Logic Handout PDF

Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes
UNIT I
Part I
Introduction to Philosophy

Contents

I. Introduction
II. Meaning of Philosophy
a. Etymology

b. Real Definition
III. Branches of Philosophy

I. Introduction

• Man can only philosophize
o “Philosophy begins in man and ends in man” – Kong Zi
• Philosophy begins in wonder
o Wondered at obvious difficulties, the changes in stars, moon and sun, and the origin of
the universe.
o A man who is puzzled and wondering is IGNORANT.
o As an ignorant, there is a natural desire to “find answers for his questions” and thus,
philosophize.
o As a rational and intelligent individual, man has a natural capacity for knowing.
§ ALL MEN BY NATURE DESIRE TO KNOW – Aristotle
Why is there a need to philosophize?
• It is because life itself is permeated with difficult questions that need to be resolved and
answered.
• These questions are derived from the condition of the human life and the mysteries that
surround human existence, and thereby push man to question.
• Man wonders about:
o Human life as a great PARADOX.
§ A paradox to be born human
• Man is born without his knowledge , and die against his own volition
• We were never asked if we wanted to be born .
1

• We have no freedom to be born, but there is a freedom to die (to some
extent).
• We are BEING-‐THROWN.
o Human life is an incomprehensible CONTRADICTION
§ From the moment of birth, we start to die
§ Life is a journey towards DEATH
§ Likewise, man always dies before he is fully born.
§ Death is a passage to a higher plane of existence, to a higher life or a new life.
o Human life is a great TRAGEDY.
§ Man is born in order to suffer and experience pain .
§ Man is condemned to die.
• As soon as man is born, he is old enough to die.
• At birth, man begins to suffer, and he will suffer until he dies.
§ The greatest unbearable suffering is to witness the death of a loved one.
• Life is a disturbing question rather than an answer in itself.
• It is indeed a great wonder.

v In order to resolve and reconcile these seeming tensions and conflicts in human existence, one must
pause and reflect as one is also invited to think deeply into the very core of one’s life. It is only
through philosophy that one is able to encounter one’s being and penetrate the deepest questions
that surround human existence. Through philosophizing, these irreconcilable dualities in human life
are understood in its ultimate meaning, and interpreted in the most significant sense that appeals
our current situation. Philosophy illumines the obscure understanding of man towards human life,
world, humanity, and God. Philosophy creates meaning amid meaninglessness, provides purpose
amid purposelessness, and brings hope amid hopelessness. It is simply because Philosophy is in itself
“a quest for meaning.”

II. Meaning of Philosophy
Etymological Definition:
• Pythagoras is the first one who coined Φιλοσοφο (philosopho)

• Philosophy came from the Greek word, philosophia, which is a compound of two root words,
philos and sophia:
“Φιλοσοφια”
Φιλος (philos) o Which means “TO LOVE”
Φιλειυ (philein)

Σοφια (Sophia) o Which means “Wisdom”
o
• Literally, philosophy is then the “LOVE OF WISDOM.”
2

Real Definition
Philosophy is the science of all things and beings in their ultimate causes and principles
as known by the light of natural reason alone.
• Philosophy is a “science” because it is a body of knowledge derived from reasoned

demonstration of causes and reduced to a system. It is not based on mere opinions or
hypotheses.
• It is a science of “all things or beings” because it studies all things or realities which can be
reached by human mind. It studies among others, man, God, nature, the world, the nature of
knowledge etc.
• It is the science of all things or beings “in their ultimate causes and principles” because it studies
and tries to understand the underlying reasons and causes of things. It tries to explain the
fundamental essence or nature of reality.
• It is the science of all things of beings in their ultimate causes and principles “known by human
reason alone” because it bases its knowledge solely o man’s reasoning power and not on
authority or faith.

III. Branches of Philosophy

1. Metaphysics -‐ is the study of Being in general.
2. Cosmology -‐ is the study of the nature of the universe or the cosmos.
3. Epistemology -‐ is the study of the nature and possibility of human knowledge.
4. Rational Psychology -‐ is the study of the principle of man as a composite of body and
soul.
5. Logic -‐ is the science and art of correct inferential reasoning.
6. Ethics -‐ is the study of human actions and its implication to goodness and
evilness.
7. Aesthetics -‐ is the study of the principle of art and the appreciation of the
beautiful.
8. Theodicy -‐ is the study the nature and attributes of God within the measure
of human reason.
3

UNIT I
PART II
What is Logic?

Contents
I. Definition of Logic
a. Etymology

b. Real Definition
II. Three-‐fold Intellectual Acts

I. Definition of Logic
Etymological Definition
• Zeno the Stoic first coined the word “logic.” Logic came from the Greek term:
λογικε (“logike”) which means “thought”

• Etymologically, logic means a “treatise pertaining to thought”
• Aristotle considered Logic as the “organon” or the tool or instrument of the sciences.
o Logic is the instrument for gaining knowledge or the tool for correct thinking.
Real Definition
Logic is the science and art of correct inferential reasoning.

• Logic deals with the laws, methods and principles of correct thinking. Thereby, logic
distinguishes correct from incorrect reasoning.
• It is a science because it is a systematized body of knowledge about the principles and
laws of correct inferential reasoning. It follows certain rules and laws in arriving at valid
conclusions.
• Logic is also considered art, the art of reasoning. As an art it requires the mastery of the
laws and principles of correct inferential thinking.
o Through logic we acquire the techniques and skill of thinking correctly
whereby our mind is able to proceed with order, ease and is able to
avoid error.

4

Formal and Material Logic
Formal Logic discusses the conceptual patterns or structures needed for a valid and
correct argument or inference. It deals with the correct patterns of argumentation.
Material Logic deals with the nature of the terms and propositions that are used in the
different types of inference. It discusses the types ad meanings of terms or words and sentences
or propositions used in the arguments.
II. The Three-‐fold Intellectual Acts
Intellectual Acts Mental Product External Sign
Simple Apprehension Idea Term
Judgment Enunciation Proposition
Reasoning Argument Syllogism

The three acts or operatons of the intellect are Simple Apprehension, Judgment, and Reasoning.
These three specific mental or intellectual acts serve as the bases for the different inferential relations.
For every operation, there is a corresponding mental product which is the result of intellectual
operation. The mental product of simple apprehension is the idea, while enunciation is the mental
product of reasoning. These mental products are manifested or expressed by their external signs. The
external sign of idea is the term, while the proposition manifests for enunciation and syllogism manifests
for argumentation. Logic is centered or focused on these three external signs.
5

UNIT II
TERMS
Contents

I. Simple Apprehension, Idea, Terms
II. Comprehension and Extension of

Ideas
III. Classification of Terms

IV. Predicaments and Predicables
V. Definition

I. Simple Apprehension: First Intellectual Act

• The first act of the intellect by which it knows the essence or nature of the thing without
affirming or denying anything about it.
• It is through simple apprehension that the intellect forms a mental image of the thing, called
idea.
• Apprehension is the beginning of knowledge. It is when we have an understanding or an idea of
things that we can say we know.
Idea and Term: Product of Apprehension
• Idea is the mental product of the apprehension. It is the mental or intellectual image or
representation of the object, because it represents the object of thing in the intellect.
• An idea is formed through the process called abstraction.
Abstraction is defined as the process by which the intellect strips the
object of its non-‐essential qualities, retains the essential ones, and
forms them into one image, which is the idea.
Characteristics of Idea
1. Abstract 4. Spiritual
2. Universal 5. Constant
3. Immaterial

• Term is the external manifestation or sign of an idea. It is a written or spoken word.
• Idea exists in the mind, but when it is expressed or manifested verbally, it then becomes a term.
• The term is considered as a conventional sign, as a sign it stands for something, like a thing,
object, place, person, event, etc.
• It is a conventional sign for the connection between the thing of object it signifies and the term
is established by convention.
• The term or word is part of language and language is used to express our thought about reality.
Reality is immense and our thought about it is very limited. The language we use to express our
thought is more limited. Concepts or ideas are like constructs of the mind about reality, as such
6

they are limited, we cannot form adequate or sufficient ideas or concepts about the whole of
reality. The words we use to express these concepts and ideas are all the more limited; hence
there is an inadequacy on the part of language. As a result, sometimes we use one term or word
to express several concepts or ideas.

II. Comprehension and Extension: Logical Properties of Idea or Term
Comprehension is the sum total of the attributes or thought-‐elements which constitute the
idea. It is the meaning, the signification, the thought-‐content or connotation of the idea.
Extension is the sum-‐total of all the individuals, things or beings or groups to which the idea can
be applied. It expresses denotation or the application of the idea to different individuals or
things.
Example:
Comprehension Extension
UNVERSITY An institution of higher UST, UP, ADMU, DLSU, UE,
learning AdU, NU, UERM, etc.

• There is an inverse relation between the comprehension and extension of idea. As the
comprehension of the idea increases, the extension decreases and vice versa. This means
that, if the conceptual features of an idea increase, the application of this idea will
decrease.
Example:
UNIVERSITY
Comprehension Extension
An institution of learning AMA, STI, Samson Tech, All Universities
and Colleges, All public and private
primary and secondary schools, etc.
An institution of higher learning All universities and colleges…
A Catholic Institution of higher DLSU, ADMU, La Consolacion, San
learning Sebastian, AdU, San Beda College, UST..
A Pontifical and Catholic Institution
of higher learning (in the UST
Philippines).

• The term with greater comprehension will have lesser extension and the term with
greater comprehension will have lesser extension and the term with greater extension
will have lesser comprehension.

7

III. Classification of Terms

A. According to Significance or Meaning (Comprehension)

1. Univocal -‐ A univocal term is a term that is used in an identical sense. It expresses only one
meaning or sense when applied to several objects. A term maybe univocal if it falls under
the following conditions:
a. A term has no other possible meanings other than itself.
e.g.
Homo Sapiens, Homo Erectus, solar system, heliocentricism, Rector Magnificus,
Supreme Pontiff, etc.
b. The term used is defined.
e.g.
Mercury is a planet in the solar system.
A notebook is a material used for writing made up of paper.
c. The terms used are taken to signify one meaning in two instances.
e.g.
The reverend father blesses the mother and the father of the child.
Water is heavier than air and the air outside is fresh.

2. Equivocal – An equivocal term is a term that expresses two or more different or unrelated
meanings. Equivocal terms may be externally the same, (same spealling and/or
pronounciation) but different in sense. They may be equivocal in”
a. pronounciation as in, son-‐sun, sweet-‐suite, pain-‐pane;
b. spelling, as in, bow-‐bow, live-‐live, lead-‐lead; or
c. both in spelling and pronunciation, as in club-‐club, watch-‐watch, ball-‐ball.
e.g.
The sentence of the judge was not clear.
I love philosophy.
My notebook is new.

3. Analogous – an analogous term is a term that expresses a meaning that is partly different
and partly the same, or meanings that are related.

a. Analogy by proportion – when a term is applied to unlike objects because of some
resemblance between them.
e.g.
“foot”
-‐ “foot of the mountain -‐ “foot of the stairs”
“leg”
-‐ “leg of the chair” -‐ “leg of the table”
8

b. Analogy by attribution – when the term is used in an absolute sense in one thing
and then attributed in other things because of some intrinsic relation with the first.
e.g.
“healthy” “Being”
-‐ Healthy food -‐ Divine Being
-‐ Healthy exercise -‐ Human Being
-‐ Healthy medicine -‐ Animate Being
-‐ Healthy body -‐ Inanimate Being

B. According to Application or Extension

1. Singular – A singular term is one that applies to only one individual or object. It may be
proper noun or name, a term prefixed by a demonstrative pronoun, or a term with
restrictive qualification.
e.g.
• The Royal, Pontifical and Catholic University of the Philippines.
• The 15th President of the Philippine Republic.
• The Dean of the College.

2. Universal – A universal term is one that is applied distributively to all the individuals or
objects in a class or to the class itself. It always expresses a universal idea. It is usually
prefixed by terms like all, every, no, each, and other similar terms serving as universal
quantifiers.
e.g.
• All teachers are professionals.
• Every Catholic is a Christian.
• A square is a polygon.
• Man is a rational animal.

3. Particular – A particular term is one that applies to only a part of the extension of the
universal. It is usually prefixed by terms like some, few several, majority, many, a
number of, and other similar terms serving as particular quantifiers.
e.g.
• Some students are lazy.
• Several policemen are dishonest.
• Majority of the priests are devout and faithful to their vows.
• Engineers are contractors.

4. Collective – A collective term is one that applies to a collective idea. It represents a
group or class but does not apply distributively to the individuals in the class or group. It
may appear singular in form, but because it represents a class it is considered collective.
9

e.g.
• The College of Cardinals are ordained by the Pope.
• A flock of sheep is destroying the crops.
• The set of officers are doing their duties well.
• The family celebrates the holiday.

IV. Predicaments and Predicables

• Predicaments are classifications of universal natures and concepts.
• Predicables are classifications of universal predicates in general.

o Predicaments and Predicables are useful to put order in our universal
concepts by ways of classification and to assign the proper nature of things
when we try to understand and define them.

The universality of concepts is the basis of their predictability. Concepts and terms are
predicables inasmuch as they are universal. The singular concept or term is not predicable simply,
without qualification; since it can be said only of a singular individual. The predicables are the
classification of universal predicates according to definite logical features. Their knowledge is helpful for
determining the logical nature of the different universal concepts and predicates that we assign to
things, and for formulating exact and correct definitions of the natures of things.

A. The Supreme Predicaments
Aristotle called them Categories, which is the Greek term for Predicaments. According to
Aristotle, there are Two Supreme Predicaments: that of Substance, and that of Accident. Above
these two is the Transcendental Being, and we use the concept Being to manifest the one and
the other.
Substance is being that carries existential actuality by itself (or a being that exists by itself).
Accident is a modification of the substance, or “being”, and does not carry existential
actuality by itself, but in the substance of which it is a modification (a being that does not
exist by itself, but in the substance).

B. The Ten Predicaments
The First Predicament is that of Substance; the remaining nine are the sub-‐classification of
the Predicament Accident. In other words, Accident, the Second Supreme Predicament is further
subdivided into nine other Predicaments, comprising the different kinds of accidents.
10

Accidents are non-‐essential modifications of the substance. Some of these are in the
substance, e.g. quantity, quality; others are just circumstantial determinations, as to place, time,
etc.
1. Substance
• A nature that carries existential actuality and reality by itself, and not a inhering
in something else as subject. E.g., a tree, an animal.
• “A nature that exists by itself”

2. Quantity
• Modification of substance as regards the effect of having extended and
measurable parts.
• Material parts have the physical property of being incompenetrable. It is not so
with spiritual things, like the human soul that informs the whole body. As a
result material beings have extended and measurable parts, as regards
dimensions and weight. A man remains the same even if he increases or
decreases his size and weight, up to a certain measure.
3. Quality
• A formal modifier of the substance.
• E.g. health, figure, beauty, color.
Aristotle further subdivided Quality as follows:
a. Habit or Disposition:

• Habit is a quality modifying the substance well or ill, as to itself, or as to
its operation, in a permanent manner.
o E.g. physical fitness, wisdom, virtue.
• Disposition is a quality analogous to the former but not permanent in
character.
o E.g. a cold-‐ailment, an initiation in mathematics.
b. Capability or Incapability
• Capability is power and strength for action;
• Incapability is shortcoming of strength for action.
c. Passion and Passive modification
• Passion is a quality of a transient nature resulting from some alteration
in the substance.
o E.g. fatigue, rash or heat, anger.
• Passive modification is akin to the former, but it is of a lingering nature.
o E.g. redness or paleness of complexion
d. Form and Figure
• Both denote a quality that follows the dimensional termination of the
substance.
11

• Form is said of the shape of artificial things.

• Figure is said of the shape of natural things.
o E.g., the form of a house, the figure of a woman.
4. Relation
• Reference of one substance to another.
o E.g. fatherhood, sonship, kingship.
5. Action
• Motion of the substance, commonly inducing a result in another thing.
o E.g. running, sawing, baking.
6. Passion
• Modification of the substance as the result of the influence of another agent.
o E.g. a wound, a confusion,
• This accident should not be confused with the species of Quality that runs under
the same name (passion).
7. When
• Circumstantial determination of the substance as to time, that is, as to a pointm
or portion, of a certain duration.
o E.g., at noon; between two or three o’clock.
8. Where
• Circumstantial determination of the substance as to place, that is, as to a point
in space, or on a surface, or within a circumstantial body.
o E.g., in Baguio, on my face, in the stomach, in the air.
9. Posture
• Determination of the substance as to the disposition of its parts.
o E.g. upright, standing, lying.
10. Habit
• Determination of the substance as to external outfit.
o E.g. dressed, armed.

C. Predicability, Kinds
Predicability is the aptitude of a universal concept to be said of many subject. It is a logical
property of the universal concept. There are two kinds:
a. Univocal
o When the universal concept is applicable to many subject in exactly the
same sense. This is the usual case with the predicables.
b. Analogous
o When the universal concept is applicable to many subjects in a sense
that is neither altogether the same nor altogether different, but
kindred.

12

D. The Predicables
The Predicables are the different kinds of Logical Universals, that is, universal concepts that may
be applied to many subjects. Taken as Classifications, they are universal concepts bearing
different kinds of logical relationship to the subject.
1. Genus
• A universal that expresses that part of the essence of the subject, which the
subject has in common with other individuals of a different species.
o Man is an animal. (Animal bears an essential feature, which man has in
common with the brute).

2. Specific Difference
• A universal that expresses that feature of the essence of the subject, which
distinguishers its essence from that of other species.
o E.g. Man is rational. (Rational expresses the essential feature of man,
which distinguishes him from the brutes.)

3. Species
• A universal that expresses the whole essence of the subject. It comprises both
the Genus and Specific Difference.
o E.g. Man is a rational animal.

4. Property
• A universal that expresses an attribute that is not part of the essence of the
subject, but necessarily flows from it.
o E.g. Man is being capable of progress, of making tools, of religious
sentiment, of artistic feeling, of wonderment.

5. Accident
• A universal that expresses a feature that is not part of the essence of the
subject, nor necessarily associated with it, but is associated with the subject
merely in a factual and contingent manner.
o Mary is beautiful and healthy. (Such attributes are not necessarily said
of the subject.)
13


V. Definition
In dealing with ideas and terms, there is a need to get familiar with its meaning for the sake
of clarity. Since terms and ideas do not possess absolute univocity, we must be able to harness our
capacity to give its meaning and to be able to define them. In this way, the vagueness of discourse
can be totally clarified and the right understanding of its meaning and context can be properly
achieved.
A. Meaning of Definition

a. Etymology
o The term “definition” came from the Latin term definere which means
“to lay down.”
o To define means “to lay down the markers or limits.”
o So when we define, we are putting or laying down the markers or limits
of the word or term. Outside of the markers, we can no longer apply the
term or the word.

b. Real Definition
o The conceptual manifestation either of the meaning of the term or of
the formal features of the object.

B. Kinds of Definition

a. Nominal1 – A nominal definition simply explains the meaning of a term or word. It
may provide the origin or root word or an equivalent term.

i. Synonym – an equivalent term or word.
§ e.g. joy means happiness; the President means the Chief.
ii. Etymology – the origin or root of the word.
§ Biology – “bio” (=life) + “logos” (=study)
§ Philosophy – “philos” (=love) + “Sophia” (=wisdom)

2
b. Real – A real definition explains what a thing or subject is. It explains the
nature of the object by giving its properties, characteristics, qualities, or
features. It could be a complete explanation of the object or thing or a simple
description of the object.

1
[Nominal = “nomen” (=name)]
2
[Real = “res” (=thing)]
14

i. Essential – an essential definition explains the very nature of the

object by giving its proximate genus and specific difference. The
proximate genus consists of the essential elements which makes the
object or individual similar to others. The specific difference is the
distinctive element which distinguishes it from others.
§ E.g. “mother” – a woman having a child.
-‐ genus -‐ specific difference
“triangle” – a polygon with three sides and three angles

ii. Descriptive – A descriptive definition explains what a thing or object
is by giving the positive but non-‐essential features of the object.
Sometimes, it is difficult to give the essential features of objects or
things, this explains the general acceptance of a simple description of
its characteristics.

1. Distinctive – a distinctive definition explains an object or thing
by giving the set of distinctive characteristics of an object or
external features, those features that are distinct to the
object.
o E.g. “Water” is a colorless, tasteless and
odorless substance.

2. Genetic – a genetic definition explains an object by giving its
origin or process of production.
o E.g. “Water” is a result of the combination of
two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen

3. Causal – a causal definition explains a thing or object by giving
its efficient cause, i.e. that which produces a thing, or the final
cause, i.e. the end or purpose of an object or its efficient
cause.
o E.g. Painting is a work of art by a painter.
Watch is an instrument used to measure
time.

15

Certain types of definitions are formulated by following certain formats:
Distinctive
X – is [genus] characterized by certain [qualities, properties, traits]
X -‐ is [genus] having the following or manifesting certain [traits, qualities,
symptoms, etc. ]
Genetic
X – is [genus] derived from, or originated from [source, origin, etc.]
X – is [genus] produced through [processes, procedure, formulation, etc.]
Causal
X – is [genus] produced or created or made by [makes, creator, writer,
producer]
X – is [genus] used for, or designed to, or intended for [use, purpose,
goal, etc.]

C. Other Classification
a. Popular – A popular definition is based on the common knowledge or idea of
people about a thing or object.
o E.g. Jose Rizal is our national hero.
Fiesta is a day of thanksgiving.
b. Scientific – Scientific definitions are usually technical definitions of scientific
terms. In the field of medicine and physical science, terms and objects or
instruments, body parts and diseases are given scientific definitions.
o E.g. Diabetes insipidus is a disorder of the posterior lobe of the
pituitary gland due to a deficiency of vasopressin, the antidiuretic
hormone (ADH).
c. Medical – definition of medical terms of procedures, using medical terms.
d. Legal – definition of legal concepts, procedures, using legal terms.
e. Lexical – definition given in the dictionary.

D. Rules of Definition

1. The definition must be clearer than the term being defined. It must not contain
terms which will only make it less intelligible.
o E.g. Net is the reticulated fabric decussater at regular intervals
with interstices and intersections.
Happiness is a way station between too little and too
16

much.
2. The definition must not contain the term being defined. The definition must use
other terms in defining. It is supposed to explain a particular term and is not
supposed to use the same term in the explanation.
o E.g. Teacher is the person who teaches.
A cookbook is a book for cooking.
3. The definition must be convertible with the term being defined. The purpose of
this rule is to make sure that the definition is equal in extension with the term
being defined. The definition must not be too narrow nor too wide, it must be
accurate and precise.
o E.g. A dog is a four-‐legged animal.
A wolf is a sheep-‐killing animal.
4. The definition must be an affirmative statement not negative whenever possible.
The definition is supposed to explain what a term or object is, and not, what it is
not. Only when the term is negative should the definition be negative.
o E.g. A child is an individual who is not yet an adult.
An amateur is not a professional.
o Correct definition: Darkness is the absence of light.

17

UNIT III
PROPOSITION

Contents
I. Judgment, Enunciation, Proposition
Tri
II. Categorical Proposition
III. Types of Categorical Proposition

IV. Schema of Categorical Proposition
V. Logical Opposition
VI. Logical Equivalence

I. Judgment, Enunciation, Proposition

• Judgment is the second act of the intellect by which it pronounces the agreement or
disagreement between terms or ideas. It is the act by which the intellect relates or
combines ideas or concepts.
• When the intellect pronounces the objective identity or non-‐identity between ideas or
the agreement or disagreement of concepts, enunciation takes place.
• Enunciation or a mental judgment is a pronouncement that is considered as the mental
product of the act of judgment.

2 Kinds of Judgment
1. Affirmative – is an expression of the agreement of identity between two
ideas or concepts.
2. Negative – is an expression of the non-‐identity or disagreement of ideas or
concepts.

Ø In propositions, the issue of truth and falsity comes into view. Ideas in
themselves are neither true nor false, It is when ideas are combined
that they attain logical value as true or false. The assertion of truth
happens in the very moment of pronouncing or expressing the
agreement

• A proposition is defined as a judgment expressed in sentence or a sentence pronouncing
the agreement or disagreement between terms.
• A proposition always has a truth-‐value: it may be truth or false. No proposition can be
both true or false.
18

• Truth is defined as the agreement of the mental judgment, as expressed in proposition,

with reality. A proposition, that is true, agrees with reality. False proposition is
otherwise.
• For a sentence to be a proposition, it must express an assertion or claim that is
meaningful and coherent. It must assert the truth or falsity about reality, especially
between ideas and concepts.
Types of Proposition
1. Categorical – expresses a direct judgment or a direct assertion of the

agreement or disagreement of two terms in an absolute manner. Since
categorical proposition expresses a direct claim, therefore its truth-‐value
is also immediately known.
E.g.
The flower is pleasant.
Maria is compassionate.

2. Hypothetical – does not express direct judgment, rather a relation
between two judgments, in which the truth of one depends on the other.
The hypothetical os always a compound statement since it is always
composed of two single or basic propositions.
E.g.
If there is typhoon, then the ground is wet.
Mother is either tired, or depressed.
Anne cannot study and party at the same time.
Types of Hypothetical Proposition.
a. Conditional – uses “if-‐then” statement;

b. Disjunctive – uses “either-‐or”;
c. Conjunctive – uses “and”.

II. The Categorical Proposition
Elements of a Categorical Proposition
All teachers are degree holders.

quantifier subject copula predicate
19

SUBJECT – the term designating the idea (thing) about which something is affirmed or
denied.
PREDICATE – the term designating the idea (thing or attribute) which is affirmed or
denied of the subject.
COPULA – the term expressing the mental act which pronounces the agreement or
disagreement between the subject and the predicate.
QUANTIFIER – expresses the application or extension of the proposition. \

Absolute Properties of Categorical Proposition
A. Quality of Proposition

The quality of the proposition affects the copula and makes the proposition either
affirmative or negative.

1. Affirmative – An affirmative proposition is a proposition whose predicate is always
affirmed of its subject according to the whole of its comprehension and part of its
extension. Based on this definition, the predicate of an affirmative proposition is
always particular except if the predicate of the proposition is a definition of the
subject. In such cases, the predicate applies only to one individual the subject and,
therefore, has a universal extension.
E.g. All doctors are literate persons.
Some books are expensive.

2. Negative – A negative proposition is one whose predicate is always denied of its
subject according to a part of its comprehension and the whole of its extension.
E.g. Mothers are not males.
Majority of the Filipinos are not rich.
B. Quantity of Proposition

The quantity of the proposition expresses the number of individuals to whom
the proposition applies.

1. Universal – A universal proposition is a proposition whose subject is a universal
term, a term that applies distributively to each individual in a class or to the class
itself. It usually starts with terms denoting universality, like, all, each, every, in case
of negative proposition, no nobody etc.
E.g. All priests are ordained.
Every Filipino is nationalistic.

20

2. Particular – A particular proposition is a proposition whose subject is a particular

term, a term used partly and indeterminately. Its subject is usually preceded by
terms, like, some, many, few, majority, a number of, minority, most, etc.
E.g. Most of the students are computer enthusiasts.
Some members of the congress are corrupt.

3. Singular – a singular proposition is a proposition whose subject is a singular term,
i.e. it applies to all individuals.
E.g. The dean is the head of the college.
Jesus Christ is our Savior.

4. Collective – A collective proposition is a proposition whose subject is a collective
term, a term that applies to a class or a group.
E.g. The Abu Sayaff Group is responsible for the terrorism.
The faculty is competent.

III. Types of Categorical Proposition

By combining the two properties of proposition, namely, quality and quantity, we obtain
four different types of propositions. These propositions are symbolized by four vowel letters.
The four propositions are as follows.
A Universal Affirmative All X are Y.

E Universal Negative No X is Y / All X are not Y.
I Particular Affirmative Some X are Y.
O Particular Negative Sone X are not Y / Not all X are Y.

IV. Schema of Categorical Proposition

A categorical proposition follows a standard pattern, and for the sake of analysis we
reduce a proposition to its standard form by substituting letters and other signs in place of the
terms and the quality and quantity of the proposition and terms. The subject term may be
symbolized by capital “S”, the predicate may be symbolized by capital “P”. To indicate the
proposition is affirmative, we put a “+” sign between the S and P. To indicate that the
proposition is negative we put a “-‐“ between S and P. To indicate that the proposition is
universal we put a small “u” after it and if the term is particular then we put a small “p” after it.
Hence, if the subject is universal, we write Su and if it is particular we write Sp. If the predicate
is a particular term then we write Pp and if it is a universal term, we write Pu.
21


A universal affirmative proposition (A) has a universal subject, affirmative quality and a
particular predicate, unless the predicate is a definition of the subject. Hence the pattern of an
A proposition, for example,
All teachers are literate is Su + Pp
If the predicate is a definition of the subject then, the predicate is used as a singular or
universal term, because the predicate being a definition has no other extension but the subject.
Hence the pattern of the proposition

A dog is a barking animal is Su + Pu

A universal negative proposition (E) has a universal subject, negative quality, and a
universal predicate. Hence the pattern of an E proposition, for example,
No teacher is illiterate is Su – Pu.
A particular affirmative proposition (I) has a particular subject, affirmative quality and a
particular predicate. Hence the pattern of an I proposition, for example,
Some students are discourteous is Sp + Pp.
A particular negative proposition (O) has a particular subject, negative quality and a
universal predicate. Hence the pattern of an O proposition, for example,
Some girls are not conservative is Sp – Pu.
Type Quality/Quantity Example Schema

A Universal Affirmative All mothers are compassionate Su + Pp
A mother is a woman who has a child. Su + Pu (in case of definition)
E Universal Negative All students are not out-‐of-‐school-‐ Su -‐ Pu
youths.
I Particular Affirmative Some foods are expensive Sp + Pp
O Particular Negative Some vendors are not tax-‐payers Sp – Pu

22

V. Logical Opposition (Square of Opposition)
Opposition is the relation existing between propositions having the same subject and
predicate but different quality or quantity or both. There are four types of opposition:
contradiction, contrariety, sub-‐contrariety, and sub-‐alternation. While quality and quantity are
absolute properties of proposition, logical opposition is considered as a relative property of
proposition because opposition happens only when we relate two propositions with the same
subject and predicate.

Types of Opposition

A. Contradiction
Contradiction is the opposition existing between two proposition having the same
subject, the same predicate, but different quality and quantity. It is the opposition between A
and O; E and I.

Rule:
Contradictory propositions cannot be both true or both false at the same time. Hence, if
one is true, the other is false; if one is false, the other is true.

E.g. A All men are mortals True
O Some men are not mortals False
E All students are not responsible. False
I Some students are responsible. True

B. Contrariety
Contrariety is the opposition existing between two propositions having the same subject
and predicate,the same universal extension, but different in quality. It is the opposition
between the two universals: A and E.

Rule:
Contrary propositions cannot be both true but may be both false. Hence, if one is true
the other is false. If the one is false the other may be true or false, meaning doubtful or
undetermined.
E.g. A All teachers are literate True
E All teachers are not literate False
A All birds are flying animals False
E All birds are not flying animals Doubtful

23

C. Sub-‐Contrariety
Sub-‐Contrariety is the opposition existing between two propositions having the same
subject and predicate, the same particular extension, but different quality. It is the opposition
between the two particulars: I and O.
Rule:
Sub-‐Contrary propositions cannot be both false, but may be both true. Hence, if one is
false the other one is true and if one is true the other may be true or false, i.e. doubtful.
E.g.
O Some students are not enrolled. False
I Some students are enrolled. True
I Some movies are educational True
O Some movies are not educational Doubtful

D. Sub-‐Alternation

Sub-‐alternation is the opposition existing between proposition having the same subject
and predicate, the same quality, but different extension or quality. It is the opposition between
A and I; E and O.
Rule:
1. From the truth of the universal (A/E), follows the truth of the particular (I/O). But from
the truth of the particular (I/O), the truth of the universal (A/E) does not follow. Hence if
the universal is true, the particular is also true, but id the particular is true, the universal
need not be true, it may be false, i.e. doubtful.
2. From the falsity of the particular (I/O), follows the falsity of the universal (A/E). But from
the falsity of the universal (A/E), the falsity of the particular (I/O) does not follow.
Hence, if the particular is false, the universal is also false, but if the universal is dales the
particular need not be false, it may be true, i.e. doubtful.
E.g.
A All philosophers are great thinkers True
I Some philosophers are great thinkers True
I Some students are diligent True
A All students are diligent Doubtful
E No criminal is a good person. False
O Some criminals are not good persons Doubtful
I Some computers are user-‐friendly False
A All computers are user-‐friendly False

24

SQUARE OF OPPOSITION

All X are Y All X are not Y
A CONTRARY
E

S S
U U
B
BA A
L
L CONTRADICTION
T T
E
E
R R
N N
A A

I
SUB-‐CONTRARY O
Some X are Y Some X are not Y

VI. Logical Equivalence

Equivalence is the similarity in terms of meaning between propositions. Equivalent
propositions may be different in expression but they express the same meaning. Like logical
opposition, logical equivalence is a relative property of propositions. The process of forming
equivalent proposition is called eduction. Eduction is the process of immediate inference in
which from a proposition taken as true, another proposition which is implied in it is derived.
There are two kinds of eduction: obversion and conversion.

A. Obversion
Obversion is the process of eduction in which the derived proposition, while retaining the
subject of the original proposition, has, for its predicate, the contradictory of the original
predicate. The original proposition is called obvertend and the derived proposition is called
obverse.

E.g.
All men are not immortal. (Obvertend)
All men are mortal. (Obverse)

25

Process of obversion:

1. Retain the subject
All men are not immortal.
Subject copula predicate

men

2. Contradict the predicate – this means replacing the predicate with a term with an
opposite or contrary meaning. By prefixing the term with “non-‐“ “un-‐“ “im-‐“ “dis-‐“
“il-‐“ and other similar terms we form their contradictory or opposite. Or we can give
a different term with an opposite meaning.

men mortal.

3. Negate the copula – this means changing the quality of the proposition. If the
original proposition is negative then it is changed to affirmative, if it is affirmative it
is changed to negative.

men are not mortal.

4. Retain the quantity.
All men are not immortal. The obverse proposition of A is E
Subject copula predicate The obverse proposition of E is A
The obverse proposition of I is O
All men are mortal. The obverse proposition of O is I

B. Conversion
Conversion is the process of eduction in which the derived proposition takes for its
subject the predicate of the original proposition and for its predicate the original subject. The
original proposition is called convertend and the derived proposition is called converse.

E.g.
All doctors are professionals. (convertend)
Some professionals are doctors. (converse)
26


Process of conversion:
1. Interchange the subject and the predicate – the subject of the original proposition
becomes the predicate of the converse proposition and the predicate becomes the
subject.
All doctors are professionals.
Quantifier Subject copula predicate

professionals doctors

2. Retain the quality – the quality of the proposition does not change.

professionals are doctors

3. No term may have a greater extension in the converse proposition than in the
convertend proposition. This is more of a rule rather part of the process. If the term
is particular in the original proposition it must remain particular, it cannot be
universal. However, if it is universal it may remain universal or it can be used as a
particular term.

Some professionals are doctors.

The converse proposition of A is either A or I.

The converse proposition of E is E.

The converse proposition of I is I.

The O proposition does not have a valid converse proposition.

27

UNIT IV
SYLLOGISM
CONTENTS
I. Reasoning, Argument & Syllogism

II. Categorical Syllogism
III. General laws of Categorical

Syllogism
IV. Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogism
V. Figures of Syllogism
VI. Moods of the Syllogism
VII. Hypothetical Syllogism

I. Reasoning, Argument, and Syllogism
Reasoning is the third act of the intellect. It is the act by which the intellect, from truths
previously known, derives and pronounces the truth of another proposition based on these
truths. Thus, the intellect, by way of inference, is able to know a new truth based on previously
known truths.
Reasoning, as a mental act is also known as an inference. Inference is the process of

deriving or deducing another proposition from given propositions. There are two kinds of
inference: immediate inference and mediate inference.
• Immediate Inference – this is an inference from one proposition without the use
of a third term. One may infer or derive another proposition from the truth of
one proposition. Logical opposition and logical equivalence are regarded as
immediate inference.
E.g. Some models are beautiful [ladies] à Some beautiful ladies are
models.
• Mediate Inference – this is an inference based on at least two propositions, it

employs a third term.
E.g. All commercials models are highly paid personalities.
Some commercial models are actresses.
Some actresses are highly paid personalities.
28

The product of mediate inference is the argument. An argument is a sequence of

propositions in which from statements taken as true another statement is inferred or derived.
In this series of propositions, the first two propositions are called the premises, which provide
the reason for the truth of another proposition called the conclusion.
Two Kinds of Reasoning
a. Deductive Argument
Deduction, (etym. Deduco – I lead down) is a process of reasoning which

proceeds from universal or general laws, principles or statements to particular instances
or propositions. An argument is deductive when the truth of its premises is intended to
guarantee the truth of its conclusion. The conclusion is already implied in the premises.
Hence if the premises are true the conclusion becomes necessarily true.
E.g. All traditional politicians are power brokers.

Some local executives are traditional politicians.
Some local executives are power brokers.

All men are mortals.
Socrates is a man.
Socrates is mortal.
b. Inductive Argument
Inductive argument (etym. Induco = I lead to) is a process of reasoning which

proceeds from specific or particular instances to the formulation of general or universal
principles or statements. An argument is inductive when the truth of its premises is
intended to make likely or probably (but not guarantee), the truth of its conclusion.
Hence, in an inductive argument, true premises do not necessarily guarantee or yield a
true conclusion, even if all premises are true, the conclusion could be false.
The premises of inductive arguments appeal to evidence through sense

experience. The premise only provides a partial support to the conclusion and unlike in
deductive arguments, the conclusion is partly contained in the premises. The strength or
weakness of an inductive argument is based on its degree of probability or risk of
uncertainty. The strength of the argument depends on a higher degree of probability.
E.g. Since Jane had a racquet in her hand, was coming from the tennis court.
Dressed in tennis outfit, she was perspiring heavily and was talking about
29

the game with somebody. Then it is likely that she had been playing
tennis.
Paolo is a Filipino. He is very sentimental and romantic.

Daniel is a Filipino. He is very sentiemntala nd romantic.
Patrick is a Filipino and he is very sentimental and romantic.
...
Jojo is Filipino
Therefore he is very sentimental and romantic.

Syllogism

One form of deductive argument is the syllogism. The syllogism is the standard
expression of argument in Aristotelian logic, it is a basic form of argument wherein it is
arranged orderly so as to show the structure or form of the argument and important
terms and propositions to facilitate logical analysis. The syllogism is a set of three
propositions, the first two being the premises and the last is the conclusion. The
conclusion must always follow and must be derived from the premises

A set of propositions is considered valid argument or a valid syllogism by virtue
of the logical connection among the propositions and terms. This logical connection
gives the syllogism its consistency and logical force. For the syllogism to be consistent
and valid it must follow the various rules and laws of deductive inference.

Matter and Form of Syllogism

A syllogism has two basic elements, the matter and form. The matter consists of
the various ideas/terms and judgments/propositions of the argument or syllogism. It is
what the syllogism or argument is all about, its substance, its content and its meaning,
in other words it is what the argument r says. The form consists of the logical
connection of the ideas/terms and judgments/propositions by virtue of which the
conclusion follows necessarily from the given premises. This logical connection of the
terms and proposition gives the syllogism its formal consistency or consequence.
Formal consistency does not mean truth. An argument can still be consistent or
valid for as long as it follows the various inferential rules, even if the propositions were
false. Of course, it is important that the propositions be true, so that the argument or
syllogism is both substantially true and formally correct.
30

Kinds of Syllogisms
a. Categorical Syllogism – is composed of categorical propositions. The first two
are the premises and the third is the conclusion. It contains three term:
major, minor and middle terms.
E.g. All inventors are scientists
Some inventors are well-‐known worldwide.
Hence, some people who are well-‐known worldwide are
scientists.

b. Hypothetical Syllogism – is composed of hypothetical propositions. Unlike
categorical, the terms in the hypothetical are not identifies as major, minor
or middle.
E.g. If the suspect is found guilty, then he will serve time in prison.
But he will not serve time in prison.
Ergo, he was found guilty.

II. Categorical Syllogism
The categorical syllogism is composed of three categorical propositions and three terms.
The first two propositions are called the premises, while the last is called the conclusion. The
first premise is called the major premise and the second premise is called the minor premise.
The conclusion expresses the agreement or disagreement between the two main terms in the
premises.
There are three terms: the major term which is the predicate of the conclusion and it is
contained in the major premise, the minor term, which is the subject of the conclusion and it is
contained in the minor premise, and the middle term, which is the common term and appears
in both premises.
E.g.
Premise Syllogism Term

Major Premise All bankers are businessmen Businessmen Major Term (P)
Minor Premise Mr. Cruz is a banker. Mr. Cruz Minor Term (S)
Conclusion Mr. Cruz is a businessman. Banker Middle Term (M)

31

Schema or Pattern of the Categorical Syllogism
P stands for major term u indicates universal quantity of the term
S stands for minor premise p indicates particular quantity of the term
M stands for middle term
+ indicates affirmative quality − indicates negative quality

Syllogism Schema
All bankers are businessmen Mu + Pp
Mr. Cruz is a banker. Su + Mp

Mr. Cruz is a businessman. Su + Pp

III. The General Laws Governing Categorical Argument

1. Dictum de Omni – this law states that whatever is affirmed universally, in a formal
manner, of a logical whole or class, should also be affirmed of its logical parts.
E.g. All X are Y
Some Z are X
Some Z are Y
2. Dictum de Nullo – this law states that whatever is denied universally, in a formal
manner, of a logical whole or class, should also be denied of its logical parts.
E.g. All X are not Y
Some Z are X
Some Z are not Y.
3. If each of two concepts agrees respectively with the same third concept, then they also
agree with each other. If A agrees with B, and B agrees with C, then A agrees with C.
4. If one concept agrees with a third term and the other disagrees with the same third
term, then they disagree with each other. If A agrees with B, but C does not agree with
A, then B and C do not agree with each other.
5. If each of the two terms disagrees respectively with the same term then nothing can
follow or can be concluded. If A is not B and C is not A, then nothing follows.

32

IV. The Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogism

Rule 1. There must only be three terms in the syllogism.

• Fallacy of the four-‐term construction is committed when there are four terms
instead of three terms in the syllogism.
E.g. All fruits are produced by plants.
Some things produced by plants are poisonous.
Some poisonous things are bananas.

• Fallacy of Equivocation happens when one term expresses two different
meanings in the syllogism. Equivocation is committed when the supposition of a
term shifts or when an equivocal term is used in the argument.
E.g. Love is blind Nothing is better than God.
God is love 1 centavo is better than nothing
God is blind. 1 centavo is better than God.

Rule 2. No term may have a greater extension in the conclusion than in the premises.

This applies to the two terms in the conclusion namely the major and the minor terms. If
a term is used as a particular in the premise its must remain particular in the conclusion,
otherwise the same term would have a wider extension in the conclusion and that may not be
the same term used in the premise. Under deductive rules we cannot proceed with sertainty
from particular to the universal, we cannot use a particular term in the premise, and then
conclude universally with the same term. However, if a term is used as a universal in the
premise, then it may be used either as a universal or particular in the conclusion. Under
deductive rules we can proceed with certainty from the universal to the particular, for the
particular is already included in the universal. If this rule is violated then an illicit process is
committed, either illicit process of the major term or illicit process of theminor term.

• Fallacy of Illicit Major Term – this is committed when the major term has a
wider or greater extension in the conclusion than in the major premise, or when
the major term is particular in the major premise and universal in the conclusion.

E.g. All boxers are fighters Mu + P p Part. Maj Term
Some soldiers are not boxers. Sp -‐ Mu
Some soldiers are not fighters Sp -‐ Pu Univ. Maj. Term

33

• Fallacy of Illicit Minor Term – this is committed when the minor term has a
wider or greater extension in the conclusion than in the minor premis, when the
minor term is particular in the minor premise and universal in the conclusion.

E.g. All boxers are fighters Mu + Pp
Some soldiers are boxers. S p + Mp Part. Min. Term
All soldiers are fighters. S u + Pp Univ. Min. Term

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

• Fallacy of Misplaced Middle Term – happens when the middle term appears in
the conclusion. The middle term cannot be in the conclusion. Its function is
confined in the premises, if it appears in the conclusion then it may just be a
repetition of the premises.

E.g. All philosophers are wise.
St. Thomas is a philosopher.
St. Thomas is a wise philosopher.

Rule 4. The middle term must be taken as a universal in the premises at least once.

• Fallacy of the Undistributed Middle Term – happens when the middle term is
taken twice as a particular in both premises. The middle term may be both
universal, or once universal in the premises, but when it is takes as a particular in
both premises, then this fallacy is committed.

E.g. All congressmen are legislators. Pu + M p Part. Mid. Term
All senators are legislators. Su +M p Part. Mid. Term
All senators are congressmen Su + Pp

Rule 5. If both premises are affirmative, the conclusion must be affirmative.
• Fallacy of Negative Conclusion – happens when the conclusion, derived from

two affirmative premises, is negative.
E.g. All bankers are businessmen

Some bankers are accountants.
Some accountants are not businessmen.
34


Rule 6. No conclusion can be drawn from two negative premises.

• Fallacy of Two Negative Premises – If two terms do not agree with the same
third term, the argument cannot proceed since there will be no common ground
between the two terms. Hence, for the syllogism to be valid, one premise must
be affirmative.

E.g. No pagan believe in Jesus Christ.
No Christian is a pagan
Therefore, ?

Rule 7. No valid conclusion can be derived from two particular premises.

• Fallacy of Double Particular Premises – A syllogism with two particular
premises will always violate one or more rules of inference, like undistributed
middle term or illicit process. Hence for a syllogism to be valid one premise must
be universal.

E.g. Some government officials are elected by the people.
Some individuals who are elected by the people are politicians.
Some politicians are government officials.

Rule 8. The conclusion always follows the weaker side.
This means that if one premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative, if
one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular. So if the major or minor
premise is negative, while the other premise is affirmative, the conclusion must be a
negative proposition; if the major or minor premise is particular and the other premise
is universal, then the conclusion must be a particular proposition. Otherwise, one
commits a fallacy of a stronger conclusion than in the premises.

35

V. Figures of the Syllogism

Figure 1

M P The middle term is the subject of the major premise and predicate
S M of the minor premise
S P

Example: All books are printed materials
Encyclopedias are books
Therefore, encyclopedias are printed materials
Rule: The major premise must be universal

The minor premise must be affirmative.
Figure 2
P M
S M The middle term is the predicate of both premises.
S P
Example: All doctors are professionals.
No child is a professional.
No child is a doctor
Rule: One of the premises must be negative.

The major premise must be universal.

Figure 3

M P
The middle term is the subject of both premises.
M S

S P
Example: No elected officials are appointed officials.
Some elected officials are mayors.
Some mayors are not appointed officials.

Rule: The minor premise must be affirmative
The conclusion must be particular.
Figure 4

P M
The middle term is the predicate of the major premise and subject
M S
of the minor premise.
S P
36


Examples: All mountaineers are adventurers
All adventurers are thrill seekers.
Some thrill-‐seekers are mountaineers.

Rule: If the major premise is affirmative, the minor premise
must be universal.
If the minor premise is affirmative, the conclusion must be
particular.

I II III IV
M P P M M P P M
S M S M M S M S
S P S P S P S P
VI. Moods of the Syllogism

The mood of the syllogism is the pattern of syllogism based in the type of the
propositions (A, E, I, O) that composed the syllogism. There are 64 possible combinations of
these propositions assuming that they will be combined by three. But there are only 19
valid moods in all the four figures: four in the first figure, four in the second figure, six in the
third figure and five in the fourth figure.
E.g. No machine is a thinking being (E)

Every computer is a machine (A) mood
No computer is a thinking being (E)

A valid syllogism has its corresponding mnemonic name.
E.g. All luxury cars are bought by wealthy businessmen (A)
Some luxury cars are the best cars. (I)
Some of the best cares are bought by wealth businessmen (I)

Figure: III Mood: A I I Mnemonic name: dAtIsI

37

FIGURE I FIGURE II

A A A bArbArA E A E cEsArE
E A E cElArEnt A E E cAmEstrEs
A I I dArII E I O fEstInO
E I O fErIO A O O bArOcO

FIGURE III FIGURE IV
A A I dArAptI A A I brAmAntIp
I A I dIsAmIs A E E cAmEnEs
A I I dAtIsI I A I dImArIs
E A O fElAptOn E A O fEsApO
E I O fErIsOn E I O frEsIsOn
O A O bOcArdO

VII. Hypothetical Syllogisms

The hypothetical syllogism is composed of a hypothetical proposition in the major
premise, and categorical propositions for both the minor premise and the conclusion. Unlike
categorical proposition which expresses direct judgment, hypothetical expresses an indirect
judgment. There are three types of hypothetical syllogisms: conditional, disjunctive, and
conjunctive.

Symbols to be used:

⊃ Ellipse, which means, “then,” “it implies that,” “it follows that”

v wedge/vee, which means “or”
• dot, which means “and”
∼ tilde, which means “not”
p antececedent
q consequent
∴ “therefore,” “ergo”

A. Conditional Syllogism

The conditional syllogism contains a conditional proposition as a major premise. The minor
premise and the conclusion are both categorical. The conditional proposition, which is the
major premise, contains two parts, the antecedent (p) and the consequent (q). The antecedent,
the part introduced by the “If,” is the condition; the consequent, the part introduced by the
38

“then,” is the result or the effect. The symbols to be used in conditional syllogisms are ⊃, p
(antecedent), q (consequent).

E.g.

If there is a strong typhoon, then the class is suspended. p ⊃ q
But there is a strong typhoon. p
Therefore, the class is suspended. ∴ q

If there is a rain, then the ground is wet. p ⊃ q
But ground is not wet. ∼ q
Therefore it did not rain. ∴ ∼ p

Rules:

1. Modus Ponens – This rule states that if the antecedent is posited (affirmed) in the minor
premise, then the consequent should also be posited in the conclusion.
E.g.
p ⊃ q ∼p ⊃ q p ⊃ ∼ q ∼p ⊃ ∼ q
p ∼ p p ∼ p
∴ q ∴ q ∴ ∼ q ∴ ∼ q

2. Modus Tollens – This rule states that if the consequent is sublated (negated) in the minor
premise, then the antecedent should also be sublated in the consequent.

E.g. p ⊃ q ∼p ⊃ q p ⊃ ∼q ∼p ⊃ ∼q
∼q ∼q q q
∴ ∼ p ∴ p ∴ ∼p ∴ p

In conditional syllogism, it is important to consider the following:

a. If the consequent is posited in the minor premise, then there should be no conclusion.
E.g.
If there is a strong typhoon, then the class is suspended. p ⊃ q
But the class is suspended. q
Therefore, there is a strong typhoon. ∴ p

The conclusion in this conditional syllogism is invalid. Because even if the class is suspended, it
does not mean there is a strong typhoon. There could be a holiday or emergency meeting that
39

may also suspend classes.

b. If the antecedent is sublated in the minor premise, there there should be no conclusion.
E.g.
If there is a rain, then the ground is wet. p ⊃ q
But there is no rain. ∼p
Therefore the ground is not wet. ∴ ∼q

The conclusion is invalid, because even if there is no rain, the ground can still become wet by
other means, i.e. sprinkling or watering.

B. Disjunctive Syllogism

The disjunctive syllogism is a type of syllogism wherein the major premise is in a
disjunctive proposition while the minor premise and the conclusion are both in categorical
propositions. Disjunctive syllogism may posit one member in the minor premise, and conclusion
rejects the other member, or, may reject in minor premise, but posit in the conclusion. The
symbol to be used in this syllogism is “v” which means “or.”

a. Strict Disjunctive – only one member is true and cannot be both true.
E.g.
The teacher is either present or absent P v A
But he is absent. A
Therefore, he is not present ∴ ∼P
Or
The teacher is either present or absent. P v A
But he is not present. ∼ P
Therefore, he is absent. ∴ A

b. Broad Disjunctive – only one member is true, but both may be true.
E.g.
Either Pedro likes to swim or play basketball. S v P
But Pedro does not like to swim; ∼ S
Therefore, he likes to play basketball. ∴ P

The case in the given syllogism is that it is possible that Pedro like to do both. Therefore, this is
a broad disjunctive syllogism. In order to determine the validity of a broad disjunctive, it has to
follow only one rule; sublate one or more members of the major premise in the minor premise,
40

then posit the remaining in the conclusion.

C. Conjunctive Syllogism

A conjunctive syllogism is a syllogism that has for its major premise a conjunctive
proposition and a categorical proposition for its minor premise and its conclusion. Conjunctive
syllogism uses the symbol “•,” which means “and.”

E.g.
You cannot serve both God and Satan simultaneously. ∼(G•S)
But you serve God. G
Therefore, you do not serve Satan. ∴ ∼ S

The conjunctive syllogism requires us to posit (only) one or more members of the major
premise in the minor premise, then sublate the remaining in the conclusion. If, instead of
positing, we sublate, then the conjunctive syllogism will be invalid.

E.g.
You cannot serve both God and Satan simultaneously. ∼(G × S)
But you do not serve Satan. ∼ S
Therefore, you serve God. ∴ G
41

UNIT V

SYMBOLIC LOGIC

Contents

I. Introduction
II. The Five Common Constants
III. Determining the Truth Value

IV. Tautologies, Contradictions, and

Contingent Statements
V. Method of Deduction and Rules of
Inference
VI. Proofs of Validity

I. Introduction

Bertrand Russell, one of the forerunners of Analytic Philosophy and a proponent of the
use of artificial symbolic language, once wrote, “because language is misleading, as well as
because it is diffused and inexact when applied to logic (for which it was never intended),
logical symbolism is absolutely necessary to ant exact or thorough treatment of our subject.”
Proponents of symbolic logic, like the author, Irving Copi, contend that arguments presented in
any natural language are often difficult to appraise because of the vague and equivocal nature
of the words used and their construction, the confusing idioms and metaphorical style. Thus to
avoid these difficulties, it is necessary to set up artificial symbolic language, free for, such
defects so that statements and arguments can be precisely formulated. The use of special
logical notation is not new and not peculiar to modern logic. Aristotle used variables or letters
to facilitate his work. However, there is a great difference between classical and modern
language, although much of the logical principles of modern logic have been drawn from the
classical. Modern logic, which we refer as symbolic logic, with its special technical language, has
become a powerful tool for analysis and deduction.

II. The Five Common Constant

There are five common constant: negation, conjunction, disjunction, material
implication and material equivalence. All their symbols are called truth-‐functional connectives
with the exception of the “not” that symbolizes negation, which is regarded as a truth
42

functional operator.

A. Negation

The negation of a statement is formed by using “not: in the original statement or by
prefixing the phrase “it is false that” or “it is not the case that.” The symbol for negation is the
tilde “∼”. The curl denies or contradicts the statement it precedes. For example, “S” could
symbolize “students are vigilant,” the negation of this statement “students are not vigilant” will
be ∼ S; and the symbol for this statement, “not p and q” will be ∼ (p × q).

The tilde is a truth functional operator, because the negation of any true statement is
false and the negation of any false statement is true. The definition of negation may be
presented in this truth table.
p ∼p
T F
F T

B. Disjunction

The disjunction or alternation of two statements is formed by inserting the word “or”
between them. The two components are called disjuncts or alternatives. A disjunction could be
used in strong or exclusive sense (proper disjunction) where only one of the disjuncts is true.
For example: “You are either dead or alive.” It could also be used in an inclusive or weak sense
(improper disjunction), where the disjunctive statement is true if either of the disjuncts is true
or both are true. It is false in case both disjuncts are false.

The symbol for disjunction (inclusive) is the wedge “v.” The truth of the disjunctive
statement is dependent on the truth of its components, thus the wedge is a truth-‐functional
connective. This connective connotes that a disjunctive statement is true id at least one of the
components or disjuncts. it connects is true. If both of the disjuncts are false then the
disjunctive statement is false. the wedge “v” may be defined by this truth value.

p q p v q
T T T
T F T
F T T
F F F

43

C. Conjunction

The conjunction of two statements is formed by placing the word “and” in between
them. The components of a conjunctive statement are called conjuncts.

The symbol for conjunction is a “•”. Thus the statement “Manila is a city and PNB is a
Bank” could be symbolized as “p ·∙ q.” The dot is a truth-‐functional connective. It connects the
components or conjuncts of a compound statement that is truth functional. A conjunctive
statement is true if and only if both the conjuncts are true. If either of the conjuncts is false
then the conjunctive statement is false. The “·∙” may be defined by this truth table:

p q p ·∙ q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F

D. Material Implication

Implicative or conditional statements are formed with the use of “if-‐then” sentence. The
two components of the conditional are the antecedent and the consequent. The rule for the
conditional asserts that, in case the antecedent is true the consequent is also true, and in case
the consequent is false the antecedent is also false. The implication or connection between the
antecedent and the consequent may be logical, definitional or causal.

The symbol for material implication is the horseshoe “⊃”. Every “if-‐then” phrase is
translated into logical symbol “⊃” and when we translate conditional statements into symbols
we treat them as material implications. The horseshoe is also a truth-‐functional connective. Any
material implication is true id it is not the case that the antecedent of the statement is true and
its consequent is false. If it happens that the antecedent is true and the consequent is false,
then the implicative statement is false. Material implication may be defined by this truth table:

p q p ⊃ q
T T T
T F F
F T T
F F T

44

E. Material Equivalence

Two statements are materially equivalent when they are both true or both false. The
symbol for material equivalence is “≡”. This symbol connotes that two statements are
materially equivalent or equivalent in truth value, they are either both true or both false.
Material equivalence may be defined by this truth table.

A statement asserting that two statements are materially equivalent is called biconditional
because it is the same as saying that both statements materially imply one another. Thus, the
statement p ≡ q, which is read as “p if and only if q”, is the same as asserting the conjunction of
p ⊃ q and q ⊃ p. This is therefore, the same as saying that any true statement is materially
equivalent to any other true statement, or any false statement is materially equivalent to ant
other true statement. or any false statement is materially equivalent to any other false
statement. For example,

Jose Rizal wrote El Filibusterismo if and only if Emilo Jacinto wrote Pahayag (both
statements are true).
All politicians are honest if and only if all Filipinos are morons. (both statements are
false).

p q p ≡ q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F T

III. Calculating the Truth Value

After getting familiar wuth symbolic statements, let us now apply our understanding of
the truth tables in order to calculate the truth value of a symbolic statement. If we are to
determine the truth value of p ⊃ (q v r), we have to identify the statement constants and set
down all the possible relations of truth and falsity between or among them. The statement
p⊃(q v r) has three statement constants, i.e. p, q, r. In this case, we need a table as follows:

45

p q r q v r p ⊃ (q v r)
T T T
T T F
T F T
T F F
F T T
F T F
F F T
F F F

In determining the truth-‐value if the statement p ⊃ (q v r), we have to work first for the
simple elements then move on towards the more complex elements. We know for a fact that
the statement is a conditional whose antecedent is p and whose consequent is a disjunction of
q and r. Therefore before working on the whole statement, it is important first to work with the
disjunction of q and r, and then to the conditional of the antecedent p and the consequent
which is the disjunction of q and r. In this case, the truth table of the statement will be

p q r q v r p ⊃ (q v r)
T T T T T
T T F T T
T F T T T
T F F F F
F T T T T
F T F T T
F F T T T
F F F F T

IV. Tautologies, Contradictions and Contingent Statements
The construction of a truth table tells us that a compound statement as been formed
may either be true or falls depending on the truth or falsity of the component statements.
However, some compound statements are true under all possible combinations of truth-‐values
of their components statements. Such statements are called tautologies, the statement that
46

are said to be “logically true,” “necessarily true,” or “true as a matter of logical necessity.” Let
us take for example the statement “Either Manilea is the capital of the Philippines or Manila is
not the capital of the Philippines. Following such statement we may have the form p v ∼ p. To
put this into a truth table, what we can have is:
C ∼C C v ∼C
T F T
F T T

In a more complex case, the tautological character of a given statement may not be all
obvious, but may be demonstrated by the use of a truth table. For instance, if the statement is
(p v q) v (∼p v ∼q), we can have our truth table as:
p q ∼p
∼q p v q ∼p v ∼q (p v q) v (∼p v ∼q)
T T F F T F T
T F F T T T T
F T T F T T T
F F T T F T T

Moreover, there are compound statements that are false under all possible
combinations of truth and falsity of their component statements. These statements are called
contradictions. Such statements are said to be “logically false,” necessarily false,” or false are a
matter of logical necessity.” An example of this statement is p • ∼p, which can be placed in the
following table.

p ∼p p •∼p
T F F
F T F
A more complex example of a contradiction is any statement of the form (p v q) • (∼p •
∼q) which can be placed in the following truth table:
p q ∼p ∼q p v q ∼p •∼q (p v q) • (∼p •∼q)

T T F F T F F
T F F T T F F
F T T F T F F
F F T T F T F

47

Meanwhile, the statement that is neither a tautology nor contradiction is called

contingent statement, i.e. a statement that may be either true or false depending on the truth
values of its component statements. It is important to take not that every statement is a
tautology, a contradiction or a contingent statements.
V. Method of Deduction and Nine Rules of Inference
In theory, truth tables are adequate to test the validity of any argument. But in practice,
they grow unwieldy as the number of component statement increase. In such a case, we have
to use a more efficient method in order to establish the validity of an extended argument
through the method of deduction. This is done by deducing the conclusion from its premises by
a sequence of elementary arguments wherein each argument is considered valid. Let us
consider this argument:
R ⊃ F
(R • F) ⊃ B
(R ⊃ B) ⊃ T
∼ T v E \∴ E

In this argument, we are not certain whether the conclusion derived is valid or not. To
be able to ascertain its validity, we should refer to the Nine Rules of Inference, which can
support the valid flow of this argument and ultimately, the derivation of conclusion.

The Rules of Inference

1. Modus Ponens (M. P.) p ⊃ q

p
/∴ q

“Given a conditional and antecedent of that conditional, you are permitted to infer
the consequent of the conditional.”
E.g. (A v B) ⊃ ∼C
(A v B)
/∴ ∼C

48

2. Modus Tollens (M.T.)

p ⊃ q
∼q
/∴ ∼p

“Given a conditional and negation of the consequent of the conditional, you are
permitted to infer the negation of the antecedent of that conditional.

E.g.
(J • G) ⊃ D
∼D
/∴∼(J • G)

3. Hypothetical Syllogism (H.S.) p ⊃ q
q ⊃ r

/∴ p ⊃ r

“Given the conditionals in which the consequent of the first is identical to the
antecedent of the second, you may infer the conditional whose antecedent is the antecedent
of the first and whose consequent is the consequent of the second.”

E.g.
(A v B) ⊃ (C • D)
(C • D) ⊃ (∼E • F)
/ ∴ (A v B) ⊃ (∼E • F)

4. Disjunctive Syllogism p v q p v q p v q p v q
∼p ∼q p q
/ ∴ q / ∴ p /∴∼q /∴∼p

“Given a disjunction and negation of one of the disjuncts, you may infer the other
disjunct.”

E.g.
[∼A v (B ⊃ C)] v ∼D
∼ [∼A v (B ⊃ C)]
/ ∴ ∼D
49


5. Simplification p • q p • q
/ ∴ q / ∴ p

“From a conjunction as premise, we may infer either of the conjuncts separately
as a conclusion.”

E.g. [(A • B) ⊃ ∼ (C v D)] • (F v ∼H)
/ ∴ (F v ∼H)

6. Conjunction p
q
/ ∴ p • q

“Given two statements, we may infer their conjuction.”
E.g.
(I v H) The flood is high
K Classes are suspended
/ ∴ (I v H) • K The flood is high and classes are suspended.

7. Addition p q
/ ∴ p v q / ∴ q v p

“Given any statement, you may infer any disjunction that includes that statement
as one of the disjuncts.”

E.g.
U ⊃ S Ted stole John’s wallet
/ ∴ (U ⊃ S) v (T ⊃ B) Either Ted or Bill stole John’s wallet.

50


8. Dillema Constructive p ⊃ q Destructive
p ⊃ q
r ⊃ s r ⊃ s
p v r ∼q v ∼s
/ ∴ q v s / ∴ ∼p v ∼r

“Given two conditionals and the disjunction of the antecedents of those conditionals, we
may infer the disjunction of the consequences of the conditionals.”

E.g. [((A v B) ⊃ C) ⊃ (D v F)]
[(F ≡ G) ⊃ (A ⊃ F)]
[((A v B) ⊃ C) v (F ≡ G)]
/∴ (D v F) v (A ⊃ F)

9. Absorption
p ⊃ q

/∴ p ⊃ (p • q)

“Given the conditional as premise, you can conclude the conjunction of both antecedent
and consequent as the whole consequent of the conclusion.”

E.g.
(R v F) ⊃ (T v Y) If it rains, then the ground is wet.
/∴ (R v F) ⊃ [(R v F) • (T v Y)] If it rains, then it rains and the ground is wet.

VI. Proofs of Validity

We can construct the proofs of validity for the abovementioned argument by referring
to the rules of inference.
R ⊃ F
(R • F) ⊃ B
(R ⊃ B) ⊃ T
∼ T v E \∴ E

51

In doing the proofs of validity, the argument should be numbered in such a way that the
numbers after the conclusion are the valid proofs.
1. R ⊃ F
2. (R • F) ⊃ B
3. (R ⊃ B) ⊃ T
4. ∼ T v E \∴ E
5. R ⊃ (R • F) 1, Absorption

The first possible proof that we can deduce is the premise no. 1, which can be applied
with absorption to arrive at its conclusion for the 5th item.

6. R ⊃ B 5, 2 Hypothetical Syllogism

Numbers 5 and 2 can be applied with the rules for Hypothetical syllogism in order to
arrive at the conclusion in number 6.

7. T 3,6 Modus Ponens

T is the result of numbers 3 and 6 following the rules for Modus Ponens.

8. E 4, 7 Disjunctive Syllogism

E is the consistent conclusion in the original argument as well as in the proofs of validity
(Nos. 5-‐8). It is the result of the disjunctive syllogism between items 4 and 7. Hence, the
argument is valid for it is proved under the rules of inference.

1. A ⊃ B
2. B ⊃ C
3. C ⊃ D
4. ∼D
5. A v E /∴ E

In the next argument, we shall try to look for the possible proofs that we can deduce in
order to prove the validity of the conclusion and the whole argument.

6. A ⊃ C 1, 2 Hypothetical Syllogism

52

A ⊃ C is the result of pairing up nos. 1 and 2 which is a hypothetical syllogism

7. A ⊃ D 6, 3 Hypothetical Syllogism

A ⊃ D is the conclusion derived from the hypothetical syllogism between nos. 6 and 3.

8. ∼A 7, 4 Modus Tollens

When we try to put together Nos. 7 and 4, it is Modus Tollens and derives ∼A as a
conclusion.

9. E 5, 8, Disjunctive Syllogism

Finally, nos. 5 and 8 are disjunctive syllogism which deduces a conclusion in no. 9, E.
Hence the argument is valid.

53

Logic Handout PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Logic Handout PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

Introduction to Philosophy

Why is there a need to philosophize?

• Pythagoras is the first one who coined Φιλοσοφο (philosopho)

• Philosophy is a “science” because it is a body of knowledge derived from reasoned

What is Logic?

I. Definition of Logic

λογικε (“logike”) which means “thought”

Formal and Material Logic

II. The Three-­‐fold Intellectual Acts

Intellectual Acts Mental Product External Sign

Simple Apprehension Idea Term

Judgment Enunciation Proposition

Reasoning Argument Syllogism

I. Simple Apprehension: First Intellectual Act

Idea and Term: Product of Apprehension

III. Classification of Terms

Aristotle further subdivided Quality as follows:

a. Habit or Disposition:

• Form is said of the shape of artificial things.

A. Meaning of Definition

i. Essential – an essential definition explains the very nature of the

I. Judgment, Enunciation, Proposition

• Truth is defined as the agreement of the mental judgment, as expressed in proposition,

Types of Proposition

1. Categorical – expresses a direct judgment or a direct assertion of the

Types of Hypothetical Proposition.

a. Conditional – uses “if-­‐then” statement;

Elements of a Categorical Proposition

All teachers are degree holders.

A. Quality of Proposition

B. Quantity of Proposition

2. Particular – A particular proposition is a proposition whose subject is a particular

A Universal Affirmative All X are Y.

All teachers are literate is Su + Pp

No teacher is illiterate is Su – Pu.

Some students are discourteous is Sp + Pp.

Some girls are not conservative is Sp – Pu.

Type Quality/Quantity Example Schema

V. Logical Opposition (Square of Opposition)

SQUARE OF OPPOSITION

Process of obversion:

I. Reasoning, Argument, and Syllogism

Reasoning, as a mental act is also known as an inference. Inference is the process of

• Mediate Inference – this is an inference based on at least two propositions, it

The product of mediate inference is the argument. An argument is a sequence of

Two Kinds of Reasoning

Deduction, (etym. Deduco – I lead down) is a process of reasoning which

E.g. All traditional politicians are power brokers.

Inductive argument (etym. Induco = I lead to) is a process of reasoning which

The premises of inductive arguments appeal to evidence through sense

Paolo is a Filipino. He is very sentimental and romantic.

Kinds of Syllogisms

Premise Syllogism Term

Schema or Pattern of the Categorical Syllogism

IV. The Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogism

• Fallacy of Negative Conclusion – happens when the conclusion, derived from

E.g. All bankers are businessmen

V. Figures of the Syllogism

Rule: The major premise must be universal

Rule: One of the premises must be negative.

VI. Moods of the Syllogism

E.g. No machine is a thinking being (E)

II. The Three-‐fold Intellectual Acts

a. Conditional – uses “if-‐then” statement;