• Study Resource
  • Explore
    • Arts & Humanities
    • Business
    • Engineering & Technology
    • Foreign Language
    • History
    • Math
    • Science
    • Social Science

    Top subcategories

    • Advanced Math
    • Algebra
    • Basic Math
    • Calculus
    • Geometry
    • Linear Algebra
    • Pre-Algebra
    • Pre-Calculus
    • Statistics And Probability
    • Trigonometry
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Astronomy
    • Astrophysics
    • Biology
    • Chemistry
    • Earth Science
    • Environmental Science
    • Health Science
    • Physics
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Anthropology
    • Law
    • Political Science
    • Psychology
    • Sociology
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Accounting
    • Economics
    • Finance
    • Management
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Aerospace Engineering
    • Bioengineering
    • Chemical Engineering
    • Civil Engineering
    • Computer Science
    • Electrical Engineering
    • Industrial Engineering
    • Mechanical Engineering
    • Web Design
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Architecture
    • Communications
    • English
    • Gender Studies
    • Music
    • Performing Arts
    • Philosophy
    • Religious Studies
    • Writing
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Ancient History
    • European History
    • US History
    • World History
    • other →

    Top subcategories

    • Croatian
    • Czech
    • Finnish
    • Greek
    • Hindi
    • Japanese
    • Korean
    • Persian
    • Swedish
    • Turkish
    • other →
 
Profile Documents Logout
Upload
[Ch 3, 4] Logic and Proofs (2) 1. Valid and Invalid Arguments (§2.3
[Ch 3, 4] Logic and Proofs (2) 1. Valid and Invalid Arguments (§2.3

... Example: To prove a theorem "If P(x1,..,xn), then Q (x1,..,xn)", where x1 ∈ D1,.., xn ∈ Dn. a. Direct proof and counter example o Show the theorem is true for all values of x1 ∈ D1,.., xn ∈ Dn, or show a counterexample (x1,..,xn) in which the theorem is false. o Example: Proposition: If n is any eve ...
Programming and Problem Solving with Java: Chapter 14
Programming and Problem Solving with Java: Chapter 14

... A is possibly true, which is written: ◊A If A is non-contingent, then it is necessarily true, which is written: A ...
Conditional and Indirect Proofs
Conditional and Indirect Proofs

... • A tautology will follow from any premises whatever. • This is because the negation of a tautology is a contradiction, so if we use IP by assuming the negation of a tautology, we can derive a contradiction independently of other premises. This is why this process is called a zeropremise deduction. ...
Show
Show

... 4. Logic. The minor premise in a syllogism. 5. Mathematics. a. The independent variable of a function. b. The amplitude of a complex number. 6. Computer Science. A value used to evaluate a procedure or subroutine. [Middle English, from Old French, from Latin arg¿mentum, from arguere, to make clear. ...
Lecture 3 - CSE@IIT Delhi
Lecture 3 - CSE@IIT Delhi

... The final statement is called the conclusion. An argument is valid if: whenever all the assumptions are true, then the conclusion is true. If today is Wednesday, then yesterday was Tuesday. Today is Wednesday. ...
Truth Tables and Deductive Reasoning
Truth Tables and Deductive Reasoning

... • In fact, developments in logic over the last century have put us in a better position to say something about what it is that makes these arguments deductively valid. Indeed, we can prove that these arguments are deductively valid — that they are incapable of taking us from true premises to a false ...
Logic and Reasoning
Logic and Reasoning

... simply do not care about children.” – “Stand back! I can help. My dad is a doctor.” – “Johnny is not fit to lead this project because he can’t even tie his shoes in the morning.” – “Mom, if you don’t buy me an iPhone, it means that you don’t really love me.” – “Would we not work harder if we made mo ...
(˜P ∨ ˜Q) are tautologically equivalent by constructing a truth
(˜P ∨ ˜Q) are tautologically equivalent by constructing a truth

... 2. Determine by means of truth-value analysis whether or not the following sentence is a tautology: R ↔ ((R ∨ S) ∧ (R ∨ ˜S)). ...
writing a conclusion
writing a conclusion

... follow. Strong forces both within and without the CCP ensure that the status quo of one-party politics will remain. According to political theorist Samuel Huntington, there are three ways a country can democratize. There can be transformation of the power elites; however, the likelihood of this occu ...
Natural deduction
Natural deduction

... – you might wonder, is this really valid? – if so, then this can be checked! try doing a truth-table. Or you can intuitively explain it to yourself like this. “Suppose that the conclusion is false. Then p ∧ q must be true while r is false. But if p ∧ q is true, then p is true. Hence p is true while ...
Rules of Inference and Methods of Proof
Rules of Inference and Methods of Proof

... of the previous ones. The body of any argument can be divided into two parts: - Premises: all but the final proposition in the argument. - Conclusion: the final proposition of the argument. So, to show the validity of any argument we show that the conclusion of the argument must follow from the trut ...
Fallacies of Presumption - University of Colorado Boulder
Fallacies of Presumption - University of Colorado Boulder

... to interpret them. This can lead us to draw erroneous conclusions from given premises. 1. Equivocation: This occurs whenever a single term is being used in two different ways within an argument. For instance: “The pamphlet for this animal rescue organization says, ‘All former zoo animals are now fre ...
Homework 8 and Sample Test
Homework 8 and Sample Test

... a. xy (Fxy → Fxz) b. xFxx v yFxy c. ¬x¬¬Fx d. aFa 9. “Some boys chase some girls” is best expressed in the predicate calculus by: a. xy ((Gx & By) → Cxy) b. xy ((Gx & By) & Cxy) c. xy ((Gx & By) ¬Cyx) d. xy ((Gx & By) & Cyx) 10. “Girls chase only shy boys” is best expressed in the pred ...
Section 2.4: Arguments with Quantified Statements
Section 2.4: Arguments with Quantified Statements

... Thus this argument is not valid since the truth of the conclusion does not follow from the truth of the premises. Warning. When using diagrams to check for validity, make sure you consider all possible diagrams, else your proof may not be valid. 4. Inverse and Converse Errors For the last example we ...
The Null Hypothesis
The Null Hypothesis

... ...
Symbols of Logic
Symbols of Logic

... History of Logical Symbols ...
Logic in Proofs (Valid arguments) A theorem is a hypothetical
Logic in Proofs (Valid arguments) A theorem is a hypothetical

... hypothesis, a tautology, or a consequence of previous members of the chain by using an allowable rule of inference. In creating a formal proof we use Substitution Rules Names don’t matter in a tautology (only the form)! Equivalences do not change truth value! Consider a proof of [(p 6 q) v (q 6 r) v ...
Introduction to Logic
Introduction to Logic

... Formal Language • Formal logic replaces the ordinary language of argument with a symbolic language. • This language is meant to be free of all ambiguity and vagueness. • The language is meant to wear its logical structure on its face. • Our formal languages: SL and QL. ...
a. p
a. p

... Valid and Invalid Arguments Testing an Argument Form for Validity 1. Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument form. 2. Construct a truth table 3. Look at the row when all the premises are true. If the conclusion is true, it is a valid argument. Otherwise it is invalid ...
Quiz Game Midterm
Quiz Game Midterm

... true, it’s valid. If there’s a row where the premises are all true but the conclusion is false, it’s invalid. ...
logica and critical thinking
logica and critical thinking

... Fallacies of relevance: When an argument relies upon premises that are not relevant to its conclusion, and therefore cannot possibly establish its truth Fallacies of weak induction: When the connection between premises and conclusion is not strong enough to support the reasoning Fallacies of presump ...
Horseshoe and Turnstiles
Horseshoe and Turnstiles

... is true and ψ is false, and true in all other cases. The double turnstile ‘⊧’ is the symbol for the logical implication. It expresses a (binary) relation between a premise, or a set of premises (Γ), and a conclusion (φ): Γ ⊧ φ. The relation in question can be called ‘following-from relation’ or the ...
Homework #3 - Jonathan Livengood
Homework #3 - Jonathan Livengood

... determine whether the argument is valid or invalid. If the TV remote isn’t working, then John has to change channels manually. John has to change channels manually. The TV remote isn’t working. 2. Translate the following argument into our formal language and then use truth tables to determine whethe ...
1 Chapter 9: Deductive Reasoning
1 Chapter 9: Deductive Reasoning

... Given that the validity of deductive arguments derives solely from their form, tools that enable us to examine the formal properties of deductive arguments, abstracting from the particular content of a particular argument, will be useful. Formal logical languages are such a tool. Languages in genera ...
Logical Argument
Logical Argument

... (see formal logic). Johnson and Blair (1987) define informal logic as "a branch of logic whose task is to develop non-formal standards, criteria, procedures for the analysis, interpretation, evaluation, criticism and construction of argumentation in everyday discourse." Opinion pieces of newspapers ...
< 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 >

Argument

In logic and philosophy, an argument is a series of statements typically used to persuade someone of something or to present reasons for accepting a conclusion. The general form of an argument in a natural language is that of premises (typically in the form of propositions, statements or sentences) in support of a claim: the conclusion. The structure of some arguments can also be set out in a formal language, and formally defined ""arguments"" can be made independently of natural language arguments, as in math, logic, and computer science.In a typical deductive argument, the premises are meant to provide a guarantee of the truth of the conclusion, while in an inductive argument, they are thought to provide reasons supporting the conclusion's probable truth. The standards for evaluating non-deductive arguments may rest on different or additional criteria than truth, for example, the persuasiveness of so-called ""indispensability claims"" in transcendental arguments, the quality of hypotheses in retroduction, or even the disclosure of new possibilities for thinking and acting.The standards and criteria used in evaluating arguments and their forms of reasoning are studied in logic. Ways of formulating arguments effectively are studied in rhetoric (see also: argumentation theory). An argument in a formal language shows the logical form of the symbolically represented or natural language arguments obtained by its interpretations.
  • studyres.com © 2025
  • DMCA
  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Report