Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Logical reasoning is a form of thinking that is concerned with arriving at a conclusion in a rigorous way. [1] This happens in the form of inferences by transforming the information present in a set of premises to reach a conclusion.
Conclusion/Consequent: All Greeks are mortal. Each of the three distinct terms represents a category. From the example above, humans, mortal, and Greeks: mortal is the major term, and Greeks the minor term. The premises also have one term in common with each other, which is known as the middle term; in this example, humans. Both of the premises ...
For example, oxygen is necessary for fire. But one cannot assume that everywhere there is oxygen, there is fire. A condition X is sufficient for Y if X, by itself, is enough to bring about Y. For example, riding the bus is a sufficient mode of transportation to get to work.
In modern usage, it has come to refer to an argument in which the premises assume the conclusion without supporting it. This makes it an example of circular reasoning. [1] [2] Some examples are: "People have known for thousands of years that the earth is round. Therefore, the earth is round." "Drugs are illegal so they must be bad for you.
An epilogue or epilog (from Greek ἐπίλογος epílogos, "conclusion" from ἐπί epi, "in addition" and λόγος logos, "word") is a piece of writing at the end of a work of literature, usually used to bring closure to the work. [1] It is presented from the perspective of within the story.
But a valid form with true premises will always have a true conclusion. For example, consider the form of the following symbological track: All meat comes from animals. All beef is meat. Therefore, all beef comes from animals. If the premises are true, then the conclusion is necessarily true, too. Now we turn to an invalid form. All A are B ...
The fallacy lies in a conclusion based solely on the order of events, rather than taking into account other factors potentially responsible for the result that might rule out the connection. [2] Post hoc ergo propter hoc is an easy fallacy to detect when it is blatant, but even the best of scientists and statesmen are occasionally misled by it.
An example of jumping to conclusions is when one makes assumptions about what someone else is going to say, often by cutting them off with the words "I know what you're going to say". Saying things like "wow, geez, and what a shame" can make one come across as more interested in looking supportive than what the other person is saying. Therefore ...