I scored a hundred percent on this quiz. But remember, it’s a test of deductive, not inductive logic (e.g., ignore whether or not the premises are valid — focus on the validity of the syllogism itself).
[Via Paul Hsieh, who got the same score as I did. Or so he says…]
Well, congratulate me! 100%. Validity is not the same as truth.
Of course, the link goes directly to the answers, so it shouldn’t be hard to get 100% in that case. 😉
Oops…
Sorry ’bout that. Fixed now.
14/15 Never saw the could/should switch in the “eat a horse” question. Read it as could both times. Logic OK, reading skill not so good.
I got 100% but it was a close call as I changed one answer before submitting (the one about the male and female answers to the logic test).
The diagram in the answer to question 1 is all wrong: it should be three circles within each other with Donald in the smallest contained by the middle sized circle representing all ducks and that one in the biggest circle representing quacking.
There are similar (but not identical) mistakes in the drawing of the diagram in relation to answer number 2 as well: it should be a big circle (clear thinking) with two smaller but non-overlapping circles inside it.
The explanation of question number 15 is basically nonsense as it doesn’t mention the real reason: the past is no guarantee for the future. Assuming otherwise is a fallacy in logic and this is actually not controversial at all among most philosophers, among scientists however it often is because they get stuck on thinking about their experiences/rationality rather than the logic.
Oops sorry they were Venn diagrams and not Euler diagrams, my bad.