Asked by Valene Canizares on May 16, 2024

verifed

Verified

If we assume the modern view of existential import, why is the following syllogism invalid? Some terrorists support an independent Palestinian state.
John Smith supports an independent Palestinian state.
John Smith is a terrorist.

A) undistributed middle
B) illicit major or minor term
C) two negative premises
D) negative premise with affirmative conclusion, or negative conclusion with no negative premise
E) universal premises with particular conclusion

Existential Import

The concept that a statement implies the existence of the subject it mentions.

Invalid Syllogism

An invalid syllogism is a form of deductive reasoning where the conclusion does not logically follow from its premises, thus making the argument logically incorrect.

  • Recognize and correct fallacies related to undistributed middle, illicit major or minor terms, and negative premise with affirmative conclusion or vice versa.
  • Grasp the distinction between traditional and modern views of existential import and its application in evaluating syllogisms.
verifed

Verified Answer

AB
Audrey BarquiraMay 22, 2024
Final Answer :
A
Explanation :
The middle term, "supports an independent Palestinian state," is not distributed in either premise, meaning it does not refer to all members of the category in either statement. This leads to an undistributed middle, making the syllogism invalid because it does not logically prove that John Smith is a terrorist based on the given premises.