Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

Ministry of Popular Power for Interior Relations, Justice, and Peace.

National Experimental University of Security.

CEFO-UNES ARAGUA.

National Academy of the C.I.C.P.C.

Police Logic

Professor: Students:

C/G Edgar Palencia Pedro Palacios

C.I: 24.389.849

Elvis Marques

C.I: 24.171.895

Reysell Olivares

C.I: 28.024.597

What is logic?
 It is the formal science and branch of both philosophy and mathematics that
Study the principles of demonstration and valid inference, the fallacies,
the paradoxes and the notion of truth.

The purpose of this study is to understand different criteria of inferences.

and how do we come to valid demonstrations, in contrast to the
invalid demonstrations. Thus, the basic question of logic is what
it is the correct thinking and how we can differentiate between an argument
valid and a fallacy?

To address this issue, logic proposes different ways to

classify statements and arguments, whether they are given in formal systems
like in natural language. Specifically analyze the propositions
(declarative sentences) that can be true or false, as well as the
fallacies, paradoxes, arguments involving causality and, in
general, the theory of argumentation.

Types of logic

Formal logic

Also known as traditional logic or philosophical logic, it is about the

study of inferences with purely formal and explicit content. It is about
to analyze formal statements (logical or mathematical), whose meaning
it is not intrinsic but rather that its symbols make sense because of their useful application that
they are given. The philosophical tradition from which the latter derives is called
precisely "formalism."

A formal system is one that is used to draw a conclusion.

from one or more premises. The latter can be axioms (propositions
self-evident) or theorems (conclusions from a fixed set of
rules of inferences and axioms.

2. Informal logic

On its part, informal logic is a more recent discipline that studies,

evaluate and analyze the arguments presented in natural language or
everyday. Hence the categorization of it as "informal". It can refer to both
spoken language as written or any type of mechanism and
interaction used to communicate something. Unlike formal logic, which
for example, it would apply to the study and development of programming languages;
Formal language refers to languages and tongues.

Thus, informal logic can analyze reasoning and

personal arguments to political debates, legal arguments or
the premises disseminated by the media such as the newspaper, the
television, the internet, etc.

3. Symbolic Logic

As its name indicates, symbolic logic analyzes the relationships between

symbols. At times it uses complex mathematical language, as it
is responsible for studying problems that traditional formal logic encounters
complicated or difficult to address. It is usually divided into two subtypes:

Predicate logic or first-order logic: it is a formal system.

composed of formulas and quantifiable variables

Propositional: it is a formal system composed of

propositions, which are able to create other propositions through
connectors called 'logical connectives'. In this case, there are no variables.
quantifiable.

4. Mathematical logic

Depending on the author who describes it, mathematical logic can

to be a type of formal logic. Others believe that logic
mathematics includes both the application of formal logic to mathematics,
as the application of mathematical reasoning to formal logic.

Broadly speaking, it is about the application of mathematical language in the

the construction of logical systems makes it possible to reproduce the human mind. By
example this has been very present in the development of artificial intelligence
and in the computational paradigms of the study of cognition.

It is usually divided into two subtypes:

Logicism: it is about the application of logic in mathematics.

Examples of this type are the theory of proof, the theory of models, the
set theory and recursion theory.

Intuitionism: it holds that both logic and mathematics are

methods whose application is consistent for making constructions
complex mental ones. But, he says that in themselves, logic and the
mathematics cannot explain deep properties of the
elements that analyze.

Logic and reasoning

 there are three types of reasoning that can also be considered systems
logical. These are mechanisms that allow us to draw conclusions about
starting from premises. Deductive reasoning makes this extraction from
a general premise to a particular premise. A classic example is the
proposed by Aristotle: All humans are mortal (this is the
general premise); Socrates is a human (this is the major premise), and
Finally, Socrates is mortal (this is the conclusion).

For its part, an inductive reasoning is the process by which one

draw a conclusion in the opposite direction: from the particular to the general.
An example of this would be 'All the crows I can see are black.'
(particular premise); then, all crows are black (conclusion).

Finally, modal reasoning or logic is based on arguments.

probabilistic, that is, that express a possibility (a modality). They
it deals with a system of formal logic that includes terms like 'couldn't',
“puede”, “debe”, “eventualmente”.

Characteristics of logic

1- The results of logic are valid or invalid

Logic consists of reasoning to produce arguments. Such arguments

are evaluated in terms of validity.

This means that from the point of view of logic, they do not exist.
correct or incorrect arguments, but valid or invalid.

It can be deductive, inductive, abductive, or analogical.

Logic follows a series of patterns to produce valid reasoning.

These patterns are deduction, induction, abduction, and analogy.

Each of the three models is applied according to the circumstances of

communicative context.

3- Logic can be formal and informal

Logic is divided into two main branches: formal logic and logic
informal.
 Formal logic is philosophical and traditional. It is responsible for studying the
deductive arguments, those in which inference is used to
draw conclusions.

4- Logical statements do not contradict each other

Logic is governed by the principle of non-contradiction. This states that two

contradictory propositions cannot be valid at the same time. That is,
One cannot be and not be simultaneously.

Let us consider the following propositions:

The square has four sides.

The square has five sides.

When two contradictory statements are presented, necessarily one

must be invalid. In this case, the second proposition is invalid since it
it goes against mathematical logic.

Third excluded

Logic is characterized by the principle of the excluded middle. This principle...

based on classical logic, which establishes that a proposition can be
only true or false, without the possibility of the existence of a third
option.

This principle is related to that of non-contradiction. While the

the principle of non-contradiction states that two contradictory propositions
they cannot be true at the same time, the law of excluded middle states that
Both contradictory propositions cannot be false. By force, one must be true.
it must be true.

6- The validity of the propositions is evaluated taking into account certain

modalities

There are various modalities that logic takes into account at the moment of
decide whether a proposition is valid or not. Among these, the following stand out:

The temporal difference: some propositions were false in the past but
Now they are true in the present, and vice versa.

The epistemological difference: in some cases, it is known that the

propositions are true or false. In other cases, it is believed that the
propositions are true or not.

7- Logical statements are units

Logical statements, whether deductive, inductive, abductive or
analogues represent a unit. Therefore, they cannot be divided.

This feature is defended by propositional logic. This branch of the

Logic states that dividing the simple statements, those that are
formed by two premises and a conclusion, it would be a mistake as it would detract
sense to the proposition.

What is language?

Language is a system of communication, formed by oral signs and

written, that serve for human beings to express our
ideas, thoughts, emotions, and feelings to other human beings, whether it's
to two or more people.

Language becomes indispensable in our social life and is key in

our interpersonal relationships.

Types of language

Informative language:

It is a language used by, or associated with, computers. Many times, this

the term is used as a synonym for programming language, but a language
Computer science does not have to be a programming language.

It is the one used to express feelings or emotions. When it comes to

explain a topic in a presentation. These texts aim to convey the
reality in an objective way, as they try to make known a fact, situation or
circumstance just as it happened.

Expressive language:

Understand, along with words, everything that serves in communication.

to give meaning to what we want to convey. The pauses, the pronunciation, the
tone, exclamations; all of this shapes expressiveness in language
essential for the receiver to grasp the message, its meaning, and its
meaning.

Informative language: It is the one we use daily and includes propositions.

true or false.
Functions of language

Function of the expressive language:

Language serves the expressive function when it allows the sender to communicate to
others, the states of mind, the emotions or feelings. In oral discourse,
It is easy to recognize emotions or feelings by observing and listening:
gestures, postures, intonation, tone and timbre of voice; but in written discourse,
One should observe elements in the text such as: exclamatory sentences, periods.
suspensive, use of diminutives, among others.

Function of the informative language:

The referential or informative function of language is fulfilled in texts whose

The purpose is to inform others of an occurrence, fact, event, or situation of the
reality. In no case do these texts express feelings, opinions or
sender's beliefs. The authors of these texts aim to be objective. Without
There is a possibility that there exists some substrate of a particular approach,
even when opinions or value judgments are not made explicit: there tends to be
ideological trends and personal opinions that can be glimpsed in
adjectives or other linguistic resources since total objectivity is
impossible. These texts or speeches are called referential because in them
the referent predominates, that is, the object or that which is perceived from the
reality.

Function of the directive language:

The function of directive language is used to cause or prevent actions.

orders and/or requests. It is neither true nor false.

Linguistic Acts

Each of these actions that we perform in language plays a role.

specific in our conversations. The last three are linked to the
coordination of actions.

Assertions are a linguistic act that we use to describe the world.

what we observe. It's curious because these seem to be descriptions. Without
embargo, his propositions about our observations. It is important
clarify this part because the statements do not describe things as they are,
just as we observe them. Even when my partner and I share
We cannot say that we observe things as the same observations.
they really are. We can only say that we share what we observe, more
not the description of reality.
Declarations are another linguistic act, but declarations unlike
the statements do not talk about facts, they open new ones
possibilities, this type speaks to you, creates new worlds, what I mean by that is
words create a different reality, because after having said so
what was said the world is no longer different. This is one of the reasons why the
speech is not innocent, it is always generating something, and in the case of the
statements allow opening new doors, generating new possibilities, for
so the language is generative. The act of making a statement generates
a new reality, for those who express it as well as for those who listen to it.
But we only generate a world through our statements if we have
the ability to enforce them.

Statements are not like true or false assertions. These

they are valid or invalid and this depends on the power of the person who makes them.
This is a fundamental distinction when we deal with the
statements. A statement carries with it a commitment different from that of
the statements. When we make a declaration, it commits us to something.
act consistently with the new reality we have declared.

Judgments are another type of statements. These are like verdicts, just like
It happens with statements. With them, we create a new reality, a
reality that only exists in language. If we did not have language, reality
created by the trials would not exist. The trials are another important example of the
generative capacity of language. They do not describe something that already existed before
to be formulated. The reality they generate resides entirely in the interpretation
that provide.

Promises are linguistic acts different from statements or those

statements, although they also, like assertions, function within
of a 'declarative space'. Promises are, by excellence, those acts
linguistic skills that allow us to coordinate actions with others. When someone
Make a promise, he or she commits to another to carry out some action.
in the future. When someone promises me that he or she is going to carry out a
certain action in the future, I can make commitments and execute
actions that would have been impossible before.

Promises imply a mutual explicit commitment. In less...

formally, the breach of a promise gives us the right to make a
claim. Promises are constitutive of human existence, just as they are
the other linguistic acts. Due to this ability to make promises
we can increase our capacity for action; we can achieve things that
would not have been possible without the ability to coordinate our action with
the others. Just look around and observe our world to verify
that a large part of what we observe rests on the capacity of beings
humans to make promises. We realize that our work,
our marriage, our education, our political system, etc.
they were generated because there were people who made promises to others.

Language traps

In today's world, there is a perversion of language that consists of the

habitual use of dubious concepts, due to their multivocal nature, or because they serve
to cover up reality instead of uncovering or interpreting it, or for its function
legitimizer intended to replace a more accurate and more critical concept. The
The language of politics is an extreme case: the far right defines itself.
as a center, the conservative and timid center presents itself as the left or
socialists, the xenophobes and racists as democrats... no one is what they say
Yes. Social sciences, partly due to the influence of political media and
communication and international organizations, they have adopted them and
legitimized, and thus, almost without realizing it, they have adapted and submitted to power
formal and to the real power. The controls that are exercised through the magazines
indexed and the financing of research programs has facilitated the
moral and intellectual betrayal of a significant part of the university world. The
The perversion of language is its most visible expression.

Since the examples are very numerous, let us cite some concepts that are of
frequent use in both social sciences and in politics and in the media
of communication. We are not going to denounce the ultra neoliberal language of the
economists, or the hyperpositivism of jurists and political scientists, or objectivism
"neutral" or an accomplice to many sociologists, since in addition to being easy would
to criticize a part of the university students but probably not the majority.
We will only comment on terms that have become generalized, that are used by others.
also critical university students, whoa at first they seem innocent,
well-intentioned, most of the time even progressive, in any case
they are always used as 'natural', indisputable, positive

Laws of logic:
1) The law of identity: it states that A is A. In other words, something is what it is.
An apple is an apple. If something exists, it has a nature, an essence. For
For example, a book has a front cover and a back cover with pages inside.
A car has four wheels, seats, doors, windows, etc. A tree has branches.
leaves, a trunk, and roots. This also means that anything that exists has
characteristics. We recognize what something is by observing its characteristics. You know
that a tree is a tree because it sees its branches, its leaves, its trunk, etc.

Furthermore, if something has an identity, it cannot have another, since this one is unique and
individual. In other words: If something exists, it has a series of attributes that are
consistent with itself. This something does not have a set of attributes that are
inconsistent with themselves. Therefore, we can easily conclude that a cat
It is not a parachute. An apple is not a race car and a tree is not a
movie.

2) The law of non-contradiction: it tells us that A cannot be both A and not A at the same time.
same time and in the same direction. In other words: something, like a statement not
It can be both true and false at the same time and in the same way. With
we frequently use the law of non-contradiction in discussions and debates since we are
capable of recognizing when something is contrary to itself. If we told you that
Yesterday someone went shopping and later we told them that this someone didn't go.
purchases, you would correct us by telling us that there is a contradiction. A
Contradiction occurs when one statement excludes the possibility of another, and yet both
they claim to be true. Since we know that both cannot be true, we see
so, a contradiction. Based on this principle, we can conclude that the truth
it does not contradict itself.

3) The law of excluded middle: it states that a declaration is either true or false.
Example: "That woman's hair is brown." Is it true or false that the hair of
that woman is brown-haired. Another example: The statement 'I am pregnant' is true or
false. Due to the fact that the author of this Lesson is a man, it is not possible that he is
pregnant. Therefore, the statement is false. If I were a woman, it would be possible that
she were pregnant given the normal conditions of a woman's body. When
A woman is pregnant; there is no middle position: She is, or she is not.
pregnant.

The law of excluded middle is important as it helps us deal with absolutes and this
it is particularly important in a society where relativism is promoted and the
True statements are denied.

Contradiction:
Incompatibility that exists between different propositions. The expressions 'Juan is alive' and
"Juan is dead" are contradictory, as long as they refer to the same individual: it is not
it's compatible to affirm "Juan is alive and is dead" as this person is either alive or dead.
dead, but not alive and dead simultaneously. These propositions invalidate each other.
yes.

In logic, a contradiction is an incompatibility between two or more propositions.

For example, the sentences "it rains and it doesn't rain" and "neither it rains nor thunders, but it rains and thunders"

they express contradictions.

Contingency:
It is the way of being or characteristic of something in that it can be or not be, depending on the
case (something that is not necessary, but it is possible). In general, contingency is predicated of
the states of things, the facts, the events, or the propositions. There is a debate about whether it is
acceptable to talk about contingent entities (or necessary or impossible entities), known
like the debate surrounding the modalities of dicto (of the word) and of res (of the thing).
The relationship between necessity, possibility, and contingency is easy to misunderstand. Everything that is
contingent is possible, but not everything that is possible is contingent, for that which is
Necessary is also possible, but it is not contingent. On the other hand, not everything that is not
Necessary is contingent, for what is impossible is neither necessary nor contingent.

Tautology:
Repetition of the same thought through different expressions. A tautology, for the
rhetoric is a redundant statement.

It is common for tautologies to be considered a mistake in language or a lack of

however, it is possible to appeal to tautologies to emphasize a certain idea. For
I can confirm that the accused is guilty since I witnessed the murder with my own
"own eyes" presents an unnecessary clarification about the use of their eyes, since it does not
I could have seen it through another means; similarly, the emphasis of the word 'own' can
omit absolutely.

Truth table:
A truth table, a table of truth values, is a table that shows the value of
truth of a compound proposition, for each combination of truth that can be
assign.

It was developed by Charles Sanders Peirce around the 1880s, but the most popular format is
the one introduced by Ludwig Wittgenstein in his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, published in 1921.

The Certainty:

It is the awareness of knowing that we know the truth. In this sense, as certainty.
we call the safe and clear knowledge that one has of something and that leaves no room for doubt.
The word, comotal, is a feminine noun that derives from certain, which in turn comes from the
Latin certus, which means 'decided', 'resolved', or 'precise'. Certainty, in this sense, does not
it limits the idea that we know the truth, but rather refers to the state of knowledge according to
of which we are aware that we possess the truth.

From there, being certain about something means knowing it with conviction, with security, and even with
evidence that what is known is, in fact, true: 'I am certain that it rained'
during the early morning, as the park's ground is wet.” Thus, certainty is also associated
to the trust placed in the information being handled. The basis of certainty, as such, is
a rational knowledge of reality that can be recognized objectively.
From there, all knowledge, and mainly scientific and factual knowledge, is based on a
set of certainties that are articulated as a discipline of knowledge.

For this reason, certainty is also associated with the exact or precise knowledge that one has.
about a certain matter, subject, or phenomenon. Synonyms for certainty, for their part, are
certainty, conviction, security or trust. On the other hand, antonyms would be doubt,
uncertainty or hesitation, that is to say, the state of consciousness we have towards that which
we ignore or do not fully know.

The Doubt:
It is an indeterminacy between two decisions or two judgments. It is a hesitation that
One can experience it in the face of a fact, a piece of news, or a belief. For example: 'The version
This official of this story generates a great doubt in me,” “Teacher, I have a question regarding the
theme that has just been explained", "There is no doubt: it is about a great player who will benefit the
team.

Doubt implies a state of uncertainty: where there are doubts, there are no certainties. If a person
doubt about something, is not sure of the validity of that question. The doubt is a limit to the
Trust, since where there are doubts, there is no belief in the truth of knowledge.

Probability:
Probability is a cause of the certainty associated with a future event or occurrence and is usually
expressed as a number between 0 and 1 (or between 0% and 100%).

A traditional way to estimate some probabilities would be to obtain the frequency of a

event determined by the conduct of random experiments, of which
knowing all possible outcomes, under sufficiently stable conditions. An event
it can be unlikely (with a probability close to 0), likely (intermediate probability) or
certain (with probability one).

Criteria of Truth:
The criterion of truth is the standard for establishing veracity, the certainty of our knowledge;
the testimony that confirms and attests to the correctness of our ideas; the degree of agreement
between our sensations and concepts and objective reality. For idealism, the criterion of
Truth is not found outside of human consciousness, in objective reality, but in the
sensations, in the ideas of the subject, in the clarity and accuracy of concepts, etc.

From the point of view of idealism, it is difficult to distinguish between the truthful and the false, between the real and
The fantastic. The criterion of the truth of dialectical materialism is, on the other hand, experience.
the practice, understood not only in the narrow sense of the single act of verification, of
experiment or individual experience, but above all, in the sense of practice
historical-social of men. "The conception of life, of practice, must be the first and
fundamental conception of knowledge (Lenin).
The criterion of practice refutes idealism and agnosticism, as it demonstrates that
our knowledge of the laws that govern Nature has the value of truths
objects, and that there are no unknowable things in the world.

The Error:
The error is something wrong or incorrect. It can be an action, a concept, or a thing that
It was not done correctly.

For example: 'I think coming to your house was a mistake,' 'You made a mistake: three for
eight is equal to twenty-four, and not to twenty-six
from the government as it squandered millions of dollars.

The Statements:
A statement is a minimal speech act, made through a sentence or an expression.
syntactic unit smaller than a sentence. Informally, the term statement is used as a synonym for
sentence, although pragmatically there are differences. For example, the same sentence said
in different contexts corresponds to different statements. And vice versa, different
sentences can express or elaborate on the same statement as this:

I want you to take out the trash.

Can you take out the trash?

Take out the trash, please.

Do you want to take out the trash?

All these different sentences, in essence, have the same interpretation, and therefore
they can essentially be considered realizations of the same pragmatic statement.
Sentence, statement, and proposition). In logic, a sentence is sometimes understood as a statement.
which can be true or false, such as "it is raining", "it is cold" or "Venus is a planet".
In this sense, logical arguments consist of statements: the premises and the
Conclusion. In other words, the statements are the series of elements combined with each other.
formed by the communicative behaviors established by the code, and constitute the
verbal messages.

CLASSIFICATION OF TRIALS:
1. FOR UNIVERSAL QUANTITIES: They are those that refer to all individuals of the
species. Example: All men are rational. PARTICULAR Are those that are
they refer to several objects without reaching totality, that is, they refer only to a part
Delete everything. Example: Some men are loyal. SINGULARS They are those who make
reference to a single individual of the species. Example: Juan is loyal.
2. FOR QUALITY: These are judgments that express the compatibility between the subject and the
predicate. The predicate is performed on the subject. AFFIRMATIVE • Example: Men are
NEGATIVE • They are those that express the incompatibility between the subject and the
predicate. They result in the subject relationship.

3. BY THE MODALITY: Problematic Judgments: They express only one category of possibility.
They indicate that something may happen, occur, or be known. It may rain in the afternoon.
cancer can be caused by a virus. It is likely that they will appoint a new secretary of
hacienda. Assertive Judgments: They express a real but subjective knowledge, that is, what each being
A human can express an opinion and/or feeling about something and, therefore, is subject to discussion and a
contrary judgment with equal validity. One Hundred Years of Solitude is the best book I have read. The
I don't like Picasso's paintings. The death penalty is a just punishment. Apodictic Trials:
They express the highest degree of truth, certainty, and necessity of knowledge. They indicate something.
What must be by necessity (laws of mathematics, physics, and other sciences) is matter.
Neither created nor destroyed, it only transforms. Pythagorean theorem. Deeper into
the sea, greater pressure

4. BY THE RELATION: Hypothetical Judgments Categorical Judgments Expresses a truth without

conditions, states a truth of knowledge and can be universal or particular.
Affirmative or negative No man flies. Some humans are immune to HIV expresses
a condition of possibility for any phenomenon. It affirms cause and effect relationships.
EXAMPLES: If it rains, the crops will be good. If the temperature drops, it will be cold. If you study,
You will be able to solve the exercises. DISJUNCTIVE JUDGMENTS: Set a double or multiple possibility.
as a solution to your proposal EXAMPLES: The reading is read in its original language or in
Translations. Mammals can be terrestrial or aquatic. Governments can be,
monarchic, democratic or dictatorial.

Reasoning:
Reasoning is understood as the faculty that allows solving problems, extracting
conclusions and learning consciously from events, establishing connections
causal and necessary logics between them. In a more restricted sense, one can talk about
different types of reasoning:

The argumentative reasoning as a mental activity corresponds to the activity

linguistic argumentation. In other words, an argument is the linguistic expression of a
reasoning.

Logical or causal reasoning is a process of logic through which, starting from one or
more judgments, it derives the validity, the possibility or the falsehood of another different judgment. The study of
The arguments correspond to logic, so it also corresponds to it.
indirectly the study of reasoning. Generally, the judgments on which it is based a
reasoning expresses knowledge already acquired or, at least, postulated as
Hypothesis.1 It is possible to distinguish between several types of logical reasoning.
For example, deductive reasoning (strictly logical), inductive reasoning
(where probability and the formulation of conjectures intervene) and abductive reasoning.

Immediate Inference:
An immediate inference is an inference that can be made from several statements or
proposition. For example, starting from the statement 'All toads are green' we can
No frog is not green.
that can be validly used in logical operations, the result of these is the
a logically equivalent form of the given statement. There also exist
Invalid immediate inferences that are syllogistic fallacies.

Valid immediate inferences:

Conversion

Given a statement of type E, starting from the traditional order of opposition, 'No S'
From P, one can obtain the immediate inference 'No P is S', which is the conversion.
from the given statement.
Given a type I statement, "Some S is P", the inference can be obtained
Immediate 'Some P is S', which is the conversion of the given statement.

Opposition

Given a type A assertion, "All S are P", one can obtain the inference
immediate "NoAnySesno P", which is the opposition of the given statement.
Given a type E statement, 'No Ses P', one can obtain the inference
immediate "TodoSesno P", which is the opposition of the given statement.
Given a type I statement, 'Some Ses P', one can obtain the inference
"SomeSno is not P", which is the opposition of the given statement.
Given a type O statement, "Some S is not P", the inference can be obtained
immediate 'Some Sesno P', which is the opposition of the given statement.

Against positive

Given a type A statement, 'All S are P.', one can obtain the inference
immediate "All Pesno S", which is the contrapositive of the given statement.
Given a type O statement, "Some S is not P.", the inference can be obtained
immediate 'Some No Pesno S', which is the contrapositive of the given statement.

Invalid Immediate Inferences:

The cases of incorrect application of contrary, subcontrary, and subalternation relations

They are syllogistic fallacies called illicit contrary, illicit subcontrary, and illicit subalternation.
Cases of incorrect application of the contrapositive are quite rare, that
generally a "illicit contradictory" fallacy is not recognized.
Illicit contrary

It is false that all A are B, therefore, no A is B.

It is false that no A is B, therefore, all A is B.

Illicit sub contrario

Some A is B, therefore it is false that some A is not B.

Some A is not B, therefore, some A is B.

Illegal subalternation

Some A are not B, therefore no A are B.

It is false that all A is B, therefore, it is false that some A is B.

Inference meditative:

It is one that follows a single premise to reach a conclusion regarding our work.
It may be considered a mediated inference because it uses several data points to arrive at a conclusion.
determined statistic. In the case of an inference, a premise and a conclusion are followed.
but in our example, the data are the premises and the total is a conclusion, so the index
Of people who have a level of education, it could be considered as an immediate inference.

Although in a data table we do not use the classic indicators of inference

we can note that it is because they are very similar in terms of a format and the process that
continues to form even if one contains data or numbers and the other has premises or
statements with logical sense.

Induction

Induction (refer): reasoning method that consists of going from the particular to the
general. from facts to generalizations. Deduction (infer): method of
reasoning that consists of going from the general to the particular, from the statements
general to the specific conclusions.

analogy

Relation of similarity between different things

Reasoning by analogy is a special type of inductive reasoning according to

what are used perceptible similarities as a basis to infer some other similarity that
it cannot be perceived yet

Proportionality is a constant relationship or ratio between different magnitudes.

Let them go measure. If one increases or decreases, the other only increases, not decreases.
Implication in its common use is a statement that entails another, without the second one.
It should be communicated explicitly.

In formal reasoning, a logical disjunction between two propositions is a connector.

logical, whose truth value is false only if both propositions are false,
and in a certain way or another.[1] There are different contexts where it is used.
logical disjunction.

In formal reasoning, a logical conjunction between two propositions is a connector.

logical whose truth value is true only if both propositions are
certain, and false in any other way. There are different contexts where it is used
the logical conjunction.

An inductive reasoning is a form of reasoning in which the truth of the...

premises support the conclusion, but do not guarantee it. A classic example of
inductive reasoning is:

All the crows observed so far have been black.

Therefore, all crows are black

Concordance is the conformity of grammatical accidents, the logic among the

different elements that must govern for a text to be interpreted
Properly. The subject and the predicate must agree in number and person.

The syllogism is a form of deductive and inductive reasoning that comes from the
word from the Latin syllogismus, and is part of the logic of Greek origin, which consists of
of two statements as premises and another as a conclusion, with the latter being a
necessary deductive inference from the other two.

It is known as vulgar knowledge, pre-scientific knowledge, or knowledge

naive to those forms of knowledge that arise from direct interaction and
superficial with the objects of reality. It can also arise from opinion
of the people around us

scientific knowledge is only handled in academic, specialized or

school materials, which are not freely accessible to anyone, partly because they require a
training or initiation to be fully understood

Science is conceived as a system of knowledge that has the imperative

categorical about caring for human life and the planet on which it lives. Science,
scientific method, valid knowledge, knowledge, criteria of validity, ethics of life
care for life.