Tim Gaines
Thu, 25 Jan 2001 09:21:19 -0800
Max, Thanks for the info. After class I found an online Britannica article which explains the Latin derivation. Modus ponens literally means "method of affirming" and modus tollens means "method of denying." Tim >Tim: > >In a nutshell: >According to Ray (2000), modus ponens involves confirmatory reasoning: >If p, then q. >P. >Therefore, q. > >Modus Tollens involves disconfirmatory reasoning: >If p, then q. >Not q. >Therefore, not p. > >I don't know the etiology of the terms, but you can check out: >http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Logi/LogiDagl.htm > >which states: > >According to the Stoic logicians, the first kind of indemonstrable >statements is as follows: "If the first, then the second; but the first; >therefore the second." We call this basic argument form as modus ponendo >ponens, in abbreviation modus ponens, the mood that by affirming affirms. >The second kind of indemonstrable statements of the Stoics is: "If the >first, then the second; but the second is not; therefore the first is >not." This basic argument form is called as modus tollendo tollens, in >abbreviation modus tollens, the mood that by denying denies, nowadays.(2) > > >-Max > > >On Fri, 26 Jan 2001, Tim Gaines wrote: > >> I'm putting TIPS to the test this morning. In 30 minutes I'll >> be talking to my Research Methods class about the logic of >> testing theories, and one point I want to make is that neither >> of the two logically valid modes of syllogistic reasoning >> (modus ponens and modus tollens) permits confirmation of the >> antecedent (the theory). It would be nice to be able to >> provide the etiology of the terms, but I have loaned my copy >> of Wason and Johnson-Laird to a student, and I can't seem to >> find the terms in other references I have. Anyone know these >> terms? >> >> Thanks, >> > > Tim > > -- > > > > >Maxwell Gwynn, PhD [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Department of Psychology (519) 884-0710 ext 3854 >Wilfrid Laurier University >Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3C5 Canada