Consider the following conditional syllogism:
Premise 1: If I don't eat lunch today, I will be hungry tonight.
Premise 2: I ate lunch today.
Conclusion: Therefore, I wasn't hungry tonight.
This syllogism is an example of
A) affirming the consequent
B) denying the antecedent.
C) affirming the consequent.
D) denying the antecedent

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

This syllogism is an example of denying the antecedent. Premise 1 states that if I don't eat lunch, I will be hungry tonight. This is the antecedent. Premise 2 states that I ate lunch today. This is the denial of the antecedent. The conclusion, therefore, is not necessarily true. It is possible that I did not feel hungry tonight even though I ate lunch because there could be other factors that influence hunger. Thus, the syllogism is invalid.

Consider the Following Conditional Syllogism