SlideServe
Télécharger Obtenir Pro
Menu
Accueil Pro
Préférences
ApparenceLight Aide et commentaires
© SlideServe · v2026

Using Venn Diagrams to Test Validity

diella avatar
diella
26 diapositives · 1.1K Views · Jul 30, 2014

Using Venn Diagrams to Test Validity. What we are doing. To test the validity of a syllogism, you may use a Venn diagram. A Venn diagram is three intersecting circles. There are 8 sections created as a result. How to do it.

Using Venn Diagrams to Test Validity - slide 1
01 / 26Using Venn Diagrams to Test Validity
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

Using Venn Diagrams to Test Validity
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation

  1. Using Venn Diagrams to Test Validity

  2. What we are doing. • To test the validity of a syllogism, you may use a Venn diagram. • A Venn diagram is three intersecting circles. There are 8 sections created as a result.

  3. How to do it. • To test a syllogism using a Venn diagram, we fill in the major and minor premises. • Do NOT fill in the conclusion. • If the syllogism is valid, the conclusion will already be diagrammed. If it isn’t, the syllogism is invalid.

  4. S is the minor term. (Remember: S is the subject of the conclusion.) P is the major term (the predicate of the conclusion.) M is the middle term.

  5. Take the following syllogism: All Greeks are mortal. (All M are P) All Athenians are Greek. (All S are M) So, all Athenians are mortal. (All S are P) What is its mood and figure? AAA-1

  6. Start with the major premise. • (Remember: M is Greeks, P is mortal.) • What would this part look like?

  7. Major premise, diagrammed.

  8. Now, diagram the minor premise: All Athenians are Greek. • Out of P, S, and M, which letter do we use for the Athenians? • S • Out of P, S, and M, which letter will we use for the Greeks? • M

  9. So what will the minor premise look like?

  10. Now, overlap the two premises: • S = Athenians • P = mortal • M = Greeks Is the conclusion valid?

  11. Yes. All Greeks are mortal. (All M are P) All Athenians are Greek. (All S are M) So, all Athenians are mortal. (All S are P)

  12. Try this one: All mathematicians are rational. (All P are M) All philosophers are rational. (All S are M) SO, all philosophers are mathematicians. (All S are P) What will the diagram look like?

  13. Volunteer

  14. What rule(s) does this syllogism violate? All mathematicians are rational. (All P are M) All philosophers are rational. (All S are M) SO, all philosophers are mathematicians. (All S are P) • D1: fallacy of the undistributed middle. (Whenever we have exactly 3 shaded regions, we have a fallacy of distribution.)

  15. Consider the following: All philosophers are logical. (All P are M.) Some physicists are logical. (Some S are M.) So, some philosophers are physicists. (Some S are P.) What is the mood and figure? AII-2

  16. What does this one look like?

  17. AII-2 is invalid. Whenever a diagram indicates that a term occupies 2 regions, it is invalid.

  18. What rule(s) does this one violate? All philosophers are logical. (All P are M.) Some physicists are logical. (Some S are M.) So, some philosophers are physicists. (Some S are P.) • D2 (fallacy of the undistributed middle)

  19. Tweaking it a bit. Some physicists are logical. (Some S are M) No philosophers are logical. (No P are M) So, some physicists are not philosophers. (Some S are not P) What is the mood and figure of this argument? IEO-2

  20. What does IEO-2 look like?

  21. OEO-4 Some P is not M. No M is S. Some S is not P. • Diagram and test for validity. • OEO-4 commits D2, (fallacy of the illicit major).

  22. AEE-3 All M is P. No M is S. No S is P. • AEE is invalid. It commits D2 (fallacy of the illicit major, again).

  23. OOO-1 Some M is not P. Some S is not M. Some S is not P. This syllogism commits a D1 violation…2 negative premises. This particular violation is called fallacy of exclusive premises.

  24. The problem of EAO-4. • No P is M. • All M is S. • Some S is not P. • According to what we’ve learned, EAO-4 doesn’t violate Q1, Q2, D1, or D2. However, there is nothing to positively indicate the conclusion!

  25. One more rule! • You cannot have two universal premises and a particular conclusion. This is called the existential fallacy.

  26. Limitations on Venn Diagrams • 4- and 5-term diagrams are possible, but…