Supply the missing premise or conclusion of the ff. enthymeme in such a way that the resulting syllogism is valid. Write the resulting syllogism in standard form and test it for validity using a Venn diagram. What things would you take into account in evaluating it?

Question:

Legislation that can't be enforced leads to disrespect for the law, so legislation making marijuana possession a criminal offense leads to disrespect for the law.

What i came up with is..

Legislation that cannot be enforced are disrespect for the law.
All marijuana possession are disrespect for the law.
Therefore, disrespect for the law are legislation that cannot be enforced.

And what i would take into account is Legislation that cannot be enforced, marijuana possession.

Thanks

To supply the missing premise and conclusion of the enthymeme, we can use the following steps:

1. Identify the major and minor premises in the given statement:

Major premise: Legislation that can't be enforced leads to disrespect for the law.
Minor premise: Legislation making marijuana possession a criminal offense.

2. Identify the missing premise required to complete the syllogism:

Missing premise: All legislation making marijuana possession a criminal offense cannot be enforced.

3. Combine the premises and conclusion into a valid syllogism in standard form:

Major premise: All legislation making marijuana possession a criminal offense cannot be enforced.
Minor premise: Legislation making marijuana possession a criminal offense.
Conclusion: Therefore, legislation making marijuana possession a criminal offense leads to disrespect for the law.

4. Test the validity of the syllogism using a Venn diagram:

Since the conclusion states that legislation making marijuana possession a criminal offense leads to disrespect for the law, we can represent this visually in a Venn diagram. The area representing legislation making marijuana possession a criminal offense should be entirely within the area representing disrespect for the law.

Evaluation:

In evaluating the validity of the syllogism, you need to consider the logical connection between the premises and the conclusion. Does the conclusion logically follow from the premises? In this case, the missing premise assumes that all legislation making marijuana possession a criminal offense cannot be enforced. This assumption would need to be justified and supported by evidence or reasoning to validate the syllogism. Additionally, an evaluation of the premises themselves would be important to ensure that they are grounded in truth and not based on any fallacies or incorrect assumptions.

The missing premise that would make the enthymeme valid is:

All legislation that cannot be enforced leads to disrespect for the law.

With this premise, the resulting syllogism would be:

Premise 1: All legislation that cannot be enforced leads to disrespect for the law.
Premise 2: All marijuana possession is legislation that cannot be enforced.
Conclusion: Therefore, all marijuana possession leads to disrespect for the law.

To evaluate the validity of this syllogism using a Venn diagram, you would consider the overlapping areas between "legislation that cannot be enforced" and "disrespect for the law," as well as the relationship between "marijuana possession" and "legislation that cannot be enforced." If the Venn diagram shows that the conclusion is supported by the premises, then the syllogism is valid.