lecture17 - Lecture 17 Syllogisms in Ordinary Language...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Lecture 17 Syllogisms in Ordinary Language Patrick Maher Philosophy 102 Spring 2009 Introduction The arguments that people give in ordinary language are rarely expressed as categorical syllogisms in standard form. However, it is often possible to rephrase arguments that occur in ordinary language so they become syllogisms in standard form. Today we will learn techniques for doing that. Reducing the number of terms Categorical syllogisms in standard form contain three terms. If an argument contains more, the number of terms must be reduced. Example All photographers are non-writers. Some editors are writers. Therefore, some non-photographers are not non-editors. Symbolized: All P are non- W . Some E are W . Some non- P are not non- E . Reduced: No P are W . (obversion) Some E are W . Some E are not P . (contraposition) Valid Review of allowed operations Conversion is allowed for E and I propositions....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/13/2009 for the course PHIL 102 taught by Professor Weinberg during the Spring '08 term at University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign.

Page1 / 10

lecture17 - Lecture 17 Syllogisms in Ordinary Language...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 5. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online