How to Think #5: Calemes

Psychologists have proven with experiments that some syllogisms are far more difficult for people to understand and process than others.
The syllogism called Calemes is tough for me.
Somehow the way information flows through this syllogism is not the way information flows through my brain.
That just means I need more practice with this one!

In symbols Calemes looks like this:

1. All P's are M's
2. No M's are S's
3. Therefore, No S's are P's.

We might use Calemes in an argument like this:

1. All good Presidents are politically skillful
2. No politically skillful person is politically inexperienced
3. Therefore, no politically inexperienced person will be a good President

Or how about this one:

1. All criminals are committing immoral and self-destructive acts
2. No one who is committing immoral and self-destructive acts is wise
3. Therefore, no one who is wise is a criminal

If you were in a conversation where you said that a criminal cannot be wise and someone said they don't understand why not the syllogism above could be useful for clarifying the concepts "wise person" and "criminal" and showing why we think one person cannot belong to both groups.

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Wayne Gadway

***

I have this book on critical thinking but I have not read it yet.
I love "Dummies" books so I bet it is good!
Well worth the time to read.

If you want to support "Anything Smart" just click on book links like you see in this post and elsewhere on my blog.
Then "Anything Smart" will receive a commission when you make purchases at Amazon.
Thanks!

https://amzn.to/4a5ASQ1

How to Think #5: Cesare

Now we move on to our 4th valid syllogism which is named Cesare.

In symbols it looks like this:
No P's are M's
All S's are M's
Therefore, No S's are P's.

My sister Rebecca gave me an excellent example of Cesare:
1. Chickadees are not 3 feet tall.
2. The birds lurking in the backyard are all about 3 feet tall.
3. Therefore none of the birds in the backyard are chickadees.

Be careful with the wording of syllogisms - but you can be a little flexible. If you are not sure if you got it right, try to translate it to exactly match the pattern:
1. No Chickadees are 3 feet tall
2. All the birds lurking in the backyard are 3 feet tall
3. Therefore, no birds lurking in the backyard are chickadees.
Perfect!

One more example of Cesare:
1. No great leaders are out for themselves
2. All Capitalists are out for themselves
3. Therefore: No Capitalists are great leaders.

That one kind of stings!
Are the premises true?
Is this a correct example of Cesare?
If the answer to both of those questions is "Yes" then the conclusion of the syllogism must be true!

Now, compare Cesare and Celarent. They are exactly the same except the terms in the first line are switched.
Cesare starts with: No P's are M's.
Celarent starts with: No M's are Ps.

***

[If you want to support "Anything Smart" just click on book links you see in my posts.
"Anything Smart" will receive a commission.
Thanks!]

[Here is another book about logic. This one is specifically about syllogisms. If you read it before I do please leave me a message here to let me know how you liked it. https://amzn.to/3Tbe2R3]

***

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Wayne Gadway