Categorical Syllogism

A categorical syllogism is a type of argument with two premisesthat is, a syllogismand

one conclusion. Each of these three propositions is one of four forms of categorical proposition:
A, E, I, and O.
In a categorical syllogism there are three terms, two in each premise, and two occurrences of
each term in the entire argument, for a total of six occurrences. The S and P which occur in its
conclusionthe Subject and Predicate termsare also called the minor and major terms,
respectively. The major term occurs once in one of the premises, which is therefore called the
major premise. The minor term also occurs once in the other premise, which is for this reason
called the minor premise. The third term occurs once in each premise, but not in the
conclusion, and is called the middle term.
The notion of distribution plays a role in some of the syllogistic fallacies: the terms in a
categorical proposition are said to be distributed or undistributed in that proposition,
depending upon what type of proposition it is, and whether the term is the subject or predicate
term. Specifically, the subject term is distributed in the A and E type propositions, and the
predicate term is distributed in the E and O type propositions. The other terms are
undistributed.
Finally, the A and I type propositions are called "affirmative" propositions, while
the E and O type are "negative", for reasons which should be obvious. Now, you should be
equipped to understand the following types of syllogistic fallacy.
Standard Form Categorical Syllogism
The word standard form categorical syllogism refers to the structure and arrangement of
propositions in the syllogism. A standard form categorical syllogism is arranged in this order:
Major Premise

: All Muslims are devoted to Allah

Minor Premise

: Muhammad is a Muslim

Conclusion

: Therefore, Muhammad is devoted to Allah

Conclusion-indicators are words which imply that what about to follow is a conclusion.
Therefore, so, ergo (Latin), thus, hence, accordingly, consequently, in consequence, it implies
that, shows that, it proves that, as a result, it means, it follows that, we may infer that, for this
reason, we may conclude, and others are examples of conclusion-indicator.

Premise-indicators on the other hand tell us that what about to follow is a premise. Since,
because, as, inasmuch, but, however, follows from, as shown by, as indicated by, and others
are examples of premise-indicators.

Symbols in Syllogism

Terms
ncjopson080513

Symbols

Quality

Symbols

Quantity

Symbols

Major Term

Affirmative

Universal

Minor Term

Negative

Particular

Middle Term

To illustrate an argument using symbol, we have the following:

All poems are uplifting

A : Mu + Pp

Some songs are poems

I : Sp + Mp

Therefore, some songs are uplifting

I : Mp + Sp

No abortionists are pro-life

E : Pu + Mu

Some pro-life persons are Catholics

I : Mp + Sp

Therefore, some Catholics are not abortionists

I : Sp + Pp

Eight Syllogistic Rules

1. There must be only three terms in a syllogism
Example: All pitchers are containers
Jose in baseball is a pitcher
Jose in baseball is a water container

All fathers have children

Pope Francis is a father
Pope Francis has children

Fallacy committed: Fallacy of Equivocation or Fallacy of Four Terms

2. Neither the major term nor the minor term may be distributed in the conclusion, if it is
undistributed in the premises.
Example: All Visayans are Malayans
No Tagalogs are Visayans
No Tagalogs are Visayans
ncjopson080513

No cats are dogs

All cats are animals
Therefore, no animals are dogs

Fallacy committed: Fallacy of Illicit Major or Fallacy of Illicit Minor

3. The middle term must not appear in the conclusion.

Example: All Pahiyas Festivals are colorful celebrations
All colorful celebrations are human expressions
So, all human expressions are colorful celebrations

No Filipinos are Indonesians

Some Asians are Indonesians
Therefore, some Indonesians are not Filipinos

Fallacy committed: Fallacy of Misplaced Middle Term

4. The middle term must be distributed at least once in the premises.

Example: All Bicolanos are Filipinos
All Boholanos are Filipinos
Therefore, All Boholanos are Bicolanos

All mammals are animals

Some animals are not bats
Therefore, some bats are not mammals

Fallacy committed: Fallacy of Undistributed Middle Term

5. Only an affirmative conclusion can be drawn from two affirmative premises.
Example: Every cat is sentient
ncjopson080513

Every cat is an animal

No cat is sentient

All Lycean students are humans

Pedro is a Lycean student
Therefore, Pedro is not human.

Fallacy committed: Fallacy of Negative Conclusion Drawn from Affirmative Premises

6. No conclusion can be drawn from two negative premises.
Example: No cheating is good
But corruption is good
No conclusion

Some women are not pregnant

But some women are not doctors
No conclusion

Fallacy committed: Fallacy of Negative Premises

7. The conclusion follows the weaker premise.
Examples: All cellular phones are used in communication
But some cameras are cellular phones
Therefore, all cameras are used in communication

No jeans are shirt

But clothes are jeans
So, some clothes are jeans

ncjopson080513

Fallacy committed: Fallacy of Universal Conclusion Drawn From a Particular Premise,

Fallacy of Affirmative Conclusion Drawn From a Negative Premise
8. No conclusion can be drawn from two particular premises.
Example: Some animals are dugong
Some animals are butanding
No conclusion
Some philosophers are not mathematicians
But some mathematicians are not musicians
No conclusion
Fallacy committed: Fallacy of Particular Premises

INFORMAL FALLACIES
Formal fallacies are errors of reasoning by virtue of their forms. Informal fallacies are errors
encountered in ordinary discourse and, sometimes described as fallacies of language. Fallacies
may be created unintentionally, or they may be created intentionally in order to deceive other
people. Sometimes the term fallacy is used even more broadly to indicate any false belief or
cause of a false belief.
Fallacies of Ambiguity (Unclear Meaning)
1. Fallacy of equivocation. Equivocation is the illegitimate switching of the meaning of a term
during the reasoning. This is also called fallacy of four terms.
Example:

God is love, but love is blind, therefore, God is blind.

2. Fallacy of accent. The accent fallacy is a fallacy of ambiguity due to the different ways a
word is emphasized or accented.
Example:

Woman, without her, man is lost.

3. Fallacy of amphiboly. This is an error due to taking a grammatically ambiguous phrase in

two different ways during the reasoning.
Example:

Lost : The dog of a lady with a long tail.

4. Fallacy of composition. The composition fallacy occurs when someone mistakenly assumes
that a characteristic of some or all the individuals in a group is also a characteristic of the
group itself, the group composed of those members.
Example:

Jose is an intelligent boy

But Jose studies at Lyceum
Therefore, all who study at Lyceum are intelligent

5. Fallacy of division. Merely because a group as a whole has a characteristic, it often doesnt
follow that individuals in the group have that characteristic. If you suppose that it does
follow, when it doesnt, you commit the fallacy of division.
Example:

The jigsaw puzzle when assembled is circular in shape. Therefore, each piece
is circular in shape.

Fallacies of relevance (Irrelevant Premise or conclusion)

1. Argumentum ad baculum (appeal to force or the threat of force). If you suppose that
terrorizing your opponent is giving him a reason for believing that you are correct, then
you are using a scare tactic and reasoning fallaciously.
Example:
ncjopson080513

You have to be good to us, or else you will fail the students evaluation.

2. Argumentum ad misericordiam (appeal to pity or emotions). You commit the fallacy of

appeal to emotions when someones appeal to you to accept their claim is accepted
merely because the appeal arouses your feelings of anger, fear, grief, love, outrage, pity,
pride, sexuality, sympathy, relief, and so forth.
Example:

You have to give me a passing mark, or else youll ruin my future.

3. Argumentum ad populum (appeal to the people). If you suggest too strongly that
someones claim or argument is correct simply because its what most everyone believes,
then youve committed the fallacy of appeal to the people. Similarly, if you suggest too
strongly that someones claim or argument is mistaken simply because its not what most
everyone believes, then youve also committed the fallacy. Agreement with popular
opinion is not necessarily a reliable sign of truth, and deviation from popular opinion is not
necessarily a reliable sign of error, but if you assume it is and do so with enthusiasm, then
youre guilty of committing this fallacy.
Example:
year.

You should tune in to ABS-CBN, because its the most watched station this

4. Argumentum ad hominem (argument against the person). You commit this fallacy if you
make an irrelevant attack on the arguer and suggest that this attack undermines the
argument itself.
Example:
He should not be entrusted with the position, because hes from a family of
drug addicts.
Fallacies of Presumption (Premise Assumed)
1. Fallacy of Accident. This fallacy presumes that a general rule can apply to all situations
without due regard to their accidental features.
Example:

The law states that you should not travel than 50 kph, thus, even if your
father is dying, you should not travel faster than 50 kph.

2. Fallacy of petitio percipii. This means begging the question. A form of circular reasoning
in which a conclusion is derived from premises that presuppose the conclusion.
Example:

Expert says that Joseph Estrada is the best president of the country,
Those experts are those who maintain that Joseph Estrada is the best
president.

3. Fallacy of complex question. You commit this fallacy when you frame a question so that
some controversial presupposition is made by the wording of the question.
Example:

Have you stopped smoking marijuana?

Fallacies of Indefinite Induction (Insufficient Samples)

1. Fallacy of false cause. Improperly concluding that one thing is a cause of another.
Example:

He met an accident because he saw a black cat.

2. Fallacy of converse accident. If we reason by paying too much attention to exceptions to

the rule, and generalize on the exceptions, we commit this fallacy. This fallacy is the
converse of the accident fallacy. It is a kind of Hasty Generalization, by generalizing too
quickly from a peculiar case.
Example:

Some foreigners are pedophiles, therefore, all foreigners are pedophiles

3. Argumentum ad verecundiam (appeal to inappropriate authority). This fallacy is

committed when one cites an authority in support of ones argument but this authority is
misplaced.
Example:
existence.
ncjopson080513

Aswangs exist because our grandparents have always believed in their

4. Argumentum ad ignoratiam (appeal to ignorance). This appears when one appeals to

ignorance to win a case. The fallacy of appeal to ignorance comes in two forms: (1) Not
knowing that a certain statement is true is taken to be a proof that it is false. (2) Not
knowing that a statement is false is taken to be a proof that it is true. The fallacy occurs in
cases where absence of evidence is not good enough evidence of absence. The fallacy
uses an unjustified attempt to shift the burden of proof.
Example:

Nobody has ever proved that God exists, therefore, God does not exist,

Dowden, Bradley. 2010. Fallacies. Available at http://www.iep.utm.edu/fallacy. Accessed last July 4, 2010
Gripaldo, Rolando M. 2008. Logic and Logical Theory. Included in The Philosophical Landscape 5th Edition. Quezon City : C&E
Publishing.
Hurley, Patrick J. 2000. A Concise Introduction to Logic. Belmont, CA : Wadsw
orth / Thompson Learning.
Timbreza, Florentino T. 1992. Logic Made Simple. Quezon City : Phoenix Publishing House Inc.
Umali, Pepe SM. 2007. Logic: Art of Living with Reason. Intramuros Manila : Mindshapers Co. Inc.

ncjopson080513