{br} STUCK with your assignment? {br} When is it due? {br} Get FREE assistance. Page Title: {title}{br} Page URL: {url}
UK: +44 748 007-0908, USA: +1 917 810-5386 [email protected]
Select Page
1. QUESTION

Assignment 3

This assignment consists of five equally-weighted questions and should take you approximately six hours to complete. As always, be concise and approach each question directly. If the question asks for an explanation with your answer, then the quality of that explanation counts in your mark for the question. The total possible high mark for this assignment is 100 marks.

Categorical Syllogism Questions 1-5: (20 marks each) The following five passages contain arguments. For each argument formulate it as a standard form categorical syllogism. Indicate the Major Term, Minor Term, and Middle Term of each categorical syllogism. Indicate the mood and figure of each categorical syllogism. Assuming the Boolean Standpoint, determine the validity of each categorical syllogism by producing a Venn Diagram for the syllogism. Provide a brief statement about the Venn Diagram that indicates what in the diagram shows invalidity or validity. If the categorical syllogism is invalid explain which of our text’s rules of validity the categorical syllogism violates.

1. It must be the case that all animals are able to think. Since all animals feel pain, and all things that feel pain are able to think.

2. All messengers who bring bad news are unwelcome. All messengers who bring bad news are punished. Therefore, some unwelcome persons are punished.

3. No syllogisms are arguments with four terms. Some arguments with four terms are invalid. So, no syllogisms are invalid.

4. Whales have lungs, but no fish do; so whales aren’t fish.

5. No students are boring, and some professors are boring.

This assignment, like all the assignments and term exams for this section of PHIL 1320, contains some questions from some of the following:

1. Baronett, Stan. Logic Second Edition. OUP. (New York: 2013) ISBN 978-0-19-984631-3.

2. Flage, Daniel E.. Understanding Logic. Prentice-Hall. (Englewood Cliffs New Jersey: 1995) ISBN 0-02-338173-6

3. Salmon, Merrilee H.. Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking Third Edition. Harcourt Brace & Company. (Fort Worth: 1995) ISBN 0-15-543064-5

4. Warmbrod, Ken. Logic and Philosophy of Logic Course Guide for Philosophy 2430. University of Manitoba. (Winnipeg: 2013) ISBN 978-0-200-00202-8

Subject Pages Style Uncategorized 9 APA

Categorical Syllogism

1. It must be the case that all animals are able to think. Since all animals feel pain, and all things that feel pain are able to think.

All things that feel pain are able to think

All animals feel pain

All animals are able to think

Major term: to think

Minor term: All animals

Middle term: feel pain

Figure:

All M are P

All S are M

All S are P

(Figure 1)

M   P

S   M

Mood:

Listing the above statement forms in standard order (Major premise, minor premise, conclusion), the mood is noted as AAA

Venn Diagram:

Testing for validity:

From a Boolean Standpoint, test for validity involves shading the Venn diagram while avoiding entering the conclusion. If the conclusion is already represented (after the shading), then the syllogism is valid.

Doing this for the above syllogism reveals it is indeed valid, implying no rule has been violated.

AAA-1

1. All messengers who bring bad news are unwelcome. All messengers who bring bad news are punished. Therefore, some unwelcome persons are punished.

All messengers who bring bad news are unwelcome.

All messengers who bring bad news are punished.

Therefore, some unwelcome persons are punished.

Major term: Punished

Minor term: unwelcome

Middle term: All messengers who bring bad news

Figure:

All M are P

All M are S

Some S are P

M   P

M   S

S   P

(Figure 3)

Mood:

Listing the above statement forms in standard order (Major premise, minor premise, conclusion), the mood is AAI

Testing for validity:

Following the procedure of shading without entering the conclusion area, it emerges that this area is already included (after completion). It is, therefore, valid because the information in the conclusion is already included in the premises. Thus, no rule has been violated.

1. No syllogisms are arguments with four terms. Some arguments with four terms are invalid. So, no syllogisms are invalid.

No syllogisms are arguments with four terms.

Some arguments with four terms are invalid.

No syllogisms are invalid.

Major term:  invalid

Minor term:  Syllogisms

Middle term: arguments with four terms

Figure:

As it were, figure is determined by position of the middle term

No P are M

Some M are S

No P are S

P    M

M   S

S   P

(Fourth Figure)

Mood:

Listing the above statement forms in standard order (Major premise, minor premise, conclusion), the mood is EIO

Testing for validity:

Adopting a Boolean Standpoint, start shading the Venn diagram while avoiding entering the conclusion area. If the conclusion is already included after shading, syllogism is valid. Clearly, this one is valid. No rule is violated.

EIO-2

1. Whales have lungs, but no fish do; so whales aren’t fish.

Whales have lungs

But no fish have lungs

So whales aren’t fish

Major term: fish

Minor term:  Whales

Middle term: Have lungs

Figure:

Look out for position of middle term

(Second Figure)

P are M

No S are M

P are not S

P  M

S  M

S  P

(Second figure)

Mood:

Listing the above statement forms in standard order (Major premise, minor premise, conclusion), the mood is EAE.

Testing for validity:

Shading without entering the conclusion area yields an already shaded conclusion upon completion. This implies the syllogism is valid. No rule has been violated.

1. No students are boring, and some professors are boring.

No students are boring

Some professors are boring

??

No P are M

Some S are M

Figure

P  M

S  M

(Second Figure)

Apparently, there is no conclusion here, just two premises.

It goes without saying that this is not even a syllogism because a categorical syllogism must contain two premises and one conclusion. The absence of a conclusion in this case merits omission of any further analysis.

1. QUESTION

### References

Appendix

 Appendix A: Communication Plan for an Inpatient Unit to Evaluate the Impact of Transformational Leadership Style Compared to Other Leader Styles such as Bureaucratic and Laissez-Faire Leadership in Nurse Engagement, Retention, and Team Member Satisfaction Over the Course of One Year