Logic question

[Oggiedoggie]

I'm looking for a term to describe this logic structure:

Red things are fast.
My car is red.
Therefore: My car is fast.

I realize that the logic in this example is flawed. I'm just looking for a term for the structure in this example.

I'm trying to help our daughter with her homework and I continue to impress her with my lack of knowledge.

 

[zeke12]

You have a false premise, therefore your conclusion is faulty.

 

[Chi City 81]

You have a false premise, therefore your conclusion is faulty.

Correct. The equation would only be true if your first sentence began with the word "All."

 

[Oggiedoggie]

OK, OK, so once again I prove my lack of knowledge.

Throw an "All" in front of the red.

Is there a term by which this type of logic equation is referred?

 

[zeke12]

I'm not sure what more you're looking for.

 

[poindexter]

Try this list of fallacies

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

 

[Inky_Wretch]

Is there a term by which this type of logic equation is referred?

It's a syllogism...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

 

[JR]

And the SportsJournalists.com fallacy of choice:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

 

[spup1122]

I wish I knew where my logic book was from college. I could tell you in an instant, but I just don't remember. Sorry man.

 

[Dedo]

Your example is flawed, but I think you're getting at the transitive property.

Transitive property -- If X equals Y, and Y equals Z, then X equals Z.

 

[spup1122]

I think you're right dedo. I couldn't remember it.

 

[Point of Order]

OK, OK, so once again I prove my lack of knowledge.

Throw an "All" in front of the red.

Is there a term by which this type of logic equation is referred?

Throw in "All" and the logic of the statement is correct.

 

[Oggiedoggie]

It's a syllogism.

Thanks Inky_Wretch and others.

Don't worry, when the time comes to explain dating to our daughter, mom will take over.

But, then again, looking at what she ended up with, it might be a job for grandma.

 

[Point of Order]

All red things are fast.
My car is red.
Therefore: My car is fast.

Flawed logic (see also Chris_L, hondo and Boom) would be concluding the following:

"My car is fast, therefore it must be red" (Mistaken reversal) or
"My car isn't red, therefore it cannot be fast" (Mistaken negation)

 

[slappy4428]

My car is red, but it isn't fast because it's a Yugo

 

[jgmacg]

All red things are fast.
My car is red.
Therefore: My car is fast.

Flawed logic (see also Chris_L, hondo and Boom) would be concluding the following:

"My car is fast, therefore it must be red" (Mistaken reversal) or
"My car isn't red, therefore it cannot be fast" (Mistaken negation)

"My car is red. Cars run on gasoline. Ergo, we're in Iraq." (Mistaken invasion)

 

[Dedo]

Yeah, you're right. It's called a syllogism when you're talking about ideas, and the transitive property when you're talking about numbers. But they're essentially the same thing.

Syllogisms always remind me of a classic Norm MacDonald joke about dogs. I won't be able to do it justice, but he told a story about how he was taking a walk with a friend of his who was attending "the University of Science" and majoring in logic. Norm asks him what logic is, and his buddy says he'll explain it to him. The buddy says, "See that guy over there walking that big dog? I'll bet you he's straight." Norm asks how he knows this, and the buddy explains that people with big dogs generally own houses with yards, and people who own houses with yards generally have families, and people with families are generally straight.

So Norm was fascinated by this, and he went home and told his neighbor about logic. The neighbor asked him what logic is, and Norm says he'll explain it to him. Norm asks, "Do you have a dog?" The neighbor says, "No." And Norm says, "What're you, one of them gays?"

 

[Cadet]

Of course, red is not a color.

It's a word used to describe a color.

 

[Lugnuts]

All red things are fast.
My car is red.
Therefore: My car is fast.

Flawed logic (see also Chris_L, hondo and Boom) would be concluding the following:

"My car is fast, therefore it must be red" (Mistaken reversal) or
"My car isn't red, therefore it cannot be fast" (Mistaken negation)

"My car is red. Cars run on gasoline. Ergo, we're in Iraq." (Mistaken invasion)

It could also be called a non sequitur, couldn't it?

Hey I'm wondering... by definition, what's a "strawman argument"?

 

[Johnny Dangerously]

It's part of the whole strawman justice thing.