conditional diagramming Forum
-
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:02 am
conditional diagramming
Can someone diagram this?
Because Joe likes to eat pie, he is fat.
Because Joe likes to eat pie, he is fat.
- TrojanHopeful
- Posts: 385
- Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 1:37 am
Re: conditional diagramming
Premise: Likes to Eat Pie-------->Fat
Premise: Joe likes to eat pie
Conclusion: Joe is fat
Contrapositive:
Not Fat---------->Doesn't like to eat pie
Premise: Joe likes to eat pie
Conclusion: Joe is fat
Contrapositive:
Not Fat---------->Doesn't like to eat pie
-
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:52 pm
Re: conditional diagramming
There is a difference between conditionals and arguments. 'Because' is an argument indicator, not a conditional indicator, so there isn't really a conditional statement here to diagram.
Consider 'A -> B' and 'A BECAUSE B'. To see that these are different note that from the latter one can infer that 'A', whereas from the former one cannot.
Consider 'A -> B' and 'A BECAUSE B'. To see that these are different note that from the latter one can infer that 'A', whereas from the former one cannot.
- TrojanHopeful
- Posts: 385
- Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 1:37 am
Re: conditional diagramming
True. However, I believe that my argument breakdown above shows that there is a conditional statement involved (if, in fact, the argument is valid).jamesireland wrote:There is a difference between conditionals and arguments. 'Because' is an argument indicator, not a conditional indicator, so there isn't really a conditional statement here to diagram.
Consider 'A -> B' and 'A BECAUSE B'. To see that these are different note that from the latter one can infer that 'A', whereas from the former one cannot.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:52 pm
Re: conditional diagramming
Your proposed conditional tells us about the relationship between the two parts: Joe liking to eat pie and Joe being fat; but it doesn't tell us anything about the truth of the individual parts. Given the conditional, can we say whether or not Joe does like to eat pie? no. The original statement however indicates that it is in fact true that Joe likes to eat pie. Diagramming the statement as a conditional leaves out important information. Depending on the question this might be very important.TrojanHopeful wrote:True. However, I believe that my argument breakdown above shows that there is a conditional statement involved (if, in fact, the argument is valid).jamesireland wrote:There is a difference between conditionals and arguments. 'Because' is an argument indicator, not a conditional indicator, so there isn't really a conditional statement here to diagram.
Consider 'A -> B' and 'A BECAUSE B'. To see that these are different note that from the latter one can infer that 'A', whereas from the former one cannot.
The original statement might imply a conditional like the one you propose, but just because it is an implication doesn't mean it is a proper representation.
- maru
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 3:44 pm
Re: conditional diagramming
I think diagramming a causal argument can still be helpful, as long as you keep in mind that it's causal and not conditional. Sorry, unhelpful comment is unhelpful. :|
-
- Posts: 3086
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:05 pm
Re: conditional diagramming
No, definitely helpful. You should have a method for diagramming causal arguments that differs from conditionals. Especially for strengthen/weaken questions, where you're looking for a specific answer type if the argument is causal.maru wrote:I think diagramming a causal argument can still be helpful, as long as you keep in mind that it's causal and not conditional. Sorry, unhelpful comment is unhelpful.
Personally, I draw out the cause and effect with a swooping arrow connecting the two underneath. Similar to a conditional, but different enough so that I know more is going on.