BASIC LOGIC REVIEWER

CHAPTER V: REASONING, ARGUMENT & SYLLOGISM

REASONING - supreme or highest operation of man

- reach culmination of all his operations and powers
- ability to think and reason that sets him apart from others
- act by which intellect, from previous truths, derives and pronounces
truth of another proposition based on these truths
- intellect by inferring, able to know new truth based on previous truths
- as a mental act, it is inference

INFERENCE - process of deriving or deducing another proposition from given

propositions

KINDS OF INFERENCE:

1. IMMEDIATE INFERENCE - from one proposition without use of a third term

- derive another proposition from truths of one

proposition

Ex. B are A  A are B = All penguins are birds  Some birds are
penguins

2. MEDIATE INFERENCE - based on at least two propositions with a third term

Ex. A are B  All professionals are experts in their field. (premise)
A are C  Some professionals are doctors. (premise)
C are B  Some doctors are experts in their field. (conclusion)
 Product is the argument, a sequence of propositions
 Premise is starting point of argument, basis of inference, evidence /
proof
 Conclusion is end point, result, claim

* Discourse is an argument if it wants to argue or prove something as true / false

* Consider context of text/speech = is it argumentative, claiming, presenting proof?

PREMISE INDICATORS
 Since, because, for, due to (reason/cause)
 In as much as, can be shown by (illustration)
 Follows from, for the reason that, is implied by (presupposing from
previous)
 Is deduced from, is shown by, is proved by (analysis of proof)
 Assuming that, can be concluded from (presupposing/validating)

CONCLUSION INDICATORS
 Therefore, ergo, thus, then, so, hence (conclusion/ final end)
 Shows that, entails that, as a result, it follows that (illustrated
claim/end)
  Implies that, proves that, consequently, allows us to infer that,
demonstrates that (as a consequence/result/illustration)

Considerations of Discourse’s Purpose:

1. Is topic problematic/ unresolved?

2. Is intention to stake a claim?
3. Is purpose to explain/report/describe/argue?
4. Is relation/connection to topic to others relevant?

KINDS OF REASONING

 DEDUCTION – process of reasoning from general (universal) to specific

(particular)
 INDUCTION – process of reasoning from specific (particular) to general
(universal)

DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT - from deduco, “I lead down”

- intended to guarantee truth of conclusion
- conclusion implied in premises:
P is true  C is true
- can be confirmed by appeal to premises
* invalid inference may have true conclusion
* there is guarantee from arguer / indicate arguer’s belief

Conditions for validity:

- Premises are true
- Conclusion must follow from premises
- Process follows deductive rules of reasoning

INDUCTIVE ARGUMENT - from induco, “I lead into”

- intended to make likely/probably (but not guarantee) truth
of conclusion:
P is true ≠ C is true

* premises appeal to evidence through sense experience

- premise provides partial support and conclusion is partly
contained in premises
- based on degree of probability/risk/uncertainty

SYLLOGISTIC ARGUMENT
- one form of deductive argument
- standard expression of argument in Aristotelian logic
- basic form of argument arranged orderly to facilitate logical
analysis
- set of three propositions; first two are premises and last is
conclusion
- all propositions must be logically connected

MATTER AND FORM OF SYLLOGISM

  MATTER - various ideas (terms) and judgments (propositions) of argument and
syllogism
- what argument (syllogism) is all about
- substance, context and meaning; what argument says

 FORM - logical connection of ideas and judgments by virtue of which, conclusion

follows necessarily from premises
- structure, pattern, flow of syllogism
- gives formal consistency or consequence

KINDS OF SYLLOGISM

1. CATEGORICAL - composed of categorical (common) propositions:

- first two are premises, last one is conclusion
- contains: major, minor and middle terms
Ex. All students are hardworking [premise]
(middle-X) (major-M)
Pedro is a student [premise]
(minor-m) (middle-X)
Pedro is hardworking [conclusion]
(minor-m) (major-M)

2. HYPOTHETICAL - composed of hypothetical propositions

- terms are not identified / differentiated
Ex. If I study hard, I can increase my chance of being a dean’s lister this year.

THE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM

- composed of 3 categorical propositions and 3 terms
- first two propositions are premises and last one is the conclusion
- first is major premise; second is minor premise
- conclusion expresses agreement/disagreement between two
main terms

THREE TERMS IN CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM

 MAJOR TERM – predicate of conclusion found in major premise
 MINOR TERM – subject of conclusion in minor premise
 MIDDLE TERM – common term which appears in both premises

SCHEMA or PATTERN OF CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM

 SCHEMA - basis of analysis of formal validity of syllogism (structure)

A=u+p
E=u-u
I=p+p
O=p-u

LEGENDS:

 “P” – major term

 “S” – minor term
 “M/X” – middle term
 “u” - universal
 “p” - particular
 “ + ” - affirmative
  “ - ” – negative

LAWS GOVERNING CATEGORICAL ARGUMENT

1. Dictum de Omni – affirmed universally should be affirmed in parts

 if “All X are Y” and ”Some Z are X” then “Some Z are Y”
2. Dictum de Nullo – denied universally should be denied in parts
 if “All X are not Y” and ”Some Z are X” then ”Some Z are not Y”
3. If two agree with same third, they agree with each other
 if “A agrees with C” and ” B agrees with A” then ”B agrees with C”
4. If one agrees with third and other disagrees with same, they disagree
with each other
 if “A agrees with B” and ”C does not agree with B” then ”B does not agree
with C”
5. If two terms disagree with same third, nothing follows
 if “A is not B” and ”C is not A”, nothing follows

EIGHT LAWS OF CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM

1. Only 3 terms in a syllogism

Else: Fallacy of 4-term construction = no middle term
Else: Fallacy of Equivocation = middle term has different meanings
2. No term should have greater extension in conclusion than in premises
Else: Fallacy of illicit major = P in first line, U in conclusion X
Else: Fallacy of illicit minor = P in second line, U in conclusion X
3. Middle term must not appear in conclusion
Else: Misplaced middle term = M in conclusion
4. Middle term should be taken as universal at least once or at most twice
Else: Undistributed middle term
5. Both premises are affirmative, conclusion should also be affirmative
(Dictum de Omni)
Else: Negative conclusion
6. No conclusion from two negative premises (Rule # 5)
Else: Two negative premises
7. No valid conclusion from particular premises
Else: Double particular premises
8. Conclusion follows weaker side
Else: Stronger conclusion than premises

FIGURES OF SYLLOGISM
- pattern or arrangement of syllogism based on middle term position
- contains four derivatives

FIGURE I FIGURE II
M–P P–M
S–M S–M
S–P S–P

FIGURE III FIGURE IV

 M–P P–M
M–S M–S
S–P S–P

MOODS OF SYLLOGISM
- pattern of syllogism based on types of propositions used
- 64 combinations possible but 19 combinations only are valid

FIGURE I (Ideal Figures)

bArbArA
cElArEnt
dArII
fErIO

FIGURE II
cEsArE
cAmEstrEs
fEstInO
bArOcO

FIGURE III
dArAptI
dIsAmIs
dAtIsI
fElAptOn
fErIsOn
bOcArdO

FIGURE IV
brAmAntIp
cAmEnEs
dImArIs
fEsApO
frEsIsOn
 FOURTH FIGURE
Bramantip Fesapo

Every B is A No B is A
Every C is B Every C is B
Some C is A Some C is not A
Camenes Fresison

Every B is A No B is A
No C is B Some C is B
No C is A Some C is not A
Dimaris

Some B is A
Every C is B
Some C is A

REDUCTION TO FIRST FIGURE

- process of expressing in Figure I those in other figures

- Figure I  perfect figure; bArbArA  perfect mood

s – simple conversion

= interchange the subject and predicate of the premise

Ex. Some people are scientists.  Some scientists are people.

p – accidental conversion

= change quantifier first before interchanging subject and predicate of a premise

Ex. All dictators are evil people.  Some evil people are dictators.

m – mutation

= interchange the two premises

Ex. Some books are printed material. No printed materials are digitally
recorded.
No printed materials are digital. Some books are printed material.
c – contradiction

= contradict O propositions (change to A propositions) and interchange the propositions

Ex. Some C is not B  All C is B. All C is A.

Some C is not A  All C is A. All C is B.