Modus ponens is the basic valid argument form that says: from “If P then Q” and “P,” we may validly infer “Q.” It affirms the antecedent and concludes the consequent. The pattern “If P then Q; P; therefore Q” guarantees that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. This is one of the most frequently used inference rules in formal and informal reasoning.
Option A:
Option A presents the correct modus ponens form, with the conditional and affirmation of the antecedent leading to the consequent. It preserves validity in all interpretations.
Option B:
Option B is the fallacy of denying the antecedent: from “If P then Q” and “not P” it draws “not Q,” which is not logically guaranteed, because Q might still be true for other reasons.
Option C:
Option C is the fallacy of affirming the consequent: from “If P then Q” and “Q” it infers “P,” which is also not always valid.
Option D:
Option D is modus tollens, a different but still valid form, which infers “not P” from “If P then Q” and “not Q,” but it is not modus ponens.
Comment Your Answer
Please login to comment your answer.
Sign In
Sign Up
Answers commented by others
No answers commented yet. Be the first to comment!