Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (2-3):227-234 (1999)
|Abstract||Since Aristotle it is recognised that a valid syllogism cannot have two particular premises. However, that is not how a lay person sees it; at least as long as the premises read many, most etc, instead of a plain some. The lay people are right if one considers that these syllogisms do not have strict but approximate (Zadeh) validity. Typically there are only particular premises available in everyday life and one is dependent on such syllogisms. – Some rules on the usage of particular premises are given below.|
|Keywords||approximate reasoning fuzzy logic possible worlds syllogisms with particular premises undetermined quantifiers|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jorge J. E. Gracia (1975). Propositions as Premises of Syllogisms in Medieval Logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 16 (4):545-547.
Niki Pfeifer (2006). Contemporary Syllogistics: Comparative and Quantitative Syllogisms. In G. Kreuzbauer & G. J. W. Dorn (eds.), Argumentation in Theorie Und Praxis: Philosophie Und Didaktik des Argumentierens. Lit.
Hugo Mercier & Guy Politzer (2011). Solving Categorical Syllogisms with Singular Premises. Thinking and Reasoning 14 (4):434-454.
Guy Politzer & Hugo Mercier (2008). Solving Categorical Syllogisms with Singular Premises. Thinking and Reasoning 14 (4):434 – 454.
Fred Johnson (1994). Syllogisms with Fractional Quantifiers. Journal of Philosophical Logic 23 (4):401 - 422.
Colwyn Williamson (1988). How Many Syllogisms Are There? History and Philosophy of Logic 9 (1):77-85.
Ernest W. Adams (2005). On a Proportionality Analysis of Syllogistic Private Reasoning. Synthese 146 (1-2):129 - 138.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads17 ( #78,020 of 722,787 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,787 )
How can I increase my downloads?