True or False Use your knowledge of Venn diagrams for categorical propositions a

Question

True or False

Use your knowledge of Venn diagrams for categorical propositions and immediate inferences, from the Aristotelian and the Boolean standpoints, to determine which of the following statements are true. Place a check mark in the box next to each true statement An Aristotelian Venn diagram for the statement "No Sare P" should have a shaded overlapping region betweer circle S and circle P, and there should be a circled X in the non-overlapping region of circle S An argument with an unconditionally valid form but whose premise has a subject term that does not denote something that really exists, commits the existential fallacy from both the Boolean and the Aristotelian standpoints The following immediate inference is invalid from the Aristotelian standpoint: No werewolves are Tasmanian devils. Therefore, it is false that some werewolves are Tasmanian devils The following argument form is unconditionally valid: It is false that some S are P. Therefore, no S are ? An argument that has an unconditionally valid form does not commit the existential fallacy from the Boolean standpoint, and the argument does not commit the existential fallacy from the Aristotelian standpoint ? An argument with an unconditionally valid form is valid from both the Boolean standpoint and the Aristotelian standpoint The following immediate inference is valid from the Aristotelian standpoint but invalid from the Boolean standpoint: It is false that some key chains are surveillance devices. Therefore, it is false that all key chains are surveillance devices The Aristotelian standpoint and the Boolean standpoint differ only in their interpretations of universal (A and E) propositions ? To test an immediate inference for validity, first test it with the Venn diagram method from the Aristotelian standpoint and then from the Boolean standpoint If an argument has a conditionally valid form but has a premise whose subject term does not denote something actual, then the argument commits the existential fallacy from the Aristotelian standpoint The Aristotelian standpoint and the Boolean standpoint differ in their interpretations of particular (1 and O) propositions ? The following argument form is conditionally valid: It is false that some S are not P. Therefore, all S are P. ? The Aristotelian Venn diagrams for type 1 statements and type O statements are the same as the Boolean All arguments that are valid from the Aristotelian standpoint are also valid from the Boolean standpoint An argument with an unconditionally valid form is valid only from the Aristotelian standpoint Venn diagrams for those statement types

Explanation / Answer

The following statement said are TRUE:

Statement 1. No S is P is represented by highlighting the overlapping area between S and P.

Statement 6 is correct as. conditionally valid argument is correct both from Boolean as well as Aristotelian logic. Such arguments have conclusion which flow from the premises and also have existential import.

Statement 7 is true as the argument has existential import from Aristotelian logic but not from Boolean logic.

Statement 9 is true as the same argument can be valid from Aristotelian perspective but not from Boolean logic.

Statement 10 is true as existential import in Aristotelian logic is determined by the presence of the subject term in real life.

Statement 11 is true as arguments with particular premises may be invalid from Boolean logic and still be valid from Aristotelian logic provided they have an existential import.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.