Premise 2. She is a fur-free blonde
Conclusion. She is preferred by gentleman
3.
4. Valid but not true, because not all men prefer fur-free blondes.
5. If you are a fur-free blonde, then men will prefer you.
6.
a. No, even though it may be a tautology is it not necessarily true in real life. It is possible that that the premises are not true in real life, in which case the tautology would not be true in real life either.b. Just because the conditional form does not have a mathematical solution does not mean it won't have a real life solution because the premises could be true in real life.
c. The conclusions of tautologies work in mathematics, but not always in real life.
7. It is a bad piece of information because of the fine print on the bottom saying the argument is only right 80% of the time.
8. no
9. It made me think about how not everything in the media is true.
I liked your ad and I liked your explanation how even though it was a tautology is does't mean it's true!
ReplyDeleteIt is true that even if this isn't really a true statement in real life, mathematically it can still be a tautology. The only thing wrong is that in the truth table you made, you didn't use the Hypothesis 1 and 2. good job!
ReplyDeleteI've never seen this ad, but I love it! Such an interesting argument to choose! I see your point that even if it is mathematically true that doesn't mean its true in real life! However, isn't it not a tautology since you have one answer as being false?
ReplyDeletegood observation on the truth table, lili!
Deleteprofessor little
This is an interesting attempt from PETA to get women to not wear fur by saying that not wearing fur is more appealing to men. You're absolutely right that even if this is a tautology it does not make sense in real life. I think you could argue that this is an "appeal to popularity" (fallacy) since it bases its logic off of what most men would (supposedly) prefer which a women should also prefer in order to be sexy/appealing for men.
ReplyDeletei agree with the falacy, melina.
Deleteprofessor little
This ad was really weird and not exactly true, I'm all for animal rights, but PETA's attempts at animal rights always really bothered me. Either way, good job explaining how even if an argument appears as a tautology, it's not always 100% true.
ReplyDeleteThis is a really coold ad! Very creative! I liked the fact that your explanations were straight to the point.
ReplyDeletelexi,
ReplyDeletei like the advertisement that you chose! a lot of your analyses are spot on. initially, however, when discussing the validity of the syllogism/advertisement, it is actually INVALID as it is in the form of a converse statement.
if a then b
b is true
a is true.
your explanation for part 6 is done well, unfortunately, the truth table itself is missing quite a few pieces. all in all, though, generally a good post.
professor little