Yuku free message boards
Username or E-mail:
Password:
Forgot
Password?
Sign Up
Grab the Yuku app
Search:
My Community
Mark Sebring Discussion Group Archive
>
Other Groups
>
OUR : Analytical Thinking
0 Points
Search this Topic:
Remove this ad
Meaning of Life
Other Groups
Lives of Quiet Desperation
Humor
Songs, Poems, Short Stories
Puzzles, Trivia, Movies. etc.
Lives of Quiet Desperation
Mark Sebring on Multiply
More "Things I've Written"
Philosophy Discussion Forum
General Discussion Forum
<< Previous Topic
Next Topic >>
Re: OUR : Analytical Thinking
Author
Comment
MSebring
#1
[url]
[-]
Dec 11 08 3:24 PM
Dishrag
- No, you are not wrong in trying to relate this to set notation.
The four different types of statements may be understood as statements describing the relationships between sets.
A - Universal Affirmative: All S are P = Set S is a subset of set P
E - Universal Negative: All S are not P = Set S and set P do not intersect
I - Particular Affirmative: Some S are P = Set S and set P intersect
O - Particular Negative: Some S are not P = Set S is not a subset of set P
In Plato's original syllogism (post 43) the conclusion is an E statement (All A are not C) so the answer to your question would be "No, no A can be C."
In post 45 Alglenne seemed to suggest that it could be changed to an O statement (Some A are not C). In that case the answer to your question would be "Yes, some A could be C."
My Recent Posts
<< Previous Topic
Next Topic >>
Meaning of Life
Other Groups
Lives of Quiet Desperation
Humor
Songs, Poems, Short Stories
Puzzles, Trivia, Movies. etc.
Lives of Quiet Desperation
Mark Sebring on Multiply
More "Things I've Written"
Philosophy Discussion Forum
General Discussion Forum
Email to Friend
del.icio.us
Digg it
Facebook
Blogger
Yahoo MyWeb
Mark Sebring Discussion Group Archive
>
Other Groups
>
OUR : Analytical Thinking
Click to subscribe by RSS
Click to receive E-mail notifications of replies