1 / 9

Squares of Opposition

Squares of Opposition. Modern v . Traditional. The Traditional Square of Opposition. Contradictory. A & O or E & I Both can’t have the same truth value. Only one can be true; the other must be false. Contrary. A & E statements only.

silas
Download Presentation

Squares of Opposition

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Squares of Opposition Modern v. Traditional

  2. The Traditional Square of Opposition

  3. Contradictory • A & O or E & I • Both can’t have the same truth value. • Only one can be true; the other must be false.

  4. Contrary • A & E statements only. • Both can’t be true, but both could be false (not guaranteed), unless a necessary truth is involved. • Relationship doesn’t hold in modern square, except with additional, existential premise.

  5. Sub-contrary • I & E statements only • Both can’t be false, but both could be true (not guaranteed), unless you’re dealing with a necessary falsehood. • Relationship doesn’t hold in modern square, except with additional, existential premise.

  6. Super > Sub-alternate • A to I, E to O • Truth of super implies truth of sub • Note that it doesn’t go the other way. My other car is a super-sub.

  7. Sub > Super-alternate • I to A, O to E • Falsity of sub implies falsity of super. • Note that it doesn’t go the other way. Is this making sense?

  8. Implications of the Modern Square of Opposition • Don’t freak out! • So, you may have learned about relationships that, unlike Aristotelians, modern logicians assert don’t hold. Get over it. • The important concept to learn here is that of existential import. • Otherwise, one of the most important and easily recognized relationships (contradiction) is preserved. • The other relationships still work, so long as we add a premise asserting that “There is at least one S.” • We will learn more about adding missing premises in the next section, dealing with enthymemes. • FYI, the term enthymeme comes from the Greek en “in” + thymos “mind,” or, literally, a proposition retained “in the mind” rather than made explicit in the argument.

  9. Contradictions and the Square of Opposition Only contradiction remains, unless the premise “There is at least one S” is supplied.

More Related