John wrote: > Give me your sources. My sources are my nine years of education in the college of natural sciences at two univsersities as well as my many years as a scientific researcher. Maybe I should write my own book? You can check this stuff out yourself by taking a trip to the library or running searches on some of the search engines. There is nothing strange or esoteric in what I have conveyed to you. You will see that if you begin to study on your own. Following are some links that I just pulled up from seaching the internet that might help you get started:
http://www.thelogician.net/2_future_logic/2_fl_contents.htm (Check out the intro and chapters 22-29 & 36) http://www.uwf.edu/dlow/critical_thinking.htm (This is a brief summary that at least mentions different types of syllogisms) http://www.letusreason.com/archives/logic/logic011598.htm (This article analyzes Mark 16:15-16 using conditional syllogisms) http://www.virtualsalt.com/think/deduhypo.htm (This article introduces some different types of syllogisms other than the categorical type) http://www.u.arizona.edu/~tkinney/pdf/handouts/syllogism.pdf (This article very briefly mentions different types of syllogisms and some rules associated with them) John wrote: > Your "all animals have hair" "syllogism" is a rather silly illustration. Apparently you missed the point. You made the false assertion that a valid syllogism must have the major premise being true. I gave you an example of a valid syllogism where only the major premise was false. Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
