Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Oblique syllogisms

tbhidc
Posts: 84
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2014 9:37:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
They're confusing. They deal with relations instead of two predicates being joined by a copula.

A normal syllogism...

All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Socrates is mortal

an oblique syllogism

Mary is the mother of Jesus
Jesus is God
Mary is the mother of God

The difference is that while a normal categorical syllogism deals with terms joined by a "to be" verb, an oblique syllogism deals with relations, such as "mother of" or "next to".

But it's so hard to tell when oblique syllogisms are valid and when they aren't. It seems every one is different.

What do you think? How do you tell when an oblique syllogism is valid?
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/21/2014 11:18:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/21/2014 9:37:36 PM, tbhidc wrote:
They're confusing. They deal with relations instead of two predicates being joined by a copula.

All oblique syllogisms have the trait of confusion.
What you just said has the trait of confusion (as I have no idea what you just said).
What you said is an oblique syllogism.


What do you think? How do you tell when an oblique syllogism is valid?

The one I presented is valid.
I am always valid.
All oblique syllogisms are always valid.

Always
tbhidc
Posts: 84
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/22/2014 9:10:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/21/2014 11:18:17 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 5/21/2014 9:37:36 PM, tbhidc wrote:
They're confusing. They deal with relations instead of two predicates being joined by a copula.

All oblique syllogisms have the trait of confusion.
What you just said has the trait of confusion (as I have no idea what you just said).
What you said is an oblique syllogism.


That';s a fallacy.

All men are mortal
Thumper is mortal
Thumper is a man

It's got the form...

All S is M
All P is M
.'. All P is S


What do you think? How do you tell when an oblique syllogism is valid?

The one I presented is valid.
I am always valid.
All oblique syllogisms are always valid.

Always
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/22/2014 11:43:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/22/2014 9:10:15 AM, tbhidc wrote:
At 5/21/2014 11:18:17 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 5/21/2014 9:37:36 PM, tbhidc wrote:
They're confusing. They deal with relations instead of two predicates being joined by a copula.

All oblique syllogisms have the trait of confusion.
What you just said has the trait of confusion (as I have no idea what you just said).
What you said is an oblique syllogism.


That';s a fallacy.

All men are mortal
Thumper is mortal
Thumper is a man

It's got the form...

All S is M
All P is M
.'. All P is S

But everything I say is always valid.

Always



What do you think? How do you tell when an oblique syllogism is valid?

The one I presented is valid.
I am always valid.
All oblique syllogisms are always valid.

Always
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/22/2014 5:31:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/22/2014 9:10:15 AM, tbhidc wrote:
At 5/21/2014 11:18:17 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 5/21/2014 9:37:36 PM, tbhidc wrote:
They're confusing. They deal with relations instead of two predicates being joined by a copula.

All oblique syllogisms have the trait of confusion.
What you just said has the trait of confusion (as I have no idea what you just said).
What you said is an oblique syllogism.


That';s a fallacy.

All men are mortal
Thumper is mortal
Thumper is a man

It's got the form...

All S is M
All P is M
.'. All P is S
That's not the same as the form for your original normal syllogism...
All P are M
S is a P
.'. S is an M
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
tbhidc
Posts: 84
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 1:00:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/22/2014 5:31:42 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 5/22/2014 9:10:15 AM, tbhidc wrote:
At 5/21/2014 11:18:17 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 5/21/2014 9:37:36 PM, tbhidc wrote:
They're confusing. They deal with relations instead of two predicates being joined by a copula.

All oblique syllogisms have the trait of confusion.
What you just said has the trait of confusion (as I have no idea what you just said).
What you said is an oblique syllogism.


That';s a fallacy.

All men are mortal
Thumper is mortal
Thumper is a man

It's got the form...

All S is M
All P is M
.'. All P is S
That's not the same as the form for your original normal syllogism...
All P are M
S is a P
.'. S is an M

Yeah but singular statements are generally treated as universal statements in traditional logic.

So I'm saying that this particular S, in its entirety is a P. It's essentially a universal statement that refers to only one thing.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 1:25:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/21/2014 9:37:36 PM, tbhidc wrote:
They're confusing. They deal with relations instead of two predicates being joined by a copula.

A normal syllogism...

All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Socrates is mortal

an oblique syllogism

Mary is the mother of Jesus
Jesus is God
Mary is the mother of God

The difference is that while a normal categorical syllogism deals with terms joined by a "to be" verb, an oblique syllogism deals with relations, such as "mother of" or "next to".

But it's so hard to tell when oblique syllogisms are valid and when they aren't. It seems every one is different.

What do you think? How do you tell when an oblique syllogism is valid?

You can probably tell based on the system under which the relation falls.

For example,

Mary is Bob's mother
Tom is Mary's husband
Tom is Bob's father

In the above, that's something of a generalized conclusion that may not actually be valid (and, at the very least, requires further assessment), because the system under which the relation falls is a marriage, which may or may not have resulted in the birth of Bob (because, it is possible that Bob was from a previous marriage, born out of wedlock from another man, or resulted from an affair).

In the case of,

Mary is Jesus' mother
Jesus is God
Mary is the mother of God

The system under which the relation falls is religious. Jesus is God under what merit? Because people said so? Or, because he was appointed the avatar of God by God himself? Because, that would be a celestial thing, for all intents and purposes, which occurred outside all earthly things, including childbirth and birthright. If it's because people said so, then Mary is the Son of God, likewise, if people say so.

Once again, though, it requires further consideration.

One can probably satisfactorily say that all oblique syllogisms require further assessment to determine their precision. Or, in another way, that no oblique syllogism can substantively stand on their own.
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 5:14:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/21/2014 9:37:36 PM, tbhidc wrote:
They're confusing. They deal with relations instead of two predicates being joined by a copula.

A normal syllogism...

All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Socrates is mortal

an oblique syllogism

Mary is the mother of Jesus
Jesus is God
Mary is the mother of God

Well in this case the phrasing of the premises is just wrong. You would have to differentiate between the different "forms" of Jesus or whatever.


The difference is that while a normal categorical syllogism deals with terms joined by a "to be" verb, an oblique syllogism deals with relations, such as "mother of" or "next to".

But it's so hard to tell when oblique syllogisms are valid and when they aren't. It seems every one is different.

What do you think? How do you tell when an oblique syllogism is valid?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2014 2:58:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/21/2014 9:37:36 PM, tbhidc wrote:
They're confusing. They deal with relations instead of two predicates being joined by a copula.

A normal syllogism...

All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Socrates is mortal

an oblique syllogism

Mary is the mother of Jesus
Jesus is God
Mary is the mother of God

The difference is that while a normal categorical syllogism deals with terms joined by a "to be" verb, an oblique syllogism deals with relations, such as "mother of" or "next to".

But it's so hard to tell when oblique syllogisms are valid and when they aren't. It seems every one is different.

What do you think? How do you tell when an oblique syllogism is valid?

Hmmm...perhaps you can start by giving an oblique syllogism that is invalid.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?