A.

Identifying patterns of arguments

If inflation is receeding, the governments economic policies are sound
Inflation is receding
Therefore, the governments economic policies are sound
If an attacker of a fortified position does not outnumber the defenders by at least
1:3, the attack will fail
The attacker does not outnumber the defenders by at least 1:3
Therefore the attack will fail
If we burn helium-3 and deuterium, it generates 18.4 meV of energy, one
proton and helium4
We (just) burned helium-3 and deuterium
It (will) generate 18.4meV of energy....
If n is even, and smaller then 4, n equals two
n is even and smaller then 4
n equals 2
If the liabilities of a company outweigh its assets, the company must file for
insolvency
The liabilities of this company outweigh its assets
Therefore, the company must file for insolvency
If it is brillig, and the slithy toves gyre and gimble in the wade, then the
borogoves are mimsy, and the mome outgrabe raths
it is brillig, and the slithy toves gyre and gimble in the wade
The borogoves are mimsy, and the mome outgrabe raths
If A then B (A -> B)
A
______________
B

B. Identifying mistakes - fallacies

1.

If Peter is the murderer, his fingerprints will be on the knife

Peters fingerprints are on the knife
__________________________________________
He is the murderer

A -> B
B
___________
A
2.

Jasper (a law student), after reading the University prospectus, argues like
this:
If I graduate, I must pay my fees
Hey, I have paid my fees
Therefore, I will graduate
[From this moment onwards, he stops any work, fails his exams, and is
rather surprised when he is rejected from graduation!]

3.

For any number n: if n is even, it can be divided by one

(e.g. 2 can be divided by one, 4 can be divided by one etc etc)
15 can be divided by one
Therefore, 15 is even.

Task 1: Are these arguments valid or invalid?

1.

If captain Kirk is a Vulcan, then he has pointed ears

Captain Kirk does not have pointed ears
He is not a Vulcan

2.

If an offer is valid, then it is not made by a minor

This offer has been made by a minor
This offer is not valid

3.

Land ownership is either registered in the Sasine register, or in the land

register
This house is not registered in the Sasine register
Therefore, it is registered in the Land register

4.

If a marriage is performed for a couple of the same sex, then it is void

This marriage was performed for a couple of different (not the same) sex
This marriage is not void (is valid).

5.

If a property I bought is registered in the land register, then ownership

passes to me
If ownership in a property passes to me, I become liable for damages
people incur due to negligent maintenance
If a property I bought is registered in the land register, I become liable for
damages people incur due to negligent maintenance.

6.

If legal aid is granted to the pursuer, then chances of success in court (for
the pursuer) are high
If the defender is a party litigant, chances of success for the pursuer are
high
If the defender is a party litigant, legal aid is granted to the pursuer

Task 2: each of the above examples has the form of one of these
schematic inference patterns.
Which pattern corresponds to which argument?

Valid

Invalid

A -> B
-B
________
-A

A -> B
-A
______
-B

Av B
-A (-B)
_______
B (A)

A -> B
C -> B
___________
C -> A (A -> C)

A -> B
B -> C
_____
A -> B

Complex inferences
Because
A -> B
A
_____
B
is valid
then this is, too:
A & B & C & D -> F
A
B
C
D
___________________
F
And also
A v B v C v D v E -> F
D
_____________________
F

(ie. A or B or C or .............)

However, most common in law is this form:

A & (-B) & (-C)..... -> F
A
-B
-C
...
___________
F

And, finally, an extra word of explanation...

1.
Modus ponens is a very common rule of inference, and takes
the following form:
If P, then Q.
P.
Therefore Q
The modus ponens rule may be written thus:

or in rule form:

Explanation
The argument form has two premises.
The first premise is the ifthen or conditional claim, that is, that P
implies Q.
The second premise is that P, the antecedent of the conditional claim,
is true.
From these two premises it can be logically concluded that Q, the
consequent of the conditional claim, must be true as well.
This argument is valid, but this says nothing about whether any of the
statements in the argument are true (an argument may be valid but yet
unsound where one or more premises are false).
A propositional argument using modus ponens is said to be
deductive.

2.
Modus tollens, also referred to as denying the consequent, is
also a valid form of argument and has the following form:
If P, then Q.
Q
Therefore, P.
Explanation
The argument has two premises.
- The first premise is the conditional if-then statement; namely, that
P implies Q.
- The second premise is that Q is false.
- From these two premises, we can logically conclude that P must be
false.

3.
Modus tollendo ponens is a valid, simple form of inference,
also known as disjunctive syllogism:
P or Q
Not P
Therefore, Q
4.
Modus ponendo tollens is a valid rule of inference, closely
related to both modus ponens and modus tollens. It takes the form:
Not both A and B
A
Therefore, not B
A

5.
Hypothetical syllogism - one of the proof rules of classical
logic. The hypothetical syllogism is a valid argument that takes the
following form:
P Q.
Q R.
Therefore, P R.
[Note: Hypothetical syllogisms may be counterfactual; that is, they
can be true even if the premises assume propositions that are known
to be false].