Syllogism, Mood, and Figure

Syllogism, Mood, and Figure

[@fallingsnow9246]

Fantastic video, not confusing at all and one of the only reviews I've found on the internet for argument Figures. Thanks so much from a student.

[@Micktification]

I'm glad it was useful. Thanks for the feedback!

[@Micktification]

This video is part of a series so the first part is a quick summary. If you aren't pretty comfortable with Aristotle's four standard claims and the basic form of the syllogism, the quick review may not be enough to bring you up to speed. Check out some of my earlier videos or many others that introduce Aristotle's logic first. I'd be happy to answer questions if you can tell me where the video became unclear. Also I'd appreciate any suggestions about parts that need more clarification.

[@vanessahenry9376]

Dear Ashford, another one of your confusing videos! thanks, I wasn't confused as hell already!

[@mit_thrawn_uruodo]

Sadly, our instructor's are sending us straight to this video. No other notes or reading to go off of. This is why we're lost.

[@katanaquill9276]

I just made a Syllogism in my pants

[@debijames9037]

The confusion for me is that the narrator didn't let us know how the moods were determined. No = E. and All = A, but why, and what are the rest?

[@Micktification]

Hi Debi! This video is about #6 in a series I assigned to my logic students. You might check out intro videos on categorical propositions. I have 4 - 5 posted. Start with Categorical Propositions I. It introduces the 4 standard propositional claims, A, E, I, and O Start with learning about propositional claims, their characteristics, then how they work when they are organized into arguments.

[@notmandy]

A = All x are y E = No x are y I = Some x are y O = Some x are not y

[@RahulRajput-dm5dq]

What happens if a argument in not in a standard form should we make it in a standard form then tell the moods or no need to make it in a standard form

[@yvettemonterosa3501]

I agree.. this video just through me off BIG-TIME!! Lol I am so confused. I had to watch it like three times, and I still didn't get it :-(

[@teresabirch1664]

This is ridiculous. Anyone that cannot keep it simple enough to understand (an argument) then it's not "valid" to me and neither is Aristotle's logic on syllogisms. This makes learning all this stuff not even fun anymore. I no doubt did not get my syllogisms in the right order in stating that this comment (Oh well)- S and M and P to you too.

[@samanthasmith9176]

That was COMPLETELY confusing!!!!

[@roxannatice6578]

I totally concur.

[@stefisrad4407]

thank you so much! this really helped me understand the concept

[@kevinmackin1419]

I am in my 5th class at Ashford University. How the hell do they expect me to understand what this video is trying to say? I have watched it 4 times. Each time I watch it, I get even more confused. Unbelievable! You think they would choose a video that is easier to understand. It is what it is, i guess. Good luck everybody!

[@Micktification]

Sorry the video didn't help. The first part is a review of basics about syllogisms I covered in other videos. It would be tough if you didn't have that part down first.

[@earlgreer6736]

Good Lord! I am more confused now, more than when I began!

[@Micktification]

Earl Greer The video was meant to be viewed only after becoming familiar with the four standard claims of Aristotle's logic. It's part of a series for a course that meets on campus as well as online. If you have a particular question I'd be happy to respond.

[@vanessahenry9376]

Well it sure didn't help me or others

[@personalnovah4727]

better than my professor lol, but i understand it more because maybe i already have a heads up, ! thanksss !!

[@francesroth6387]

More confused than ever. Wtf.

[@21stchill18]

Question Consider the following argument: Statement: Some chairs are curtains. All curtains are bedsheets. Conclusion: Some chairs are bedsheets. What is the Mood of the above proposition? My teacher says I-A-I but I think it is A-I-I

[@Micktification]

Mood is based on form. The form of Some S are P is I. The form of All S are P is A. So the mood of the syllogism is IAI.

[@21stchill18]

@@Micktification thanks for the reply. One question: aren't we required to order premises so that they appears in standard form(major premise first i.e premise including major term)

[@Micktification]

@@21stchill18 Yes, for mood and figure to be used to verify their logical validity syllogisms need to be symbolized with major premise first and minor premise second since the letters don’t tell you which is which except by their order. I didn’t catch that you didn’t do that in your post. Instead I assumed it was well-formed in which case it would be I A I. But you wrote it with the minor premise first. So the mood is A I I which would be more apparent if it was properly formed. My oversight was an example of why writing syllogisms in proper form is considered a requirement. Your post is a good reminder to me to check.

[@21stchill18]

@@Micktification hi again. I apologise for directly pasting the question from my examination. I see I should've mentioned why I thought that mood is IAI not AII.

[@Kitty-nx2uq]

Another great video, thank you so much:)

[@YaxisX]

This difficulty is not the fault of "people". Instead, it should be understood that Logic is nearly always, NOT TAUGHT VERY WELL. I have found this to be almost universally true. Logic could be taught well, BUT! ...this is the barrier which must be overcome. Many people give up because so much has been done to MANIPULATE the modern population and basically, schools and universities are the main source of manipulation. Many subjects can be taught in a basic series of steps. And this angry reaction that we have, is exactly the "desired response" that educators generally want you to have. They want everything to be complicated, and that is how they hold power over all knowledge. That way, the world THINKS that the subject is being taught, when in fact, only CONFUSION is being taught. That is how educators get to Have---Their--Cake---And---Eat---It---Too! This is frustrating and I know how people feel; but there is a solution. If you search more deeply, you will find that there is a system that you can understand with a little effort. There is a basic way to understand this, at least at the beginning. If you will research this, much of the rest will be made so much easier. Search for "Aristotle's Three Laws of Logic" When you become puzzled and confused over terms like Excluded Middle (And you will because it is not taught in a simple way!) ...Do a search online using these terms: IMAGE + "Artist's Gray Scale". When you see the Gray Scale, you will understand how there are Shades in the Middle between the Black and the White Opposites. The Opposites are the "contradictions". The Middles are those identities that are "like" or "similar" but not exactly the Opposites. That is how your understanding will grow. The Medieval Logicians had special names for the valid Syllogisms. Do not be discouraged merely for the reason that Logic is a complete "science" Look for these names to further your study. Barbara AAA-1 Cesare EAE-2 Darapti AAI-3 Bramantip AAI-4 Celarent EAE-1 Camestres AEE-2 Disamis IAI-3 Camenes AEE-4 Darii ALL-1 Festino EIO-2 Datisi ALL-3 Dimaris IAI-4 Ferio EIO-1 Baroco AOO-2 Felapton EAO-3 Fesapo EAO-4 Bocardo OAO-3 Fresison EIO-4 Ferison EIO-3 Also, try this website for some help.www.fibonicci.com/logical-reasoning/syllogisms/examples-types/ ...and... markmcintire.com/phil/validforms.html

[@hannahmichele9385]

I hate this!!! I'm super confused now!!

[@EveMHD1984]

I am so confused.

[@katrina1694]

I'm also MORE confused NOW, than I was before I watched the video :(

[@Micktification]

+Katrina Lovings If you could tell me when it started to be confusing maybe I could help.

[@patricialanier3223]

+Katrina Lovings I agree! I am trying to write third person, and now I find I am not using subject or predicate! ugh.

[@belindarache4930]

My brain refuse to grasp this ! Completely in the woods 🙆

[@Micktification]

This isn't the beginning video on the topic. Try watching my two videos "Introduction to Categorical Logic Parts 1-2." The one you watched just does a quick review of the earlier topics.

[@belindarache4930]

@@Micktification Thank you Mick . Will do exactly that

[@muhammadidress5315]

thank you sir

[@juliabass3932]

I had to watch this, why?

[@MalQis44]

I do not understand this video at all...I am so lost!

[@Micktification]

Hi Bilqis: I prepared this video for my class about half way into that semester. They had lectures and a textbook for context. I made all my videos public in case someone else found them useful. I have plans to organize them into a sequence and fill in some gaps but that hasn't happened yet. Meanwhile if there's something in particular you'd like to ask about beginning logic I'd be happy to respond.

[@MalQis44]

Ok thanks! This is the first time I have heard of this subject so it explains why I am so lost. I don't understand why is it so complicated trying to prove if an argument is valid or legit. What is the point of syllogism?

[@Micktification]

Hi: Syllogistic logic was invented by Aristotle over 2000 years ago and remains one path to the study of modern logic, the basis of computer technology, areas of linguistics, advanced mathematics, and cognitive science. Syllogisms are limited compared to modern logic but core principles can be learned through the study of syllogisms. It was the first system of formal logic, meaning that it studies how arguments are logically arranged rather than the truth of the propositions. It’s like studying the arithmetic behind 2+2=4 instead of whether there really are two things and two more things. We actually use sophisticated logic in everyday problem solving but we make mistakes. One purpose of studying logic is to learn how to catch those mistakes in our thinking and the arguments of others by making the logic explicit. One common use of the syllogism is to set up scientific hypotheses for testing. Consider this: “All copper conducts electricity. This wire is made of copper. This wire conducts electricity.” If we do an experiment and the wire doesn’t conduct electricity, we know one of the premises must be wrong because this is a valid syllogism, so if both premises were true the conclusion must be true. If it isn’t true, we’ve made a mistake either in logic or in our assumptions. Then it’s back to the drawing board!

[@Miaanalise]

Anybody else having to learn this in 8th grade???

[@karokooretambemola]

thanks! not confusing for me at all! people should review their lecture notes before watching videos.

[@branditrawick2008]

Say what?

[@vinlpaul3]

Wtf are figures?????

[@carrieneal6344]

This is a shame!!!

[@mdnazirhusain1721]

Would you share this ppt?

[@dogtags21]

uh...do wut now?