Deductive Reasoning

Rules for Valid Syllogisms

Rules for a valid categorical

syllogism
1. A valid syllogism must possess three, and
only three, unambiguous terms.

If any term is vague or has multiple meanings,

the syllogism is invalid.
Invalid Syllogism:

Major premise: In order to run something must have

feet
Minor Premise: My nose is running
Conclusion: Therefore, my nose must have feet.
(the term run has two different meanings)

Rules for a valid categorical

syllogism
2. The middle term must be universal and
unqualified in at least one premise.

The middle term (the one that appears in both

premises) must be universal, e.g. an all, every
or no statement in at least one premise
Invalid syllogism:

Major premise: Some charities represent religious

groups.
Minor premise: Some religious groups represent
extremist groups.
Conclusion: Therefore, some charities represent
extremist groups.
(both premises are particular or qualified)

Rules for a valid categorical

syllogism
3. The middle term must be distributed in both
premises. (Also, the middle term may not
appear in the conclusion)

The middle term must serve as the subject of one

premise (before the verb) and the predicate (after the
verb) of the other premise.
Invalid Syllogism:
Major premise: Convicts have a lot of tattoos
Minor premise: Favio has a lot of tattoos
Conclusion: Therefore, Favio must be a convict
(the middle term a lot of tattoos is the predicate of each
premise)

Rules for a valid categorical

syllogism
4. Qualified premises require qualified
conclusions

No term may be universal in the conclusion that is not

universal in a premise.
If one premise is qualified or particular, the conclusion
must be qualified or particular.
Invalid Syllogism

Major premise: Some Italians are great lovers

Minor premise: Joey is Italian

Conclusion: Therefore, Joey is a great lover

(the major premise is qualified, so the conclusion must be
qualified too)

Rules for a valid categorical

syllogism
5. At least one premise must be affirmative

Both premises cannot be negative.

If either premise is negative the conclusion must be negative.
Invalid Syllogism

Major premise: no cat is a reptile

Minor premise: no reptile is warm-blooded
Conclusion: Therefore, no cat is warm-blooded
(both premises are negative)

Argument 1
Major premise: Some Valid or Invalid?
snakes are poisonous
Answer: Invalid. The
Minor premise: No
middle term is not
mammals are
distributed
poisonous
Conclusion:
Therefore, no
mammals are snakes

Argument 2
Major premise:Left Valid or Invalid?
handers are more prone
to occupational injuries
Answer: Valid.
Minor premise: Jake is
left-handed
Conclusion: Therefore,
Jake is more prone to
occupational injuries.

Argument 3
Major premise:
Students who study
hard get good grades
Minor premise:
Loretta gets good
grades
Conclusion:
Therefore, Loretta
studies hard

Valid or Invalid?
Answer: Invalid.
Undistributed
middle term, and the
fallacy of affirming
the consequent

Argument 4
Valid or invalid?
Major premise: Either
the state must raise taxes
or cut social services
Answer: Valid.
Minor premise: The
state will not raise taxes
Conclusion: Therefore,
the state must cut social
services.

Argument 5
Major premise: No
dog likes cats
Minor premise: all
cats like fish
Conclusion:
Therefore, no dog
likes fish

Valid or invalid?
Invalid

Argument 6
Major premise: If
deforestation continues,
there will be more global
warming
Minor premise: We can
see that there is more
global warming
Conclusion: Therefore,
deforestation must be
continuing

Valid or invalid?
Invalid: the middle term
global warming isnt
distributed, and the
syllogism commits the
fallacy of affirming the
consequent

Argument 7
Major premise: some
chimpanzees can be
potty-trained.
Minor premise:
Bonzo is a chimpanzee
Conclusion:
Therefore, Bonzo can
be potty-trained.

Valid or invalid?
Invalid: the middle term,
chimpanzees, isnt
universal or unqualified
in the major premise.

Argument 8
Three friends are trying
What type of movie(s)
to decide what movie to
see. Their choices are a
can all three friends
foreign film, a violent
agree on seeing?
action adventure, a
mystery, a gory sci fi,
Answer: a mystery or a
or a comedy.
comedy
Trudy doesnt want to
see a foreign film
Mona prefers not to see
an action adventure
movie
Ozzie doesnt like
violent or gory movies

Trudy

foreign
action
adventure

Mona

Ozzie

X
XX

mystery
science
fiction
comedy

Argument 9
Assume the following
statements are all true:
Nero, the Roman
emperor, regularly
drank from cups made
of pewter that
contained lead.
Anyone who regularly
ingests lead will
develop lead
poisoning. Lead
poisoning always leads
to insanity.

t
c
e
r
r
o
c

Which of the following

conclusions can be logically
deduced from the
statements at left?
A. insane people crave lead.
B. lead poisoning is the leading cause
of insanity.
C. The use of pewter was reserved
exclusively for Roman emperors.
D. Lead poisoning was common
among the citizens of the Roman
empire.
E. Nero must have been insane.