2006-09-25 18:21:18 · 19 answers · asked by tentoeights 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Yes your cat is a dog, so is your kitchen table...
2006-09-25 18:25:48 · answer #1 · answered by leanna1700 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, all cats have four legs too. The difference between cats and dogs is not number of legs.
2006-09-26 01:29:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope - given statement X, only version of the 3 other variants which must be true is called the 'contrapositive' inverse and converse don't need to be true (but can be true).
similar to if my car is on fire then everything that is on fire is a car
contrapositive of 'all dogs have four legs' is to reverse the order and negate both clauses - e.g., 'things that do not have four legs are not dogs'
2006-09-26 01:35:02 · answer #3 · answered by larry n 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no.
Having four legs is only part of the definition of a dog. If you had an unknown animal and it had four legs, then it could be a dog, but it could be something else as well.
2006-09-26 01:23:24 · answer #4 · answered by Startoshadows 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Does that mean that a dog with only three legs stops being a dog?
2006-09-26 01:27:54 · answer #5 · answered by therealme 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No - because all dogs may have four legs, yet all four legs don't have a dog.
2006-09-26 02:37:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, it means it a part of the species of animals that has four legs.
2006-09-26 10:19:16 · answer #7 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, the argument is a logical fallacy. The conclusion doesn't follow the premise and it technically could be labeled as a loaded question. Non sequitur. Defensive lawyers counter logical fallacies in court all the time.
2006-09-26 01:53:12 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are forgetting that no two dogs are the same either !
For that matter, nothing at all is the same as another. Our inherent inability to deal with the endless distinctions forces us to look for or cook up groups based on a few similarities.
2006-09-26 01:27:58 · answer #9 · answered by small 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This isn't really a serious question, is it? I remember it from
my Methodology of Philosopy in college. (It was phrased a little
differently.) My methodology is like this: If it walks like a duck,
quacks like a duck & looks like a duck, it isn't necessarily a duck.
It may be a dwarf or small child in costume.
Go figure!
2006-09-26 01:35:02 · answer #10 · answered by Valac Gypsy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋