Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The minor premise is an L-proposition (full necessity) — Carmelics
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→In the mood Ld1LL, the conclusion is an L-proposition (stronger than the major premise)

    The minor premise is an L-proposition (full necessity)

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    In the mood Ld1LL, the conclusion is an L-proposition (stronger than the major p...The major premise is a descriptional necessity proposition (Ld), which is weaker...This combination constitutes the first exception to the rule that conclusions fo...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    The minor premise is an M-proposition in both MMM and LML94%The minor premise is an actuality proposition (X or L)92%The minor premise is an M-proposition (possibility)92%The major premise is a descriptional necessity proposition (Ld), which...87%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: ibn-sina-logic
    View source passageHide passage
    In the first figure, according to the terse account offered in the Išārāt, if the minor premise is an actuality proposition (X or L), the conclusion follows the modality of the major (X, L or M). There are, however, two exceptions in which the conclusion follows the modality of the minor premise. The first exception is Ld1LL, where the major is a descriptional necessity proposition and the conclusion, like the minor, is an L-proposition (stronger than the major). The second exception is XMM, whe

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective