Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

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. Reduction to the First Figure

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]  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.

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.

26
Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

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 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.

27
Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

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.

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.

28
Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

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)

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.

29
Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

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.

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

30
Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

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 - P u Univ. Maj. Term

 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. Sp + Mp Part. Min. Term
All soldiers are fighters. Su + Pp
p 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

31
Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

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.

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.

32
Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

V. Figures of the Syllogism

Figure 1

M P The middle term is the subject of the major premise and predicate of the
S M 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
The middle term is the predicate of both premises.
S M
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 of the
M S minor premise.
S P
Examples: All mountaineers are adventurers

33
Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

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

FIGURE I FIGURE II
AAA bArbArA EAE cEsArE
EAE cElArEnt AEE cAmEstrEs
A II dArII E IO fEstInO
EIO fErIO AOO bArOcO

34
Philosophy 2 – Logic Class Notes

FIGURE III FIGURE IV

AII dArAptI A A I brAmAntIp
IAI dIsAmIs A E E cAmEnEs
AII dAtIsI IAI dImArIs
E A O fElAptOn E A O fEsApO
E I O fErIsOn E I O frEsIsOn
O A O bOcArdO

35