Determine each of the following arguments’ forms to be valid or invalid. You may use the...

Determine each of the following arguments’ forms to be valid or invalid. You may use the Venn Diagram proof method, the rules/fallacies method, or any other method, of your choice. 1. Some athletes are not baseball players and some baseball players are not basketball players. Therefore, some athletes are not basketball players.2. All creationists are fundamentalists because all fundamentalists are religious people and all creationists are religious people. 3. As no conservationists are litterers, no environmentalists are litterers, because all environmentalists are conservationists. 4. No philosophers are theologians, and all philosophers are skeptics. Hence, no skeptics are theologians.5. All drug pushers are criminals and all criminals are burdens on society. Thus, all drug pushers are burdens on society.6. Some insurance salesmen are not GEICO customers, for some cavemen are GEICO customers, and no cavemen are insurance salesmen.

Can you state which is valid or invalid?

Solutions

Expert Solution

orchestra answered 1 year ago

Next > < Previous

Related Solutions

use truth tables to determine whether or not the following arguments are valid: a) if jones...

use truth tables to determine whether or not the following arguments are valid: a) if jones is convicted then he will go to prison. Jones will be convicted only if Smith testifies against him. Therefore , Jones won't go to prison unless smith testifies against him. b) either the Democrats or the Republicans will have a majority in the Senate. but not both. Having a Democratic majority is a necessary condition for the bill to pass. Therefore, if the republicans...

Create two arguments, one valid and one invalid. Demonstrate with a truth table the validity of...

Create two arguments, one valid and one invalid. Demonstrate with a truth table the validity of each

create two arguments, one valid and one invalid. Demonstrate with a truth table the validity of...

create two arguments, one valid and one invalid. Demonstrate with a truth table the validity of each.

Determine whether the following categorical syllogisms are valid or invalid. Categorical syllogism 1 No M are...

Determine whether the following categorical syllogisms are valid or invalid. Categorical syllogism 1 No M are P. No M are S No S are P. Categorical syllogism 2 Some M are not P. Some M are S. Some S are not P. Categorical syllogism 3 Some M are not P. Some M are not S. Some S are P. Categorical syllogism 4 All M are P. All S are M. All S are P. Categorical syllogism 6 No M are...

Which of the following is a valid C statement? Explain what each valid statement does. For invalid statements, explain the problem.

Which of the following is a valid C statement? Explain what each valid statement does. For invalid statements, explain the problem. a. int items [5]; b. int items []; c. int items = {3, 7,2 }; d. int items [] = {3, 7, 2}; e. int items [3] = {3, 7,2};

Using a truth table determine whether the argument form is valid or invalid p ∧ q...

Using a truth table determine whether the argument form is valid or invalid p ∧ q →∼ r p∨∼q ∼q→p ∴∼ r

Exercise 1.13.5: Determine and prove whether an argument in English is valid or invalid. Prove whether...

Exercise 1.13.5: Determine and prove whether an argument in English is valid or invalid. Prove whether each argument is valid or invalid. First find the form of the argument by defining predicates and expressing the hypotheses and the conclusion using the predicates. If the argument is valid, then use the rules of inference to prove that the form is valid. If the argument is invalid, give values for the predicates you defined for a small domain that demonstrate the argument...

a) Use truth tables to show that the following are valid arguments: i. [p  (p...

a) Use truth tables to show that the following are valid arguments: i. [p  (p → q)] → q ii. [(p → q) ∧ (q → r)] → (p → r) b) Use truth tables to show the logical equivalence of: i. (p → q) ⇔ (￢p ∨ q ) ii. (￢p ∨ q) ∨ (￢p  q) ⇔ p

Construct your own valid DEDUCTIVE arguments by applying the FIVE argument forms (rules) on the worksheet...

Construct your own valid DEDUCTIVE arguments by applying the FIVE argument forms (rules) on the worksheet below. You will need to insert your own example for each rule, following the form of the argument. A TRANSLATION KEY MUST BE PROVIDED FOR EACH EXERCISE (see above for an example). FORMS/RULES: Modus Ponens 1) If p, then q. 2) p. ------------------- 3) Thus, q. Modus Tollens 1) If p, then q. 2) Not q. ------------------- 3) Thus, not p. Hypothetical Syllogism 1)...

A set of hypothesis and a conclusion are given. Use the valid argument forms to deduce...

A set of hypothesis and a conclusion are given. Use the valid argument forms to deduce the conclusion from the hypothesis. (i) p v q, (ii) q ->r, (iii)(p^s) ->t, (iv) not r, (v) (not q) -> (u ^ s) (vi) t

Subjects