I need to make a syllogism for an advertisement. I choose to use Dayquil's moms don't take sick days
Is this a good syllogism ?
Mom who are sick don't take sick days
Moms take Dayquil
Therefore moms who take Dayquil are sick and don't have sick days
If not, please tell me what i can write or do to change it.
That's good but kind of mixed up.
What could I write then? How do I not mixed it up
Therefore, moms who take Dayquil when they are sick don't take sick days.
Your syllogism is not quite accurate. Let's break it down and explain the correct way to construct a syllogism using Dayquil's advertisement slogan "Moms don't take sick days."
1. The major premise: Moms who are sick don't take sick days. This premise states that when moms are feeling unwell, they still don't take time off from their responsibilities.
2. The minor premise: Moms take Dayquil. This premise highlights that moms choose Dayquil as a solution for relieving their symptoms.
3. Conclusion: Therefore, moms who take Dayquil still fulfill their responsibilities and do not take sick days. This conclusion combines the information from the major and minor premises to infer that even when moms are sick, they turn to Dayquil to keep going without taking time off.
In summary, your revised syllogism would be:
- Major premise: Moms who are sick don't take sick days.
- Minor premise: Moms take Dayquil.
- Conclusion: Therefore, moms who take Dayquil still fulfill their responsibilities and do not take sick days.
This syllogism effectively captures the message of Dayquil's advertisement, showcasing how their product helps moms power through illness without taking time off.