In a valid syllogism, the conclusion follows from the premises whether or not the premises are true.
Bertram offers this syllogism:
"A gentleman drinks sherry.
"I am a gentleman.
"Therefore, what I drink is sherry."
This would be valid only if the first premise were:
"A gentleman drinks only sherry."
Invalid:
If it rains, then the street is wet.
The street is wet.
Therefore, it rains.
Someone might have been out with a hosepipe.
At school, one guy, wanting to insult another guy wittily, said, "Peter, you know that saying, 'Familiarity breeds contempt.' I don't agree with it. No. I hardly know you and I can't stand the sight of you!"
Again, the premise is not that only familiarity breeds contempt.
3 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
And Hokas were renowned for their ability to drink an amazing amount of strong alcoholic drinks despite their comparatively small sizes.
And I think the use of syllogisms, valid or invalid, dates back to Aristotle's treatises on logic.
Sean
Sean,
It does. One of the Indian philosophical schools has an equivalent but with 5, instead of 3, propositions.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And that Indian philosophical school might have been DISTANTLY influenced by Greek philosophy? From the time when Greece and India had direct contact with each other during the fairly short lived Greek kingdom of Bactria.
Sean
Post a Comment