According to Britannica, in logic?

when "we first perform a subalternation and then convert our result, the truth of an A proposition may be said, in "conversion by limitation," to entail the truth of an I proposition with subject and predicate terms reversed: If "All singers are performers" then "Some performers are singers." But this will work only if there really is at least one singer."

But it does not state that in these propositions:

"No felines are dogs," and

"Some snakes are poisonous animals",

that feliines, dogs, snakes and poisonous animals must exist.

What is the difference?

5 Answers

  • Gadfly
    Lv 6
    6 years ago
    Favourite answer

    The first example "No felines are canines" is more of a statment of the law of identity than a logical deduction. If an animal is one it can't be the other.

    Perhaps the second is an issue of applying logical concept classification. It works if you are more specific.

    All Crotalus (rattlesnake genus) are snakes.

    Some snakes are Crotalus.

  • 6 years ago

    The difference is; what ever an 'individual' deduces, by the method of reasoning they employ.

    These 'deductions' will only be based of the information at hand, and, can change as more details of the subject are discovered.

    This is a case of 'Deductive Reasoning'.

  • 6 years ago

    Ditto to all of the above. I would add, defining the boundaries or origins or precise nature of things causes problems. I.e. for every statement we make we need to define it either in relation to other statements or by pointing to something in the world. The simplest of this type of thing is ultimate causation or first assumption problem. If every effect must have a cause or definition what then defines or starts the first thing? Godel 's Incompleteness "proofs" seem to me to involve this same concept.

  • 6 years ago

    Logic comes down to a tautological grounds. That is what Brittanica is saying. Basically, two prides, followed by a conclusion. Like,

    P1 - All human beings are governed by their bellies.

    P2 - Vladimar is a human being.

    C - Therefore, Vladimar is governed by his belly.

    Source(s): Aristotle
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 6 years ago

    And in the end, all 'thought', all 'logic', all 'reason', all '(be)causality... is imagination = ego!

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.