|
Immediate Inference
An immediate inference is an inference which can be made from only one statement or proposition. For instance, from the statement "All toads are green", the immediate inference can be made that "no toads are not green" or "no toads are non-green" (Obverse). There are a number of ''immediate inferences'' which can validly be made using logical operations. There are also invalid immediate inferences which are syllogistic fallacies. Valid immediate inferences Converse *Given a type E statement, "No ''S'' are ''P''.", one can make the ''immediate inference'' that "No ''P'' are ''S''" which is the converse of the given statement. *Given a type I statement, "Some ''S'' are ''P''.", one can make the ''immediate inference'' that "Some ''P'' are ''S''" which is the converse of the given statement. Obverse *Given a type A statement, "All ''S'' are ''P''.", one can make the ''immediate inference'' that "No ''S'' are ''non-P''" which is the obverse of the given statement. *Given a t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Inference
Inferences are steps in logical reasoning, moving from premises to logical consequences; etymologically, the word '' infer'' means to "carry forward". Inference is theoretically traditionally divided into deduction and induction, a distinction that in Europe dates at least to Aristotle (300s BC). Deduction is inference deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true, with the laws of valid inference being studied in logic. Induction is inference from particular evidence to a universal conclusion. A third type of inference is sometimes distinguished, notably by Charles Sanders Peirce, contradistinguishing abduction from induction. Various fields study how inference is done in practice. Human inference (i.e. how humans draw conclusions) is traditionally studied within the fields of logic, argumentation studies, and cognitive psychology; artificial intelligence researchers develop automated inference systems to emulate human inference. Statist ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Proposition
A proposition is a statement that can be either true or false. It is a central concept in the philosophy of language, semantics, logic, and related fields. Propositions are the object s denoted by declarative sentences; for example, "The sky is blue" expresses the proposition that the sky is blue. Unlike sentences, propositions are not linguistic expressions, so the English sentence "Snow is white" and the German "Schnee ist weiß" denote the same proposition. Propositions also serve as the objects of belief and other propositional attitudes, such as when someone believes that the sky is blue. Formally, propositions are often modeled as functions which map a possible world to a truth value. For instance, the proposition that the sky is blue can be modeled as a function which would return the truth value T if given the actual world as input, but would return F if given some alternate world where the sky is green. However, a number of alternative formalizations have be ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Validity (logic)
In logic, specifically in deductive reasoning, an argument is valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be truth, true and the conclusion nevertheless to be False (logic), false. It is not required for a valid argument to have premises that are actually true, but to have premises that, if they were true, would guarantee the truth of the argument's conclusion. Valid arguments must be clearly expressed by means of sentences called well-formed formula, well-formed formulas (also called ''wffs'' or simply ''formulas''). The validity of an argument can be tested, proved or disproved, and depends on its logical form. Arguments In logic, an argument is a set of related statements expressing the ''premises'' (which may consists of non-empirical evidence, empirical evidence or may contain some axiomatic truths) and a ''necessary conclusion based on the relationship of the premises.'' An argument is ''valid'' if and only if it would be contradicto ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Syllogistic Fallacy
A syllogism (, ''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 its earliest form (defined by Aristotle in his 350 BC book '' Prior Analytics''), a deductive syllogism arises when two true premises (propositions or statements) validly imply a conclusion, or the main point that the argument aims to get across. For example, knowing that all men are mortal (major premise), and that Socrates is a man (minor premise), we may validly conclude that Socrates is mortal. Syllogistic arguments are usually represented in a three-line form: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.In antiquity, two rival syllogistic theories existed: Aristotelian syllogism and Stoic syllogism. From the Middle Ages onwards, ''categorical syllogism'' and ''syllogism'' were usually used interchangeably. This article is concerne ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Square Of Opposition
In term logic (a branch of philosophical logic), the square of opposition is a diagram representing the relations between the four basic categorical propositions. The origin of the square can be traced back to Aristotle's tractate '' On Interpretation'' and its distinction between two oppositions: contradiction and contrariety. However, Aristotle did not draw any diagram; this was done several centuries later by Boethius. Summary 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 () and predicate (), in which the predicate is either asserted or denied of the subject. Every categorical proposition can be reduced to one of four logical forms, named , , , and based on the Latin ' (I affirm), for the affirmative propositions and , and ' (I deny), for ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Transposition (logic)
In logic and mathematics, contraposition, or ''transposition'', refers to the inference of going from a conditional statement into its logically equivalent contrapositive, and an associated proof method known as . The contrapositive of a statement has its antecedent and consequent negated and swapped. Conditional statement P \rightarrow Q. In formulas: the contrapositive of P \rightarrow Q is \neg Q \rightarrow \neg P . If ''P'', Then ''Q''. — If not ''Q'', Then not ''P''. "If ''it is raining,'' then ''I wear my coat''." — "If ''I don't wear my coat,'' then ''it isn't raining''." The law of contraposition says that a conditional statement is true if, and only if, its contrapositive is true. Contraposition ( \neg Q \rightarrow \neg P ) can be compared with three other operations: ; Inversion (the inverse), \neg P \rightarrow \neg Q:"If ''it is not raining,'' then ''I don't wear my coat''." Unlike the contrapositive, the inverse's truth value is not at all dependen ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Inverse (logic)
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 \rightarrow Q , the inverse refers to the sentence \neg P \rightarrow \neg Q . Since an inverse is the Contraposition, contrapositive of the Converse (logic), converse, inverse and converse are logically equivalent to each other. For example, substituting propositions in natural language for logical variables, the inverse of the following conditional proposition :"If it's raining, then Sam will meet Jack at the movies." would be :"If it's not raining, then Sam will not meet Jack at the movies." The inverse of the inverse, that is, the inverse of \neg P \rightarrow \neg Q , is \neg \neg P \rightarrow \neg \neg Q , and since the double negation of any statement is equivalent to the original statement in classical logic, the inverse of the inverse is logically equivalent to the original conditio ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Immediate Inference
An immediate inference is an inference which can be made from only one statement or proposition. For instance, from the statement "All toads are green", the immediate inference can be made that "no toads are not green" or "no toads are non-green" (Obverse). There are a number of ''immediate inferences'' which can validly be made using logical operations. There are also invalid immediate inferences which are syllogistic fallacies. Valid immediate inferences Converse *Given a type E statement, "No ''S'' are ''P''.", one can make the ''immediate inference'' that "No ''P'' are ''S''" which is the converse of the given statement. *Given a type I statement, "Some ''S'' are ''P''.", one can make the ''immediate inference'' that "Some ''P'' are ''S''" which is the converse of the given statement. Obverse *Given a type A statement, "All ''S'' are ''P''.", one can make the ''immediate inference'' that "No ''S'' are ''non-P''" which is the obverse of the given statement. *Given a t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
