Argument on factors determining a game's outcome

  • Thread starter Thread starter mousesgr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Argument Factors
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the validity of an argument regarding the outcome of a game between Manchester United and AC Milan. Participants analyze the structure of the argument, identifying it as incomplete and invalid due to missing premises. They conclude that while the argument fails to guarantee its conclusion based on its premises, it can be made valid by adding necessary premises. The conversation emphasizes the importance of deductive reasoning in establishing sound arguments.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of deductive reasoning and its principles
  • Familiarity with logical argument structures, including premises and conclusions
  • Knowledge of syllogisms and their validity criteria
  • Basic concepts of game theory and outcome determination
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of deductive reasoning in depth
  • Learn about constructing valid syllogisms and identifying invalid arguments
  • Research game theory concepts related to outcome prediction
  • Explore logical fallacies and their impact on argument validity
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, logic students, game theorists, and anyone interested in understanding the structure and validity of arguments in decision-making contexts.

mousesgr
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
premise : i do not know all the factors determining a game's outcome

conclusion : i do not know the outcome of the game between Man U and Milan tonight

i want to ask
1. What kind of argument is the above?
(is it a deductive argument?)

2. How good it is?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need a minor premiss: "I cannot know the outcome without knowing all the determining factors".
 
Tournesol said:
You need a minor premiss: "I cannot know the outcome without knowing all the determining factors".
F: I don't know all the factors determining a game's outcome.
O: I don't know a game's outcome.
G: I don't know all the factors determining the outcome of the game between Man U and Milan tonight.
P: I don't know the outcome of the game between Man U and Milan tonight.
[(F -> O), F, therefore P] is not valid. Neither are [(F -> O), G, therefore P] or [(F -> P), G, therefore P]. [(F -> P), F, therefore P] and [(G -> P), G, therefore P] are both valid, but (F -> P) isn't true.

If it was meant to be a syllogism, there are bigger problems. For starters, the group of things known appears in all three propositions, so the argument is not valid.

mousesgr said:
i want to ask
1. What kind of argument is the above?
(is it a deductive argument?)

2. How good it is?
1) It is incomplete (and invalid), as Tournesol pointed out. An argument is deductive if the argument being "correct" (whatever standards are set for correctness) guarantees that the argument's conclusion is "correct". Usually, a deductive argument is "correct" or "valid" if it is impossible for all its premises to be true while its conclusion is false. IOW, the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion.
2) It's invalid, so not good. But it's not hopeless; If you can add the needed premises, you can make it valid.

In case someone who knows comes along, I'll tack on a question.
premise : i do not know all the factors determining a game's outcome
conclusion : i do not know the outcome of the game between Man U and Milan tonight
Will the following translation work? Let "Kxy" mean "x knows y", "Fxy" mean "x is a factor determining the outcome of y", and "Oxy" mean "x is the outcome of y".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 131 ·
5
Replies
131
Views
13K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K