14:25 - The premise said that "all snakes are mammals." This is not true. This argument is unsound. My argument against this premise: All mammals are warmblooded. All snakes are not warmblooded. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ All snakes are not mammals. THIS REALLY HELPS, MAN! THANK YOU!!
Probably there are a lot of doubts cropping out. 1)Can you clarify your statement - 'It is not necessary that the premises be true and the conclusion be false for the argument to be invalid, but if it is merely possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion be false, then it is an invalid argument.' 2) Validity has nothing to do with the truth of the argument, then why do we consider an argument invalid if it is of the form 'True Premise and False Conclusion'. 3)Inorder to determine whether or not the argument is valid what is 'THE IMPORTANT THING TO OBSERVE'? The form i.e TP-TC, FP-FC, FP-TC and TP-FC. Or the structure of the argument i.e, if the premises support the conclusion then its valid. For eg: x is y, y is z, therefore x is z.
foosfighter thanks for the question, you are correct I believe the order of the premises are wrong. I believe the first premise should be second and the second premise should be first if it is to match the diagram. I need to higher you as a proof checker for these videos before I post them. Thanks Again
Hello sir, 11:20 i think the argument is valid. You've marked it invalid. The Venn diagram proves that the conclusion ALL PITBULLS ARE DOGS is valid. Am i right? Please explain if i am getting it all wrong 😕 Edit: Had the conclusion been ALL DOGS ARE PITBULLS, the argument would have been invalid. Right?
very amazing content
The arrow and the target are a great visualization!
This is really good!! You should do videos about problem solving!!
14:25 - The premise said that "all snakes are mammals." This is not true.
This argument is unsound.
My argument against this premise:
All mammals are warmblooded.
All snakes are not warmblooded.
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
All snakes are not mammals.
THIS REALLY HELPS, MAN!
THANK YOU!!
I came here to say this as well. You beat me to it by 2 years. 😂
Thank you so much this helped me out a lot :)
Probably there are a lot of doubts cropping out.
1)Can you clarify your statement - 'It is not necessary that the premises be true and the conclusion be false for the argument to be invalid, but if it is merely possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion be false, then it is an invalid argument.'
2) Validity has nothing to do with the truth of the argument, then why do we consider an argument invalid if it is of the form 'True Premise and False Conclusion'.
3)Inorder to determine whether or not the argument is valid what is 'THE IMPORTANT THING TO OBSERVE'? The form i.e TP-TC, FP-FC, FP-TC and TP-FC. Or the structure of the argument i.e, if the premises support the conclusion then its valid. For eg: x is y, y is z, therefore x is z.
are humans considered animals, then in logic?
at around the 8:00, why is the reptile circle the biggest and not the animals?
foosfighter thanks for the question, you are correct I believe the order of the premises are wrong. I believe the first premise should be second and the second premise should be first if it is to match the diagram. I need to higher you as a proof checker for these videos before I post them. Thanks Again
Hello sir,
11:20 i think the argument is valid. You've marked it invalid. The Venn diagram proves that the conclusion ALL PITBULLS ARE DOGS is valid. Am i right? Please explain if i am getting it all wrong 😕
Edit: Had the conclusion been ALL DOGS ARE PITBULLS, the argument would have been invalid. Right?
Lulu Loves Lillies you are correct. These early videos were uploaded before the editing process was utilized. The videos get much better.
A cogent argument must be inductively strong. true or false
True
Poodles, not puddles.