There is a meme that I’m sure many of you have heard about:
Let us create a syllogism: Emily is a strong, independent black woman who don’t need no man.
Premise 1: A strong, independent black woman don’t need no man.
Premise 2: Emily is a strong, independent black woman.
Conclusion: Therefore, Emily don`t need no man.
Let us examine the syllogism: “a strong, independent black woman” is our middle term, A, and the first premise. “don’t need no man” is our predicate term, B, and the second premise. Finally, our conclusion and subject term, C, is “Emily”.
In this case, the argument is neither true nor valid, therefore not sound, since the conclusion is not logical based on the premises, which are also not true. However, neither premise is true: Emily is not black, therefore not a strong, independent black woman. Also, there is no evidence other than the aforementioned meme than strong, independent black women don’t need no man. Furthermore, if one counts the double negative, it means: “Emily is a strong, independent black woman who needs a man.” The Miriam-Webster Dictionary defines “independent” as not requiring or relying on others. One would assume, based on this definition, that an “independent woman” would not need a man, really anything in general.