The modus putting ponies It is a type of logical argument, of reasoned inference, belonging to the formal system of deduction rules of the well-known propositional logic. This argumentative structure is the initial guideline that is transmitted in propositional logic and is directly related to conditional arguments..
The argument modus putting ponies It can be seen as a two-legged syllogism, which instead of using a third term that serves as a link, rather uses a conditional sentence with which it relates the antecedent element with the consequent element.
Leaving conventionalisms, we can see the modus putting ponies as a proceduremodus) of the deduction rules, that by means of the assertion (putting) of an antecedent or reference (a previous element), manages to assert (put) to a consequent or conclusion (a later element).
This reasonable formulation starts from two propositions or premises. It seeks to be able to deduce through these a conclusion that, despite being implicit and conditioned within the argument, requires a double affirmation -both of the term that precedes it and of itself- in order to be considered a consequent.
Article index
This affirmative mode, as part of the application of deductive logic, has its origins in antiquity. It appeared from the hand of the Greek philosopher Aristotle de Estagira, from the 4th century BC. C.
Aristotle posed with the modus ponens -as it is also called - obtain a reasoned conclusion through the validation of both a precedent and a consequent in a premise. In this process the antecedent is eliminated, leaving only the consequent.
The Hellenic thinker wanted to lay the foundations of descriptive logical reasoning in order to explain and conceptualize all the phenomena close to the existence of man, product of his interaction with the environment.
The modus putting ponies has its roots in Latin. In the Spanish language its meaning is: “a method that affirming (asserting), affirms (asserts)”, because, as previously stated, it is composed of two elements (an antecedent and a consequent) affirmative in its structuring.
Generally speaking, the modus putting ponies correlates two propositions: a conditioning antecedent called "P" and a conditioned consequent called "Q".
It is important that premise 1 always has the conditioning form "if-then"; the "if" is prior to the antecedent, and the "then" is prior to the consequent.
Its formulation is as follows:
Premise 1: If "P" then "Q".
Premise 2: "P".
Conclusion: "Q".
Premise 1: "If you want to pass the exam tomorrow, then you must study hard".
Premise 2: "You want to pass the exam tomorrow".
Conclusive: "Therefore, you must study hard".
Premise 1: "If you want to get to school quickly, then you must take that path".
Premise 2: "You want to get to school fast".
Conclusive: "Therefore, you must take that path".
Premise 1: "If you want to eat fish, then you should go shopping at the market".
Premise 2: "You want to eat fish".
Conclusive: "Therefore, you must go buy in the market"
The modus putting ponies It may present small variations in its formulation. The four most common variants will be presented below with their respective examples.
Premise 1: If "P" then "¬Q"
Premise 2: "P"
Conclusion: "¬Q"
In this case the symbol "¬" resembles the negation of "Q"
Premise 1: "If you keep eating that way, then you won't achieve your ideal weight.".
Premise 2: "You keep eating that way".
Conclusion: "Therefore, you will not achieve your ideal weight".
Premise 1: "If you keep eating so much salt, then you won't be able to control your hypertension".
Premise 2: "You keep eating so much salt".
Conclusion: "Therefore, you will not be able to control hypertension".
Premise 1: "If you are aware of the road, then you will not get lost".
Premise 2: "You are aware of the road".
Conclusion: "Therefore, you will not get lost".
Premise 1: If “P” ^ “R” then “Q”
Premise 2: “P” ^
Conclusion: "Q"
In this case the symbol "^" refers to the copulative conjunction "and", while the "R" comes to represent another antecedent that is added to validate "Q". That is, we are in the presence of a double conditioner.
Premise 1: "If you come home and bring popcorn, then we'll see a movie.".
Premise 2: "You come home and bring popcorn".
Conclusion: "Therefore, we will see a movie".
Premise 1: "If you drive drunk and looking at your cell phone, then you will crash".
Premise 2: "You drive drunk and watching your cell phone".
Conclusion: "Therefore, you will crash".
Premise 1: "If you drink coffee and eat chocolate, then you are taking care of your heart".
Premise 2: "You drink coffee and eat chocolate".
Conclusion: "Therefore, you are taking care of your heart".
Premise 1: If “¬P” then “Q”
Premise 2: "¬P"
Conclusion: "Q"
In this case the symbol "¬" resembles the negation of "P".
Premise 1: "If you did not study the vowel concurrences, then you will fail the linguistics exam".
Premise 2: "You did not study the vowel concurrences".
Conclusion: "Therefore, you will fail the linguistics exam".
Premise 1: "If you don't feed your parrot, then it will die".
Premise 2: "You don't feed your parrot".
Conclusion: "Therefore, he will die".
Premise 1: "If you don't drink water, then you will become dehydrated".
Premise 2: "You don't drink water".
Conclusion: "Therefore, you will become dehydrated".
Premise 1: If "P" then "Q" ^ "R"
Premise 2: "P"
Conclusion: "Q" ^ "R"
In this case the symbol "^" refers to the copulative conjunction "and", while the "R" represents a second consequent in the proposition; therefore, an antecedent will be affirming two consequents at the same time.
Premise 1: "If you were good to your mother, then your father will bring you a guitar and its strings".
Premise 2: "You were good to your mother".
Conclusion: "Therefore, your father will bring you a guitar and its strings".
Premise 1: "If you are practicing swimming, then you will improve your physical resistance and lose weight".
Premise 2: "You are practicing swimming".
Conclusion: "Therefore, you will improve your physical resistance and lose weight".
Premise 1: "If you have read this article in Lifeder, then you have learned and are more prepared".
Premise 2: "You have read this article in Lifeder".
Conclusion: "Therefore, you have learned and are more prepared".
The modus ponens represents the first rule of propositional logic. It is a concept that, starting from simple premises to understand, opens the understanding to deeper reasoning.
Despite being one of the most used resources in the world of logic, it cannot be confused with a logical law; it is simply a method for the elaboration of deductive evidence.
By removing a sentence from the conclusions, the modus ponens avoids extensive agglutination and concatenation of elements when making deductions. For this quality it is also called "rule of separation".
The modus putting ponies It is an indispensable resource for a full knowledge of Aristotelian logic.
Yet No Comments