|10-27-2011, 06:23 AM||#1|
Writing speed: snail
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Porto, Portugal
Thanked 11,467 Times in 3,902 Posts
Technical Guide to Form Arguments Logically
Since it seems we’re on theory season in the Naruto Manga section and seeing that some theories are… less than stellar, to put it nicely, I thought that this section needs a thread that can serve as reference for both those who create theories and those who refute them.
1) Deductive thinking
a. PropositionWhen we state something, be it affirmative or negative, we’re making a proposition that is composed by subject and predicate. The subject is the target of the statement and predicate is the attribute given/denied to the subject.
For example, in the proposition “This manga’s name is Naruto”, the manga is the subject and Naruto is the predicate. But why am I talking about this?
Because of that big word. Syllogism is the form of deductive thinking with 3 propositions where 2 of them become premises and the other becomes the conclusion. The conclusion is a proposition with new information that is based on the premises.
Also, how the terms display themselves in the premises alter the nature of the conclusion. There are four figures, going from more spontaneous to more technical:
Taking again the example, the syllogism belongs to the First Figure. Now these are the principles behind those figures
Now, if you’re not bored out of your skulls like when I first learned this, you’ll notice that are some aspects that never appear, like two negative premises or two particular premises. That’s because there are rules when forming a syllogism.
c. Formal fallacies of syllogismsYes, all this blabber was only to reach to these pearls of (lack of) logic that people in this forum seem to love. Since we made a list of rules, let’s see what fallacies are connected to them by order.
One would think people would be wiser to avoid such a silly fallacy, but some just seem to love it. Here’s an example:i. Fallacy of Four Terms
This is fallacious because there are clearly four terms: the 7th Path is not the 7th Realm in Buddhism, therefore this syllogism lacks a middle term, making the conclusion invalid.
ii. Fallacy of Intrusive Middle TermAgain, another fallacy that should be easy to avoid but somehow it isn’t.
This is fallacious because the middle term (Senju) is present in the conclusion, giving the proposition 2 predicates when it can only have one (in this case, being descendant of the Second Son). The correct conclusion is “All Uzumaki descend from the Second Son”.
iii. Fallacy of Undistributed Middle TermSeemingly similar to the previous fallacy, but there’s a significant difference.
This is fallacious because, even though the middle term is not in the conclusion, it still makes the conclusion invalid. Why? Think of it for a bit: the middle term is being the predicate for both affirmative premises, so it’s never distributed in any of them. That’s why the Second Figure has a negative premise and a negative conclusion, to give distribution to the middle term.
iv. Illicit minor/majorAnother fallacy that’s connected to the distribution of terms
This is fallacious because the major term (being undead) is augmented in the conclusion. It was non-distributed in the premise but somehow distributed in the conclusion.
v. Fallacy of Exclusive TermsAnd this is why you don’t have two negative premises.
This is a blatant fallacy, since the conclusion is useless (we didn’t need the syllogism to know that Tobirama isn’t Naruto) and the middle term is irrelevant (who says Tobi can say any character in the context of the syllogism)
vi. Illicit affirmative/negativeMore nonsense!
Another blatant fallacy, because, like in math, when you add two affirmatives you can’t have a negative as result.
vii. Universal/Affirmative conclusion when one of the premises is Particular/Negative
One more silly fallacy:
This is fallacious, because the major term is negative and it’s the predicate of the conclusion, therefore its negative property also has to be present in the conclusion.
viii. Fallacy of Particular TermsAnd taking the above example, it is also fallacious because Karin is a particular term that also happens to be the minor, but since we’re taking two particular terms, the link between premises is too weak to validate the conclusion.
Last edited by Numinous; 10-27-2011 at 06:30 AM.
|The Following 22 Users Say Thank You to Numinous For This Useful Post:||
AOTKorby (10-27-2011), ask me anything (10-27-2011), aspit (10-30-2011), jts105 (10-27-2011), kael03 (10-27-2011), KatrinaKatt (10-27-2011), kluang (01-26-2012), Mal (01-20-2012), Miburo (11-04-2011), ninjalostboy95 (11-05-2011), phillip (10-27-2011), platinumrug (10-28-2011), saiyaman (01-20-2012), Senkradlol (10-27-2011), stubborn_d0nkey (10-27-2011), Uchiha09 (01-02-2012), UzumakiUchiha (05-17-2012), Vengeance (10-27-2011), Vishnu (10-27-2011), Wolverine (11-04-2011), woody_3162 (10-28-2011), xxMESTxx (10-27-2011)
|Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)|
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Final fantasy xiii - the official guide - piggyback [rs][mu]||:Sakura:||Gaming||0||04-22-2010 01:00 PM|