Isn’t the illustration of a syllogism under the entry “enthymeme” actually an invalid syllogism?

272 views

The entry on this site “enthymeme” begins with an explanation of the difference between an “enthymeme” and a “syllogism”. It begins by describing what a syllogism is, and offers this example:

All reptiles are cold-blooded animals. (Major premise)
A lizard is a cold-blooded animal. (Minor premise)
Therefore, a lizard is a reptile. (Conclusion)

The problem with this syllogism is that it is an invalid form. A lizard is not a reptile because it is cold-blooded. Amphibians, insects, arachnids (such as spiders), and fish are also cold-blooded. Just insert one of those categories in place of “reptiles” and you’ll immediately see that this form of syllogism is false.

All fish are cold-blooded animals.
A lizard is a cold-blooded animal.
Therefore, a lizard is a fish.

The following is a valid form:

All reptiles are cold-blooded animals.
A lizard is a reptile.
Therefore a lizard is cold-blooded.

Answered question
0

Very beautiful argument you have put forward. It is just an example disregard of validity or invalidity. Further explanation will be presented under Syllogism heading.

Answered question