Formal fallacyIn logic and philosophy, a formal fallacy, deductive fallacy, logical fallacy or non sequitur (ˌnɒn_ˈsɛkwɪtər; Latin for "[it] does not follow") is a pattern of reasoning rendered invalid by a flaw in its logical structure that can neatly be expressed in a standard logic system, for example propositional logic. It is defined as a deductive argument that is invalid. The argument itself could have true premises, but still have a false conclusion. Thus, a formal fallacy is a fallacy where deduction goes wrong, and is no longer a logical process.
BegriffsschriftBegriffsschrift (German for, roughly, "concept-writing") is a book on logic by Gottlob Frege, published in 1879, and the formal system set out in that book. Begriffsschrift is usually translated as concept writing or concept notation; the full title of the book identifies it as "a formula language, modeled on that of arithmetic, for pure thought.
Hypothetical syllogismIn classical logic, a hypothetical syllogism is a valid argument form, a syllogism with a conditional statement for one or both of its premises. An example in English: If I do not wake up, then I cannot go to work. If I cannot go to work, then I will not get paid. Therefore, if I do not wake up, then I will not get paid. The term originated with Theophrastus. A pure hypothetical syllogism is a syllogism in which both premises and conclusions are conditionals.
The Laws of ThoughtAn Investigation of the Laws of Thought on Which are Founded the Mathematical Theories of Logic and Probabilities by George Boole, published in 1854, is the second of Boole's two monographs on algebraic logic. Boole was a professor of mathematics at what was then Queen's College, Cork (now University College Cork), in Ireland. The historian of logic John Corcoran wrote an accessible introduction to Laws of Thought and a point by point comparison of Prior Analytics and Laws of Thought.
Square of oppositionIn term logic (a branch of philosophical logic), the square of opposition is a diagram representing the relations between the four basic categorical propositions. The origin of the square can be traced back to Aristotle's tractate On Interpretation and its distinction between two oppositions: contradiction and contrariety. However, Aristotle did not draw any diagram; this was done several centuries later by Apuleius and Boethius.
Converse (logic)In logic and mathematics, the converse of a categorical or implicational statement is the result of reversing its two constituent statements. For the implication P → Q, the converse is Q → P. For the categorical proposition All S are P, the converse is All P are S. Either way, the truth of the converse is generally independent from that of the original statement. Let S be a statement of the form P implies Q (P → Q). Then the converse of S is the statement Q implies P (Q → P).
