“What
if I told you the biggest contributor to death and pollution in the United
States wasn’t cars or
cancer or clickbait, but rather cheeseburgers and other foodstuffs? Yes, we
love food, but if we we really care about the world we’d ban eating. We must ban eating. We can, and we
should. I’m not saying it would be easy, but there are clear and better
alternatives.” -Matt Hardigree
2)P1: All
people who eat junk food will die
P2: Nancy eats junk food
C: Therefore, Nancy will die
3)
The argument is valid:
4) B: This argument is valid but not true.
Though there are some people who eat junk food, die, it is not their eating of
junk food, which causes their death.
5) If you do not eat junk food, then you will not die.
6) p=You eat junk
food q=You die
|
P
|
Q
|
~p
|
~q
|
~pà~q
|
|
T
|
T
|
F
|
F
|
T
|
|
T
|
F
|
F
|
T
|
T
|
|
F
|
T
|
T
|
F
|
F
|
|
F
|
F
|
T
|
T
|
T
|
No the argument is not a
tautology
a)
The argument is not a tautology and it does
not make sense in real life. Many people eat junk food yet they do not die.
b)
The argument is not a tautology and doesn’t
make sense in real life. Many people eat junk food but do not die
c)
Truth
tables can determine whether or not an argument is a tautology or not.
I like your truth table it provides evidence for why the argument is not a tautology.
ReplyDeleteur truth table is well done- very clear and good explanation.
ReplyDeletei like ur argument
Interesting topic. Your truth table is very clear but you did not discuss 7,8, or 9. I understand it is not something that makes sense in real life, after reading an article like this do you feel like you should be more cautious about what you read on the internet?
ReplyDeleteFunny argument- your truth table also looks great and you did a very concise job...clearly it isnt a tautology, which is similar to my argument
ReplyDeletejenna,
ReplyDeletereally interesting topic! i was not able to view your venn diagram, but from your explanation i am gathering that you came up with the wrong conclusion. your argument is invalid and not true, because it is of the form if a then b, x is b, x is a, which is the converse. additionally, your truth is missing many components.
all in all a good effort, though.
professor little