|
|
Denying the Antecedent vs Improper TranspositionAffirming the Consequent and Commutation of Conditionals are logically similar, as they have the same form (affirming the consequent Q and therefore affirming P), but the latter phrase applies to conditional statements. Thus, while both being examples of fallacious modus ponens, at least I can tell when to use each. This is not the case for Denying the Antecedent and Improper Transposition, though. They appear too similar for me to distinguish between them. Denying the Antecedent presents like this: P implies Q. Not-P, therefore, not-Q. Invalid because P is not a necessary condition for Q. Got it. Improper Transposition presents like this: If P, then Q. If not-P, then not-Q. Nowhere in the page description is it stated whether this applies to conditionals only or not (which helped me with the first two fallacies I mention). So are the two effectively the same and just context-dependent? Or is there another difference I've missed? |
| asked on Sunday, May 10, 2020 09:40:01 AM by TrappedPrior (RotE) | |
Top Categories Suggested by Community |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.
* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.
|
|
The only examples I found on this (outside of my own site) used conditionals. If by "context dependent" you mean that conditionals are required, I would say "probably" with the disclaimer that this is because I have simply not seen it any other way. Perhaps someone who specializes in formal logic can chime in. |
| answered on Monday, May 11, 2020 06:27:39 AM by Bo Bennett, PhD | |
Bo Bennett, PhD Suggested These Categories |
|
Comments |
|
|
| |
