Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Two important factors for the main premise of a deductive argument are
A. Though "no one has ever seen a ghost" may sound like a generalization, it actually
reports the results of (or the lack of them) and, as a result, this claim is
more suitable for an argument.
B. Though this claim is certainly a generalization, it contains only one term. If we restated it
in the form of a premise from a syllogism, it would become "No ghosts are," or "All
ghosts are not." It's not impossible to get a deductive argument out of such a premise--
"Yolanda is. Therefore, Yolanda is not a ghost"--but it is both awkward and reductive. ½
isn't the best choice here.
x
x
x
xx
x
x
x
x
x
^. Scientific study has proven that . . ." may sound like a generalization, but as a report of
(even by scientists), this claim has the form of an premise. And
eliminating that phrase creates another problem: "there are no ghosts" only has a single
term, "ghosts." Of course, we can imagine this claim being used deductively, just as we
can imagine a second premise such as "Yohanan is," producing the conclusion,
"Therefore, Yohanan is not a ghost." But is certainly not the best choice.
2. Which would be the best way to restate the claim, "The hardest-working students receive
the highest grades," for use in analyzing a deductive argument?
A. "Working students" may produce some confusion, since it denotes something
different from "hadest-working students," but the real problem here is that the
active verb, "receive," needs to be replaced by a state-of-being verb (such as
"are"), in order to avoid misunderstandings.
B. The abbreviations here are fine, but the active verb, "receive," needs to be
replaced by a state-of-being verb (such as "are"), in order to avoid
misunderstandings
C. No shortening occurred here, which is fine in cases like this where the terms are
not terribly lengthy or complex. But the active verb, "receive," needs to be
replaced by a state-of-being verb (such as "are"), in order to avoid
misunderstandings.
x x
x x
x x
x
x
º. Since all deductive arguments can be expressed as either syllogisms or conditionals, choose
the equivalent conditional for the following major premise of a syllogism: "All men are mortal."
4. Since all deductive arguments can be expressed as either syllogisms or conditionals, convert
the following conditional into a premise for a syllogism: "If the Spartans win, then Amy will
celebrate."
A. This answer would only be acceptable if you understood "Spartans" as meaning
"Spartan wins," and "celebrators" as meaning "occasions for celebrating." Since
this is possible, but not likely, there is a better choice than a.
B. The two ideas associated in the original conditional are "winning" and
"celebrating," but this answer associates "winning" and "Spartans." Be sure not to
change the meaning of a claim in restating it for analysis.
C. CORRECT
^. The verb has been converted to state-of-being here, but the sense has been altered.
Instead of saying something about what happens when "the Spartans win," your
answer talks about what it means when there are "celebrations."