premises are true

Based on the translation by E. M. Edghill, with minor emendations by Daniel Kolak.

In Defense of The Wide-Scope Instrumental Principle. Simon Rippon

Handout 1: Arguments -- the basics because, since, given that, for because Given that Since for Because

Lecturer: Xavier Parent. Imperative logic and its problems. by Joerg Hansen. Imperative logic and its problems 1 / 16

The Problem of Major Premise in Buddhist Logic

Courses providing assessment data PHL 202. Semester/Year

Unit 4. Reason as a way of knowing

Reply to Bronstein, Leunissen, and Beere

John Buridan. Summulae de Dialectica IX Sophismata

Announcements. CS311H: Discrete Mathematics. First Order Logic, Rules of Inference. Satisfiability, Validity in FOL. Example.

Logic Dictionary Keith Burgess-Jackson 12 August 2017

1. To arrive at the truth we have to reason correctly. 2. Logic is the study of correct reasoning. B. DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

1 Clarion Logic Notes Chapter 4

Practice Test Three Fall True or False True = A, False = B

PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS QUIZ

PHI Introduction Lecture 4. An Overview of the Two Branches of Logic

Directions: For Problems 1-10, determine whether the given statement is either True (A) or False (B).

An alternative understanding of interpretations: Incompatibility Semantics

How Gödelian Ontological Arguments Fail

9 Methods of Deduction

Transcription:

Ancient Philosophy Handout #1: Logic Overview I. Stoic Logic A. Proposition types Affirmative P P Negative not P ~P Conjunction P and Q P Q Hypothetical (or Conditional) if P, then Q Disjunction P or Q P Q Negated Conjunction not both P and Q B. Basic Syllogistic Forms Mode Ponendo Ponens Ponendo Tollens Tollendo Ponens Common Modus Ponens Conjuctive Syllogism Disjunctive Syllogism P Q P Q P Q ~P Q Example If the fight against al-qaeda in Iraq meets all the criteria of the Just-War Theory, then there is no moral objection to fighting it. It does meet those criteria. So, there s no moral objection to fighting it. He cannot have passed every test and still failed the course. He did pass every test. So, he did not fail the course He either passed the placement examination or he took logic at another school before coming here. He did not take logic at another school. So, he passed the placement examination.

2 Mode Tollendo Tollens Common Modus Tollens ~Q ~P Example If my theory is correct, then these two chemicals should turn yellow when mixed. They do not turn yellow when mixed. So, my theory is not correct. C. Other Argument Forms Common Chain Argument Constructive Dilemma Destructive Dilemma Q R P R R S P R Q S P S ~Q ~S ~P ~P] Example If guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. If only outlaws have guns, our country will be a more dangerous place to live. So, if guns are outlawed, our country will be a more dangerous place to live. (St. Thomas More:) If I swear that the Act of Succession in declaring the King head of the Church in England is legal, I will be guilty of perjury & lose my soul. If I swear that the Act is illegal, I will be charged with treason & lose my life. I have only two choices: swearing that the Act is legal or swearing that it is illegal. [In fact, he found a third alternative.] So, either I will lose my soul or I will lose my life. (Plato in the Republic:) If Homer speaks the truth then the heroes are the sons of the gods and if he speaks the truth then they did many wicked things. But either they are not the sons of gods or they did not to many wicked things. So, Homer does not speak the truth.

3 II. Aristotelian Logic A. Proposition types Type Universal Affirmative All S are P Asp Particular Affirmative Some S are P Isp Particular Negative Some S are not P Osp Universal Negative No S are P Esp B. Opposition & Conversion 1. Contradictory Opposition: The members of a contradictory pair have opposite truth-value (one must be true; the other must be false) All S are P & Some S are not P No S are P & Some S are P (Asp & Osp) (Esp & Isp) 2. Contrary Opposition: Universal propositions are contrary to one another. They cannot both be true. All S are P & No S are P (Asp & Esp) 3. Conversion: Conversion is the interchange of subject & predicate. It is valid for E & I propositions and for A propositions when the predicate is a definition. No S are P. So, No P are S. (Esp. Eps) Some S are P. So, Some P are S. (Isp. Ips) All S are P (defn). So, All P are S. (Asp (defn). Αps)

4 C. Concepts necessary to distinguishing Categorical Syllogisms The names of terms major term minor term middle term The names of premises major premise minor premise The mood of a syllogism The figure of a syllogism 1st Figure 2nd Figure 3rd Figure Definition Isp Osp Omp Osp the predicate of the conclusion p p p the subject of the conclusion s s s the term which occurs in both premises, but not in the conclusion the premise containing the predicate of the conclusion (the major term) the premise containing the subject of the conclusion (the minor term) the list of the forms of proposition in this order: major minor conclusion the specification of now the middle term is related to the end terms the figure in which the middle term is subject of one end term & predicated of the other the figure in which the middle term is predicated of both end terms the figure in which the middle term is subject of both end terms m m m Omp AII EIO OAO 1 2 3

5 D. Valid Syllogistic Forms Premise Pair (at least one Universal; at least one Affirmative) 1st Figure (Univ. Major; Aff. Minor; Any Conclusion) 2nd Figure (Univ. Major; Any Minor; Neg. Conclusion) 3rd Figure (Any Major; Aff. Minor; Part. Concl.) AA Asm Asp EA Asm Esp Asm Esp AE Apm Esm Esp AI Ims IA Imp Isp EI Ims AO Apm Osm OA Omp

6 1st Figure Schema Example Barbara Amb Adm Adb All wars that inflict more harm than good are unjust. All nuclear wars inflict more harm than good. So, all nuclear wars are unjust. Celarent Darii Ferio Emb Adm Edb No military action whose harmful effects cannot be controlled is morally permissible. All military uses of biological weapons are military actions whose harmful effects cannot be controlled. So, no military uses of biological weapons are morally permissible. All wars that inflict more harm than good are unjust. Some wars in defense of a good cause inflict more harm than good. So, some wars in defense of a good cause are unjust. No military actions that intentionally kill the innocent are just. Some US military actions in WWII intentionally kill[ed] the innocent. So, some US military actions in WWII were not just.

7 2nd Figure Schema Example Cesare Asm Esp No computers are capable of common sense. All human beings are capable of common sense. So, no human beings are computers. Camestres Festino Baroco Apm Esm Esp Apm Osm All persons are capable of language use. No computers are capable of language use. So, no computers are persons. No punishments that are not essential to the fight against crime are justified. Some contemporary executions are punishments not essential to the fight against crime. So, some contemporary executions are not justified. All animals have the power of sensation. Some living things do not have the power of sensation. So, some living things are not animals.

8 3rd Figure Schema Example Darapti All lemons are sour. All lemons are fruits. Some fruits are sour. Disamis Datisi Felapton Bocardo Ferison Imp Ims Omp Ims Some human beings do stupid things. All human beings are rational. So, some rational beings do stupid things. All human beings are rational. Some human beings do stupid things. So, some beings that do stupid things are rational beings. No lemons are sweet. All lemons are fruits. So, some fruits are not sweet. Some citrus fruits are not sweet. All citrus fruits are fruit. So, some fruits are not sweet. No living beings capable of local motion are plants. Some living beings capable of local motion are onecelled organisms. So, some one-celled organisms are not plants.