Upcoming SlideShare
×

# Categorical Propositions 4.3, 4.5, 4.6 W Sound

8,499
-1

Published on

0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
• Full Name
Comment goes here.

Are you sure you want to Yes No
• Be the first to comment

• Be the first to like this

Views
Total Views
8,499
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
155
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

### Categorical Propositions 4.3, 4.5, 4.6 W Sound

1. 1. Categorical Propositions<br />4.3 (Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition), 4.5 (The Traditional Square of Opposition) and 4.6 (Venn Diagrams and the Traditional Standpoint)<br />
2. 2. 4.3 Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition<br />“All Henry’s students are achievers”<br /> “All unicorn’s are one-horned animals.”<br />Aristotle and Boole conflict: Two approaches to the interpretation of existence of Universal Categorical Proposition<br />Aristotle: assumes existence, that is things actually exist in all propositions<br />Boole: make no assumptions about existence, that is universal propositions have no existential import.<br />Aristotle and Boole agree that particular propositions make claims about actually existing things. They disagree on universal (A and E) propositions only. For Aristotle universal propositions have existential import if and only if the proposition asserts something about an actually existing thing.<br />
3. 3. Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition<br />Aristotelian Standpoint:<br />All German Shepherds are dogs<br />No snakes are snails<br />All vampires are vile creatures<br />Boolean Standpoint:<br />All dogs are animals<br />No mammals are frogs<br />All squares are round objects<br />
4. 4. Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition<br />Existential Fallacies from the Boolean Standpoint:<br />All S are P<br /> Therefore, some S are P<br />No Some S are P<br /> Therefore, some S are not P<br />Why are these arguments existential fallacies?<br />You can’t conclude the existence of something from a premise that makes no assumptions about existence.<br />
5. 5. Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition<br />John Venn (19th Century) created Venn Diagram system by adoption the Boolean Standpoint.<br />All S are P =<br /> No members of S outside P.<br />No S are P =<br />No members of S are inside P.<br />
6. 6. Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition<br />Some S are P = <br /> At least one S exists<br /> and that S is a P.<br />Some S are not P =<br /> At least one S exists<br /> and that S is not a P.<br />
7. 7. Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition<br />
8. 8. Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition<br />Modern Square of Opposition: have a contradictory relationship.<br />
9. 9. Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition<br />Using the Modern Square of Opposition to determine the true value of an Argument:<br />All dogs are animals<br /> Therefore, some dogs are not animals<br />
10. 10. Venn Diagrams and the Modern Square of Opposition<br />All dogs are animals <br /> Therefore some dogs are animals<br />
11. 11. 4.5 The Traditional Square of Opposition<br />Aristotle: Universal propositions about actually existing things have existential import<br />Three new moves with traditional Square of opposition<br />Contrary<br />Subcontrary<br />Subalternation <br />
12. 12. The Traditional Square of Opposition<br />
13. 13. 4.5 The Traditional Square of Opposition<br />Immediate inference using the Traditional Square<br />Contradictory = opposite truth value (same as Modern Square). Relationship between A & O and E & I only.<br />Contrary= at least one is false, (not both true). Relationship between A & E only.<br />Subcontrary = at least one true, (not both false). Relationship between I & O only.<br />Subalternation = truth flows downward and falsity flows upward. Relationship between A & I and E & O only.<br />
14. 14. The Traditional Square of Opposition<br />Three steps for testing for immediate inference using the Traditional Square of Opposition<br />Determine the type of relation, that is the move that has occurred between the premise and conclusion<br />Using the basic relations from the traditional square of opposition, deduce the remaining truth values if possible<br />If the move is legal, then the argument is valid. If the move is illegal/illicit, then the argument is invalid.<br />
15. 15. The Traditional Square of Opposition<br />Three Fallacies:<br />Illicit contrary: invalid application of the contrary relation<br />Illicit subcontrary: invalid application of the subcontrary relation<br />Illicit subalternation: invalid application of the subalternation relation<br />
16. 16. The Traditional Square of Opposition<br />Using the Traditional Square of Opposition to make immediate inferences: Lets work our way around the square using the following propositions:<br />All dogs are animals (T)<br />Some dogs are fish (F)<br />Some students are not a piano (T)<br />
17. 17. The Traditional Square of Opposition<br />All dogs are animals (T)<br />
18. 18. The Traditional Square of Opposition<br />Some dogs are fish (F)<br />
19. 19. The Traditional Square of Opposition<br />Some students are not a piano (T)<br />
20. 20. 4.6 Venn Diagrams and the Aristotelian or Traditional Standpoint<br />The conflict between Aristotle and Boole is based on the whether universal proposition have existential import. <br />Aristotle assumes that universal propositions (A & E) that actually refer to existing things have existential import.<br />Boole makes no assumptions that universal propositions (A & E) refer to existing things, that is have existential import.<br />
21. 21. Venn Diagrams and the Aristotelian or Traditional Standpoint<br />
22. 22. Venn Diagrams and the Aristotelian or Traditional Standpoint<br />Problem Steps:<br />Reduce to problem to it’s basic form and check from the Boolean standpoint. If the problem is valid from the Boolean standpoint—your done—it is also valid from the Aristotelian standpoint.<br />If the problem is invalid from the Boolean standpoint, then adopt the Aristotelian Standpoint and place a circled X in the un-shaded region of the premise and recheck the argument. <br />If the argument is conditionally valid, then check if the circled X actually represents an existing thing. If so the argument is valid from the Aristotelian Standpoint. If not, then the argument is invalid.<br />
23. 23. Venn Diagrams and the Aristotelian or Traditional Standpoint<br />Problem:<br />All squires are animals<br /> Therefore, some squires are animals<br />
24. 24. 4.3, 4.5 and 4.6 Summary<br />Aristotelian and Boolean standpoints: <br />Aristotle is open to existence<br />Boole is closed to existence<br />Valid arguments from the Boolean standpoint are unconditionally valid because we are not concerned with whether the terms actually refer to existing things.<br />Arguments from the Aristotelian Standpoint are conditionally valid because we have to determine if the subject term of premise actually refer to existing thing.<br />
25. 25. 4.3, 4.5 and 4.6 Summary<br />Existential Fallacies:<br />
26. 26. 4.3, 4.5 and 4.6 Summary <br />Modern Square of Opposition<br />Contradictory relationships, all other relationships are undetermined.<br />Traditional Square of Opposition<br />Contradictory<br />Contrary<br />Subcontrary<br />Subalternation<br />
27. 27. 4.3, 4.5 and 4.6 Summary <br />Venn Diagrams:<br />Boolean or Modern Standpoint<br />
28. 28. 4.3, 4.5 and 4.6 Summary <br /><ul><li>Venn Diagrams:</li></ul>Aristotelian or Traditional Standpoint<br />
29. 29. 4.3, 4.5, 4.6 Summary<br />Practice Problems:<br />Film doing problems in Logic Coach<br />