Philosophy Test 2

Front 1

Universal Affirmative Proposition

Back 1

The whole of one class is included or contained in another class.

ex. All S is P.

Front 2

Standard-Form Categorical Proposition

ASEBINOP

Back 2

A: All S is P

E: No S is P.

I: Some S is P.

O: Some S is not P.

Front 3

Contraries

Back 3

Two propositions so related that they cannot both be true, although both may be false

Front 4

Contingent

Back 4

Being neither tautologous nor self-contradictory. A Contingent statement may be true or false.

Front 5

Subcontraries

Back 5

Two propositions so related that they cannot both be false. They can both be true.

Front 6

Conversion

Back 6

Valid form of immediate inference. Interchanging the subject and predicate terms in a proposition. Valid for E and I forms. Limited for A. Non applicable for O.

Front 7

Obversion

Back 7

To change a statements quality (affirmative to negative or vice versa) and replace predicate term with it's compliment.

New statement is called obverse. Original is called obvertend.

Front 8

Contraposition

Back 8

To replace the subject term with the compliment of the predicate term and replace the predicate term with the compliment of the subject term.

Valid for A and O. Limited for E. Not valid for I.

Front 9

Existential Import

Back 9

An attribute of propositions that normally assert the existence of objects of some specified kind.

Ex. "Some dogs are obedient" asserts that there are dogs.

Front 10

Existential Fallacy

Back 10

Any mistake in reasoning that arises from assuming illegitimately that some class has members.

Front 11

Syllogism

Back 11

Any deductive argument in which a conclusion is inferred from two premises.

Front 12

Categorical Syllogism

Back 12

A deductive argument consisting of three categorical propositions that contain exactly three terms, each of which occurs in exactly two of the propositions.

Front 13

Standard form

Back 13

Form syllogism is said to be when each statement is of form A,E,I,O and in the order; major minor conclusion.

Front 14

Major term

Back 14

Term that occurs as predicate term of conclusion.

Front 15

Minor term

Back 15

Term that occurs as the subject term of conclusion.

Front 16

Middle term

Back 16

Term that occurs in both premises but not the conclusion.

Front 17

Major premise

Back 17

Contains major term.

Front 18

Minor premise

Back 18

Contains minor term.

Front 19

Mood

Back 19

Characterization of categorical syllogisms. Determined by forms of propositions. Four proposition types, three propositions per equals 64 total moods. Identified by 3 letters.

Front 20

Figure

Back 20

The position of the middle term in the premises of standard form categorical syllogism.

Front 21

Fallacy of 4 Terms

Back 21

Syllogism constructed with more than three terms.

Avoid four terms.

Front 22

Fallacy of Undistributed middle

Back 22

Middle term of syllogism isn't distributed in at least one premise.

Distribute middle term in at least one premise.

Front 23

Fallacy of Illicit Process

Back 23

Term that is distributed in conclusion isn't distributed in the corresponding premise.

Any term in conclusion must be in premise.

Front 24

Fallacy of Exclusive Premise

Back 24

Fallacy committed when both premises in a syllogism are negative propositions (E or O).

Avoid two negative premises.

Front 25

Existential Fallacy

Back 25

A particular conclusion is inferred from two universal premises.

Front 26

Drawing an affirmative conclusion from negative premise

Back 26

If either premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative.

Front 27

Illicit Major or Illicit Minor

Back 27

If either term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in the premises.

Front 28

Singular Proposition

Back 28

A proposition that asserts that a particular individual has (or doesn't have) some specified attribute.

Front 29

Unit class

Back 29

Class with only one member.

Front 30

Exclusive Propositions

Back 30

Propositions that assert that the predicate applies exclusively to the subject named.

Front 31

Exceptive Propositions

Back 31

Proposition that asserts that all members of some class, with the exception of the members of one of it's subclasses, are members of some other class.

Front 32

Parameter

Back 32

An auxiliary symbol or phrase that is introduced in translating statements uniformly, helping to express syllogism with exactly three terms, so that it may be accurately tested.

Front 33

Uniform Translation

Back 33

Techniques making possible the reformulation of a syllogistic argument into standard form, so that it may be tested accurately.

Front 34

Enthymeme (1st, 2nd, 3rd order)

Back 34

An argument stated incompletely, the unstated part being taken for granted. Occurs in premise or conclusion. Which one affects order.

1st/2nd/3rd = Major/minor/conclusion.

Front 35

Disjunctive Syllogism

Back 35

Syllogism in which one of the premises is a disjunction, the other premise is the denial or the contradictory of one of the two disjuncts, and the conclusion is the statement that the other disjunct in the first statement is true.

Front 36

Pure Hypothetical Syllogism

Back 36

A syllogism that contains only hypothetical propositions.

Front 37

Mixed Hypothetical Syllogism

Back 37

A syllogism that contains one conditional (or hypothetical) premise, and one categorical premise.

Front 38

Modus Ponens

Back 38

A mixed hypothetical syllogism in which the first premise is a conditional proposition, the second premise affirms the antecedent of the conditional, and the conclusion affirms the consequent of that conditional.

Front 39

Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent

Back 39

From the truth of the consequent of a conditional statement, the conclusion is reached that the antecedent of the conditional must be true.

Front 40

Modus Tollens

Back 40

A mixed hypothetical syllogism in which the first premise is a conditional proposition, the second statement is a denial of the consequent, and the conclusion is the denial of the antecedent of the conditional.

Front 41

Fallacy of denying the antecedent

Back 41

From the negation of the antecedent of a conditional proposition, the conclusion is reached that the consequent of the conditional is false.