Lecture notes, cheat sheets
Logics. Direct deductive inference: transformation by logical square. Relationships of contradiction and opposition (the most important) Directory / Lecture notes, cheat sheets Table of contents (expand) 40. DIRECT DEDUCTIVE CONCLUSION: LOGICAL SQUARE CONVERSION. RELATIONS OF CONTRADICTIONS AND OPPOSITES Given the properties of the relationship between the categorical propositions A, E, I, O, which are illustrated by the logical square scheme, one can draw conclusions by establishing the following of the truth or falsity of one judgment from the truth or falsity of another judgment. The relation of contradiction (contradictority): A-O, E-I. Since the relationship between contradictory judgments is subject to the law of the excluded middle, from the truth of one judgment follows the falsity of another judgment, from the falsity of one - the truth of the other. For example, from the truth of the universally affirmative proposition (A) "All peoples have the right to self-determination" follows the falsity of the particular-negative proposition (O) "Some peoples do not have the right to self-determination"; from the truth of the particular affirmative judgment (I) "Some court verdicts are acquittal" follows the falsity of the general negative judgment (E) "Not a single court verdict is acquittal." Conclusions are built according to the schemes: A → ⌉O; ⌉A → O; E →⌉I;⌉E → I. Opposite (contrary) relationship: A-E. The truth of one proposition implies the falsity of another, but the falsity of one of them does not imply the truth of the other. For example, from the truth of the generally affirmative proposition (A) “All peoples have the right to self-determination,” the falsity of the generally negative proposition (E) “No people has the right to self-determination” follows. But from the falsity of proposition A, “All court verdicts are acquittal,” the truth of proposition E, “Not a single court verdict is acquittal,” does not follow. This proposition is also false. Relations between opposite judgments obey the law of non-contradiction. A → ⌉E, E→ ⌉A, ⌉A → (E ∨ ⌉E), ⌉E → (A ∨ ⌉A). 41. DIRECT DEDUCTIVE CONCLUSION: LOGICAL SQUARE CONVERSION. RELATIONSHIPS OF SUBCONTRARITY AND SUBMISSION Relation of partial compatibility (subcontrast): I-O. The falsity of one proposition implies the truth of another, but the truth of one of them can entail both the truth and the falsity of another proposition. Both propositions can be true. For example, from the false proposition “Some doctors do not have a medical education” the true proposition “Some doctors have a medical education” follows; from the true proposition “Some witnesses have been interrogated” the proposition “Some witnesses have not been interrogated” follows, which can be either true or false. Thus, subcontrarian judgments cannot be both false; at least one of them is true: ⌉I → O; ⌉0→I; I → (О ∨ ⌉О); O → (I ∨ ⌉1). Subordination relationship (A-I, E-O). The truth of the subordinating judgment implies the truth of the subordinate judgment, but not vice versa: the truth of the subordinating judgment does not follow from the truth of the subordinate judgment; it can be true, but it can be false. For example, from the truth of the subordinate proposition A “All doctors have a medical education,” the truth of the subordinate proposition I “Some doctors have a medical education” follows. From a true subordinate proposition "Some witnesses have been examined" one cannot necessarily assert the truth of the subordinate proposition "All witnesses have been examined": A → I; E → O; I → (A ∨ 1 A); O → (E ∨ 1E). The falsity of the subordinate judgment follows from the falsity of the subordinate judgment, but not vice versa: from the falsity of the subordinate judgment the falsity of the subordinate does not necessarily follow; it may be true, but it may also be false. For example, from the falsity of the subordinate proposition (O) "Some peoples do not have the right to self-determination" follows the falsity of the subordinate proposition (E) "No people has the right to self-determination." If the subordinating proposition (A) "All witnesses have been examined" is false, then the subordinate proposition (I) "Some witnesses have been examined" may be true, but it may be false (it is possible that no witness has been examined). In the logical square, the word "some" is used to mean "at least some." ⌉I →⌉ A; ⌉O → ⌉E; ⌉A → (I ∨ ⌉I); ⌉E→ (O ∨ ⌉0). << Back: Immediate Deductive Inference: Contrasting with the Predicate >> Forward: Immediate deductive reasoning: logical square transformation. Relations of subcontrararity and subordination We recommend interesting articles Section Lecture notes, cheat sheets: ▪ History of psychology. Lecture notes See other articles Section Lecture notes, cheat sheets. Read and write useful comments on this article. Latest news of science and technology, new electronics: The existence of an entropy rule for quantum entanglement has been proven
09.05.2024 Mini air conditioner Sony Reon Pocket 5
09.05.2024 Energy from space for Starship
08.05.2024
Other interesting news: ▪ Compact version of the GeForce GTX 970 graphics card ▪ The initiative of a woman affects the relationship in a couple ▪ Smart glasses Recon Jet HUD Pilot Edition News feed of science and technology, new electronics
Interesting materials of the Free Technical Library: ▪ section of the site Microcontrollers. Article selection ▪ Yukteswar article. Famous aphorisms ▪ article Why are only 12 letters used on Russian license plates? Detailed answer ▪ article Deputy chief physician of the hospital for surgery. Job description ▪ article Stork instead of Crocodile. Encyclopedia of radio electronics and electrical engineering ▪ article Incredible card guessing. Focus Secret
Leave your comment on this article: All languages of this page Home page | Library | Articles | Website map | Site Reviews www.diagram.com.ua |