Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorQuantifier Logic (Some, Most, All)

Consider the following premises regarding the state judiciary:

Every judge appointed to the appellate court has over a decade of trial experience. Most judges appointed to the appellate court have published legal scholarship. None of the judges who have published legal scholarship sit on the disciplinary board.

Based on these premises, the following deduction must logically be true:
Most judges with over a decade of trial experience do not sit on the disciplinary board.

Cevap: Cevap

Cevap

The statement is False because it commits a quantifier overreach error, attempting to apply a characteristic of a specific subset (appellate judges) to the majority of a broader superset (judges with trial experience).
The deduction provided in the stem is invalid. It correctly chains the premises to realize that most appellate judges do not sit on the board. However, it illegally extends that conclusion to state that most judges with a decade of trial experience do not sit on the board. We only know that *some* (at least the appellate judges) do not. We do not have information about the rest of the judges with trial experience.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Map the formal logic of the premises.
Premise 1: All Appellate Judges (AJ) -> Trial Experience (TE). Premise 2: Most AJ -> Published (P). Premise 3: No P -> Disciplinary Board (DB), which means All P -> ~DB.
Translating statements into formal notation clarifies the boundaries of the quantifier relationships.
2
Chain the 'Most' and 'None/All' premises to form a valid intermediate deduction.
Combine Premise 2 (Most AJ -> P) with Premise 3 (All P -> ~DB) to deduce: Most AJ -> ~DB (Most appellate judges do not sit on the disciplinary board).
In quantifier logic, combining a 'Most' statement with an 'All/None' statement yields a valid 'Most' statement if the 'Most' group points to the sufficient condition of the 'All' group.
3
Evaluate the relationship between the intermediate deduction and the target group.
We know 'Most AJ -> ~DB' and 'All AJ -> TE'. The deduction asks if 'Most TE -> ~DB' must be true.
We must test if the target conclusion strictly follows from the relationship between AJ and TE.
4
Determine the validity of the final deduction.
Invalid. Because AJ is a subset of TE, we can only conclude that 'Some TE -> ~DB'. We cannot conclude 'Most TE' share any characteristic because the broader group of TE judges could be infinitely larger than the AJ subset.
Moving from a subset to a superset only guarantees a 'Some' relationship, never a 'Most' relationship without additional numerical data.

Anahtar Kavram

Quantifier Logic (Some, Most, All)
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Quantifier Logic (Some, Most, All)

Bu konudan daha fazla soru