Loading in 5 sec....

Dilemma: Division Into CasesPowerPoint Presentation

Dilemma: Division Into Cases

- 344 Views
- Uploaded on

Download Presentation
## PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Dilemma: Division Into Cases' - Sharon_Dale

**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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

Dilemma: Division Into Cases

Dilemma: p Ú q

p ® r

q ® r

\ r

Premises:x is positive or x is negative.

If x is positive , then x2 is positive.

If x is negative, then x2 is positive.

Conclusion:x2 is positive.

Application: Find My Glasses

1. If my glasses are on the kitchen table, then I saw them at breakfast.

2. I was reading in the kitchen or I was reading in the living room.

3. If I was reading in the living room, then my glasses are on the coffee table.

4. I did not see my glasses at breakfast.

5. If I was reading in bed, then my glasses are on the bed table.

6. If I was reading in the kitchen, then my glasses are on the kitchen table.

Find My Glasses (cont’d.)

Let: p = My glasses are on the kitchen table.

q = I saw my glasses at breakfast.

r = I was reading in the living room.

s = I was reading in the kitchen.

t = My glasses are on the coffee table.

u = I was reading in bed.

v = My glasses are on the bed table.

Find My Glasses (cont’d.)

Then the original statements become:

1. p ® q 2. r Ú s 3. r ® t

4. ~q 5. u ® v 6. s ® p

and we can deduce (why?):

1. p ® q 2. s ® p 3. r Ú s 4. r ® t

~q ~p ~s r

\ ~p \ ~s \ r \ t

Hence the glasses are on the coffee table!

Fallacies

- A fallacy is an error in reasoning that results in an invalid argument.
- Three common fallacies:
- Using vague or ambiguous premises;
- Begging the question;
- Jumping to a conclusion.

- Two dangerous fallacies:
- Converse error;
- Inverse error.

Converse Error

If Zeke cheats, then he sits in the back row.

Zeke sits in the back row.

\ Zeke cheats.

- The fallacy here is caused by replacing the impication (Zeke cheats ® sits in back) with its biconditional form (Zeke cheats « sits in back), implying the converse (sits in back ® Zeke cheats).

Inverse Error

If Zeke cheats, then he sits in the back row.

Zeke does not cheat.

\ Zeke does not sit in the back row.

- The fallacy here is caused by replacing the impication (Zeke cheats ® sits in back) with its inverse form (Zeke does not cheat ® does not sit in back), instead of the contrapositive (does not sit in back ® Zeke does not cheat).

Universal Instantiation

- Consider the following statement:All men are mortal Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
- This argument form is valid and is called universal instantiation.
- In summary, it states that if P(x) is true for all xÎD and if aÎD, then P(a) must be true.

Universal Modus Ponens

- Formal Version: "xÎD, if P(x), then Q(x).P(a) for some aÎD. \Q(a).
- Informal Version: If x makes P(x) true, then x makes Q(x) true.a makes P(x) true.\a makes Q(x) true.
- The first line is called the major premise and the second line is the minor premise.

Universal Modus Tollens

- Formal Version: "xÎD, if P(x), then Q(x).~Q(a) for some aÎD. \~P(a).
- Informal Version: If x makes P(x) true, then x makes Q(x) true.a makes Q(x) false.\a makes P(x) false.

Examples

- Universal Modus Ponens or Tollens???
If a number is even, then its square is even.

10 is even.

Therefore, 100 is even.

If a number is even, then its square is even.

25 is odd.

Therefore, 5 is odd.

Using Diagrams to Show Validity

- Does this diagram portray the argument of the second slide?

Mortals

Men

Socrates

A Modus Tollens Example

- All humans are mortal.Zeus is not mortal.Therefore, Zeus is not human.

Zeus

Mortals

Humans

Modus Tollens in Pictures

- For all x, P(x) implies Q(x).~Q(a).Therefore, ~P(a).

{x | Q(x)}

a

{x | P(x)}

Converse Error in Pictures

- All humans are mortal.Felix the cat is mortal.Therefore, Felix the cat is human.

Mortals

Felix?

Humans

Felix?

Inverse Error in Pictures

- All humans are mortal.Felix the cat is not human.Therefore, Felix the cat is not mortal.

Mortals

Felix?

Felix?

Humans

Quantified Form of Converseand Inverse Errors

- Converse Error:" x, P(x) implies Q(x).Q(a), for a particular a.\P(a).
- Inverse Error:" x, P(x) implies Q(x).~P(a), for a particular a.\~Q(a).

An Argument with “No”

- Major Premise: No Naturals are negative.
- Minor Premise:k is a negative number.
- Conclusion:k is not a Natural number.

Negative numbers

Natural numbers

k

Abduction

- Major Premise: All thieves go to Paul’s Bar.
Minor Premise: Tom goes to Paul’s Bar.

Converse Error: Therefore, Tom is a thief.

- Although we can’t conclude decisively if Tom is a thief or not, if we have further information that 99 of the 100 people in Paul’s Bar are thieves, then the odds are that Tom is a thief and the converse error is actually valid here.
- This is called abduction by Artificial Intelligence researchers.

Download Presentation

Connecting to Server..