Mood and Figure: Reconstruct the Syllogistic Forms - Assignment Example

Philosophy (A No rent-control proposals are regulations welcomed by landlords, and all regulations welcomed by landlords are measures that allow a free hand in raising rents. Therefore, some rent-control proposals are measures that allow a free hand in raising rents. Standard form syllogism: No rent-control proposals are regulations welcomed by landlords All regulations welcomed by landlords are measures that allow a free hand in raising rents some rent-control proposals are measures that allow a free hand in raising rents Mood and figures EAI-4 Major term- Rent control proposals Minor term- free hand in raising rent. Middle term- Regulations welcomed by landlord 2) No illegal aliens are people who have a right to welfare payments, and some migrant workers are illegal aliens. Thus some migrant workers are not people who have a right to welfare payments. Standard form syllogism: No illegal aliens are people who have a right to welfare payments Some migrant workers are illegal aliens Some migrant workers are not people who have a right to welfare payments Mood and figures: EIO - 3 Major term: migrant workers Minor term: welfare payments Middle term: illegal aliens 3) Some African nations are not countries deserving military aid, because some African nations are not upholders of human rights, and all countries deserving of military aid are upholders of human rights. Standard form syllogism: Some African nations are not countries deserving military aid Some African nations are not upholders of human rights All countries deserving of military aid are upholders of human rights Mood and figures: OOA - 1 Major term: Countries deserving military aid Minor term: African nations Middle term: Upholders of human rights 4) No humanitarians are people suited to be immigration officials, given that allpeople suited to be immigration officials are racists, and no humanitarians are racists. Standard form syllogism: No humanitarians are people suited to be immigration officials All people suited to be immigration officials are racists no humanitarians are racists Mood and figures: EAE - 4 Major term: humanitarians Minor term: racists Middle term: immigration officials 5) No people who respect human life are terrorists, and all airline hijackers are terrorists. Hence, no airline hijackers are people who respect human life. Standard form syllogism: No people who respect human life are terrorists All airline hijackers are terrorists No airline hijackers are people who respect human life Mood and figures: EAE - 3 Major term: airline hijackers Minor term: respect Middle term: terrorists Reconstruct the syllogistic forms from the following combinations are mood and figure. Example: OAE-3 The major premise is O, middle term on left. The minor premise is A, middle term on left. The conclusion is E. Some __M____ are not ___P____. All ___M___ are ___S____. No ___S____ are ___P____. Now you try it. 6) EIA-4 No P are M Some M are S All S are P 7) AII-3 All M are P Some M are S Some S are P 8) AOO-2 All P are M Some S are not M Some S are not P 9) EAO-2 No P are M All S are M Some S are not P 10) OEI-1 Some m are not P No S are M Some S are P (B) 1) EIO-2 Begin by reconstructing the syllogism: No p are M Some S are M Some S are not P Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. OK Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. OK Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. OK Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. not Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. OK Valid? If invalid, which rules are broken? Rule 4 2) EAO-1 No M are P All S are M Some S are P Begin by reconstructing the syllogism: Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. OK Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. OK Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. OK Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. OK Valid? Valid If invalid, which rules are broken? 3) EOO-4 No P are M Some m are not S Some S are not P Begin by reconstructing the syllogism: Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Not Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Not Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? No If invalid, which rules are broken? Rules 3 and 4 4) EAO-3 No M are P All m are S Some S are not P Begin by reconstructing the syllogism: Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 5) AII-2 Begin by reconstructing the syllogism: All P are M Some S are M Some S are P Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 1) All transparent metals are good conductors of heat. All transparent metals are good conductors of electricity. Therefore, some good conductors of electricity are good conductors of heat. Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 2) All war zones are places where abuse of discretion is rampant. Some places where abuse of discretion is rampant are international borders. Therefore, some international borders are war zones. Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 3) No endangered species are creatures loved by the timber industry. All spotted owls are members of an endangered species. Therefore, some spotted owls are not creatures loved by the timber industry. Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Fail Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? fail If invalid, which rules are broken? Rule 4 4) All members of the NRA are people opposed to gun control. All members of the NRA are law-abiding citizens. Therefore, all law-abiding citizens are people opposed to gun control. Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 5) No individuals sensitive to the difference between right and wrong are people who measure talent and success in terms of wealth. All corporate takeover experts are people who measure talent and success in terms of wealth. Therefore, no corporate takeover experts are individuals sensitive to the difference between right and wrong. Then check to see if any rules are broken: Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? (C) Re-write the following arguments using letters to represent terms, reduce the number of terms to three, and put the arguments into standard form. Then test the new forms by means of the five rules to determine validity. For example: Some people who do not regret their crimes are convicted murderers, so some convicted murderers are people insusceptible of being reformed, since all people susceptible of being reformed are people who regret their crimes. All people susceptible of being reformed (PS) are people who regret their crimes (PR). Some people who do not regret their crimes are convicted murderers (CM). Some convicted murderers are people insusceptible of being reformed. Putting into standard form: Reducing to three terms: All PS are PR. All non-PR are non-PS. (by contraposition) Some non-PR are CM. Some non-PR are CM. (okay) Some CM are non-PS. Some CM are non-PS. (okay) Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. OK, since the middle term, non-PR, is distributed in the major premise. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. OK, since neither term in the I conclusion is distributed. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. OK, since neither premise is negative. Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises.OK, since there are no negative premises or conclusion. Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. OK, since the minor premise is particular. Valid? Yes. If invalid, which rules are broken? Now you try it. 1) All Peace Corps volunteers (PV) are people who have witnessed poverty and desolation (PD), and all people insensitive to human need PI are people who have failed to witness poverty and desolation non-PD. Thus, all Peace Corps volunteers PV are people sensitive to human need.non PI Standard form All PV are PD All PI are not PD All PV are not PI Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok since the middle term PD is distributed in both the major and minor premise. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok because the terms PV and PI are in the major and minor premises respectively. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok because only the minor premise is negative. Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Fail because there is a negative conclusion. Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok because the premises are particular. Invalid because rule 4 is broken. 2) All aircraft that disintegrate AD in flight are unsafe planes non-SP. Therefore, no poorly maintained PA aircraft are safe planes SP, because all well-maintained aircraft non-PA are aircraft that remain intact in flight IF. All AD are non-SP No PA are SP All non-PA are IF Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Fail because the middle term is not clear. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Fail because IF is not distributed in the major and minor terms. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Fail because both premises are negative. Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. fail Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Fail Invalid because all the five rules have been broken. 3) No objects that sink OS in water are chunks of ice CI, and no objects that float non-OS in water are things at least as dense as water DW. Accordingly, all chunks of ice CI are things less dense than water non-DW. Standard form No OS are CI No non-OS are DW All CI are non-DW Reduce to three terms No OS are CI Some DW are not OS Some DW are not CI Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok because OS is distributed in the major premise. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok because CI and are distributed in the premises. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Fail because there are two negative premises Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Invalid because rule 3 is broken. There are two negative premises. 4) All schools driven by careerism SC are institutions that do not emphasize liberal IL arts. It follows that some universities UN are not institutions that emphasize liberal arts IL, for some schools that are not driven by careerism non-SC are universities UN. All SC are IL Some UN are IL Some UN are not SC Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok because IL is distributed in all the premises. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok, UN and SC are distributed in both premises. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid 5) No cases of AIDS AD are infections easily curable by drugs ED, since all diseases that infect the brain DB are infections not easily curable by drugs non-ED , and all diseases that do not infect the brain non-DB are cases other than AIDS non-AD. No AD are ED All DB are ED All non-DB are non-AD Standard form-Reducing to three terms No AD are ED All DB are ED No DB are AD Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok, ED has been distributed in all the premises. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok, both terms are found in the premises. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid (D) Translate the following arguments into standard-form categorical syllogisms, then use the rules for syllogisms to determine whether each is valid or invalid. For example: Whenever suicide rates decline, we can infer that people’s lives are better adjusted. Accordingly, since suicide rates have been declining in recent years, we can infer that people’s lives have been better adjusted in recent years. All years in which suicide rates decline are years in which people’s lives improve. Some recent years are years in which suicide rates decline. Therefore, some recent years are years in which people’s lives improve. 1) Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. OK, since the middle term, years in which suicide rates decline, is distributed in the major premise. 2) Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. OK, since neither term in the I conclusion is distributed. 3) Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. OK, since neither premise is negative. 4) Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. OK, since there are no negative premises or conclusion. 5) Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. OK, since the minor premise is particular. Valid? Yes. If invalid, which rules are broken? Now you try it. 1) Environmentalists purchase only fuel-efficient cars. Hence, Hummers must not be fuel efficient, since environmentalists do not purchase them. Standard form All hammers are not fuel efficient, environmentalists purchase only fuel efficient cars. Therefore, environmentalists do not purchase hammers Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. The middle term, fuel efficient cars, has been distributed in both premises. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok, since not term in the I has been distributed. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok because non of the terms is negative. Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok, since the premises or conclusion are not negative. Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok, the minor premise is specific and particular. Valid? Ok. If invalid, which rules are broken? 2) There are public schools that teach secular humanism. Therefore, since secular humanism is a religion, there are public schools that teach religion. Standard form Some public schools teach religion All secular humanism are religions. Some public schools teach secular humanism. Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. The middle term, religions has been distributed in the two premises. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. The major and minor terms are within the major and minor premise respectively. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. None of the premises is negative. Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok because there are no negative premises or conclusion. Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok, because the minor term is particular. Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 3) Any city that has excellent art museums is a tourist destination. Therefore, Paris is a tourist destination, because it has excellent art museums. Standard form All cities that have excellent art museums are tourist destinations. Paris has excellent art museums. Paris is a tourist destination Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok, the middle term is excellent art museums. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Paris and tourist destination are distributed in the premises. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok, the two premises are not negative. Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok because the premises and conclusion are not negative. Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok, because the minor term is particular. Valid? Ok. If invalid, which rules are broken? 4) Not all interest expenses are tax deductible. Home mortgage payments are interest expenses. Thus, they are not tax deductible. Some interest expenses are tax deducible Home mortgage payments are interest expenses. No home mortgage expenses are tax deductible Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok, interest expenses is the middle term. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok, the two terms are distributed in the premises. Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok, the two premises are not negative. Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Fail, there is no agreement between the two terms and conclusion. Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok, the minor term is particular. Valid? If invalid, which rules are broken? Invalid because rule 4 has been broken. 5) If marriage is based on a meshing of neuroses, it allows little room for growth. If a marriage allows little room for growth, it is bound to fail. Therefore, if a marriage is based on a meshing of neuroses, it is bound to fail. Standard form All marriages based on a meshing of neuroses allow little room for growth. All marriages that allow little room for growth are bound to fail. All marriages based on meshing neuroses are bound to fail Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 6) Wherever icebergs are present, threats to shipping exist. Icebergs are not present in the South Pacific. Hence, there are no threats to shipping in the South Pacific. All icebergs cause threats to shipping. No icebergs are in South pacific No threats to shipping in the South Pacific Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 7) According to surveys, there are college students who think that Africa is in North America. But anyone who thinks that has no knowledge of geography. It follows that there are college students who have no knowledge of geography. Standard form College students think Africa is in North America Students who think that Africa is in North America have no knowledge in geography. Some College students have no knowledge in geography. Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok. Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 8) All of the movies except the chick flicks were exciting. Hence, the action films were exciting, because none of them is a chick flick. Standard form Movies were exciting Chick flicks are not exciting No movie was a chick flick Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? 9) Autistic children are occasionally helped by aversive therapy. But aversive therapy is sometimes inhumane. Thus, autistic children are sometimes helped by inhumane therapy. Some aversive therapy helps artistic children Some aversive therapies are inhumane Some artistic children are helped by inhumane therapy Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Ok Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Ok Rule 3: There are not two negative premises. Ok Rule 4: No affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, and no negative conclusion from two affirmative premises. Ok Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Ok Valid? Ok If invalid, which rules are broken? Work cited Top of Form Hendrickson, Noel. The Rowman & Littlefield Handbook for Critical Thinking. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2008. Print. Bottom of Form Read More