Subalternation
Subalternation is an immediate inference which is only made between A (All S are P) and I (Some S are P) categorical propositions and between E (No S are P or originally, No S is P) and O (Some S are not P or originally, Not every S is P) categorical propositions of the traditional square of opposition and the original square of opposition. If the A proposition is true we may immediately infer that I is true. If the E proposition is true we may immediately infer that O is true. Conversely, If the I is false, we can immediately infer that A is also false, as well as if O is false, then E is false. However, if the A proposition is false that will not tell us anything about the truth value of the I proposition. Similarly, if the E proposition is false, that will not tell us anything about the truth value of the O proposition. An example of a subalternation is "If all leopards are mammals, then some leopards are mammals." When the inference is misapplied, the syllogistic fallacy A ...
[...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 Apuleius and 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), ...
[...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, the result of which is a logically equivalent statement form to the given statement. 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'' ...
[...More Info...]       [...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  

Categorical Proposition
In logic, a categorical proposition, or categorical statement, is a proposition that asserts or denies that all or some of the members of one category (the ''subject term'') are included in another (the ''predicate term''). The study of arguments using categorical statements (i.e., syllogisms) forms an important branch of deductive reasoning that began with the Ancient Greeks. The Ancient Greeks such as Aristotle identified four primary distinct types of categorical proposition and gave them standard forms (now often called ''A'', ''E'', ''I'', and ''O''). If, abstractly, the subject category is named ''S'' and the predicate category is named ''P'', the four standard forms are: *All ''S'' are ''P''. (''A'' form, \forall _\rightarrow P_xequiv \forall neg S_\lor P_x/math>) *No ''S'' are ''P''. (''E'' form, \forall _\rightarrow \neg P_xequiv \forall neg S_\lor \neg P_x/math>) *Some ''S'' are ''P''. (''I'' form, \exists _\land P_x/math>) *Some ''S'' are not ''P''. (''O'' form, \ex ...
[...More Info...]       [...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  

Converse (logic)
In logic and mathematics, the converse of a categorical or implicational statement is the result of reversing its two constituent statements. For the implication ''P'' → ''Q'', the converse is ''Q'' → ''P''. For the categorical proposition ''All S are P'', the converse is ''All P are S''. Either way, the truth of the converse is generally independent from that of the original statement.Robert Audi, ed. (1999), ''The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy'', 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press: "converse". Implicational converse Let ''S'' be a statement of the form ''P implies Q'' (''P'' → ''Q''). Then the converse of ''S'' is the statement ''Q implies P'' (''Q'' → ''P''). In general, the truth of ''S'' says nothing about the truth of its converse, unless the antecedent ''P'' and the consequent ''Q'' are logically equivalent. For example, consider the true statement "If I am a human, then I am mortal." The converse of that statement is "If I am mortal, then I am ...
[...More Info...]       [...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  

Syllogistic Fallacy
A syllogism ( grc-gre, συλλογισμός, ''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 BCE book ''Prior Analytics''), a 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 ar ...
[...More Info...]       [...Related Items...]     OR:     [Wikipedia]   [Google]   [Baidu]  

Illicit Subalternation
Illicit may refer to: * Illicit antiquities * Illicit cigarette trade * Illicit drug trade ** Illicit drug use ** Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act * Illicit financial flows * Illicit major * Illicit minor * Illicit trade * Illicit work * Illicit Streetwear clothing company * Illicit (Dance music group) * ''Illicit'' (film), a 1931 film starring Barbara Stanwyck * ''Illicit'' (album), a 1992 album by Tribal Tech See also *Valid but illicit Validity and liceity are concepts in the Catholic Church. Validity designates an action which produces the effects intended; an action which does not produces the effects intended is considered "invalid". Liceity designates an action which has bee ...