Venn Test: Invalid Case
This video presents the same text shown beside it, spoken and on screen. It adds nothing the text does not say.
The same Venn test delivers an invalidity verdict by refusal: both premises are diagrammed, and the region the conclusion needs empty is left partly unshaded.
Take AAA-2. All P are M. All S are M. So all S are P. Three circles again. Diagram the major premise: all P are M shades the part of P lying outside M. Diagram the minor: all S are M shades the part of S lying outside M. Both premises are now drawn. Look at what the conclusion needs. All S are P requires the whole part of S outside P to be empty. Inspect it. One piece of that region — inside S, inside M, outside P — carries no shading at all. Nothing in either premise ruled it out. The diagram declines to show the conclusion, and that refusal is the verdict. The flaw has a name: both premises relate their terms to M without ever placing S and P in contact, so the middle term is undistributed.
An unshaded region is not a claim that something occupies it. It records that the premises left the question open, which is exactly why the conclusion fails — it asserts more than what was drawn. Reading blankness as evidence of existence turns a correct invalidity verdict into a false one.
Builds on
Unlocks
- Nothing yet depends on this.