ComplicationsforCategorical

Syllogisms
PHIL121:MethodsofReasoning
February27,2013
Instructor:KarinHowe
BinghamtonUniversity

OverallPlan
First,Iwillpresentsomeproblematic
propositionsandexplainhowwecandeal
withthem(ornot)
Second,wewilldiscusssomeproblematic
typesofargumentsandhowwecandeal
withthem(ornot)

ProblematicPropositions

 Issue1:Statementsthatdon'tcontainaquantifier
Example1:Catsaremammals
Thisisclearlymakingauniversalclaim(it'stalkingabout
allcats,notjustsomeofthem)
Solution:Rewritethisstatementasthefollowingstandard
formcategoricalproposition"Allcatsaremammals."
Ingeneral,whenpresentedwithastatementthatseems
categoricalbutdoesnotcontainaquantifier,wewillassume
itismakingauniversalclaimunlesswehavegoodreasons
tothinkotherwise.
Example2:"Childrenarepresent"
ThisexampleisclearlyanexceptiontothegeneralruleI
juststated.Clearly,thisisnotstatingthatallthechildrenare
presentitismerelysayingthattherearechildrenhere.
Solution:rewritethisstatementasastandardform
categoricalpropositionasfollows:"Somechildrenare
peoplethatarehere."(orsomethinglikethat)

Issue2:Comparethefollowingtwostatements:
Abatisamammal.

Thisisclearlymakingauniversalstatementit'stalkingabout
ALLbats,notaboutoneparticularbat.
Solution:"Abatisamammal"canbetranslatedintothe
standardformcategoricalproposition"Allbatsare
mammals."

Abatflewinthewindow.

However,thissentenceisnotmakingauniversalclaim.Rather,
thisissayingthatthereissomeparticularbatthatflewintothe
window,andthusonthebasisofthisinformationwecanmake
theclaim"Somebatsarethingsthatflyintowindows,"because
wehaveatleastonebatwecanpointtowhodidthis.
Solution:"Abatflewintothewindow"canbetranslatedinto
thestandardformcategoricalproposition"Somebatsare
thingsthatflyintowindows."

 Likewiseforsentenceswith"an"or"the"sometimes
thesesentencesmakeuniversalclaimsandsometimes
theymakeclaimsaboutparticularindividuals,andthus
shouldbetreatedasparticularstatements
Wehavetousecontextcluesandwhatweknowabout
theworldinordertointerpretthemcorrectly
Howaboutthisstatement?
"Thecatisafineanimalcommonlymistakenfora
meatloaf."
Doesthisstatementmakeauniversalclaim,orisit
makingaparticularclaim?
Kindofambiguous..
Sometimeswe'rejustgoingtohavetomakea
judgmentcall

QuickTime and a
decompressor
are needed to see this picture.

 Issue3:statementsthatarealmostinstandard
form,butnotquite
Example1:Racehorsesareallthoroughbreds.
Clearly,thisismakingauniversalstatement.How
wouldwerestatethisasastandardformuniversal
statement?
Careful!Onetemptationmightbetotakewhatfollows
"all"andmakeitthesubjectoftheproposition,making
theothertermthepredicate:"Allthoroughbredsare
racehorses."(wrong!)
Solution:rewritethisstatementinstandardformas
"Allracehorsesarethoroughbreds."

 Example2:Allrolypolyfishheadsarenotgooddancers.
Expressedsymbolically:F=rolypolyfishheads,D=
gooddancers
AllFarenotD
Twopossiblesolutions:
Althoughwearemakeadistinctionbetween"notD"
and"nonD",thisdistinctionisinacertainsensean
artificialandmeaninglessdistinction."notD"and
"nonD"meanthesamething,sowecouldcollapse
thedistinctioninthiscaseandrewritethisstatementas
"Allrolypolyfishheadsarenongooddancers."
Anotherpossiblesolutionistojustthinkaboutwhat
thissentenceisreallysaying.Tosaythatallfishheads
arenotgooddancersissimplytosaythat"Noroly
polyfisheadsaregooddancers"(notethatthese
solutionsareequivalentviaobversion)

 Issue4:statementsthatarethenegationsofstandard
formcategoricalpropositions
Notallbirdscanfly.
Expressedsymbolically:B=birds,F=things
thatcanfly
NotallBareF
Clearly,thisisthenegationofanAproposition.
Basedonthesquareofopposition,thisisclearly
equivalenttothecorrespondingOproposition.
Solution:rewritethisstatementasastandard
formcategoricalpropositionasfollows:"Some
birdsarenotthingsthatcanfly."

 TherearenopenguinsintheArctic.
Thisstatementcouldnaturallybereadin
twodifferentbutlogicallyequivalentways:
"It'sfalsethatsomepenguinsarethingsthatlive
intheArctic"
"NopenguinsarethingsthatliveintheArctic."

Solution:alwayswritestatementsofthis
form("therearenoXthatareY")asE
propositions("noXareY"),sincethatway
thestatementwillbeinstandardform

 Issue5:statementswithnonstandardquantifiers
suchas"most,""many,""afew,""allbutafew,"
"almostall,""notquiteall,"etc.
Solution:althoughitlosessomeofthemeaning
ofthesedifferentquantifiers,wewilltranslateall
ofthesequantifiersassimply"Some"(captures
theminimalmeaningofthesequantifiers)
Likewise,statementswiththenonstandard
quantifiers"every,""each,"or"any"arebest
understoodasthestandardquantifier"All."

Issue6:statementsinvolving"only"
Example:Onlymammalsaremarsupials
Clearly,thisismakingsomesortofuniversalclaim.
Whatuniversalclaimisitmaking?
Twooptions:
1. Allmammalsaremarsupials.
2. Allmarsupialsaremammals.
Anotherwaytothinkaboutit:Canbeseentobemaking
theclaim"Ifit'snotamammal,thenit'snotamarsupial"
(becauseonlymammalsaremarsupials).Well,thisisthe
sameassaying"Allnonmammalsarenonmarsupials,"
whichisthecontrapositiveofoption2above.
Solution:rewriteallstatementsoftheform"OnlyXare
Y"as"AllYareX"

 Issue7:exceptivepropositions(propositionsthatsaythings
like"Allexceptemployeesareeligible")
Clearly,thisismakingauniversalclaim,butwhatkindof
universalclaim?
Infact,isisassertingtwouniversalclaims.Itissaying
boththat"allnonemployeesareeligible"andthat"no
employeesareeligible."
Solution:rewritethesekindsofstatementsasthe
conjunctionofthetwounderlyingstandardform
propositions.Then,ifweneedtousethesestatementsinan
argument,wecanjustsplitthemupintotwopremises,
right?.?
Okay,thatworks,sortof,butthereareissueswiththis,as
wewillcomebacktointhesectionaboutproblematic
arguments

 Issue8:singularpropositions(e.g.,"Karinisa
kangaroo")
Whatkindofclaimisthismaking?Isitmakinga
universalclaim,orisitmakingaparticularclaim?
Standardsolution:
Symbolizethenamedindividualasauniqueunitclass
(asasetcontainingonlythatindividual);e.g.K=
{Karin}
Symbolizethepredicateclassasnormal;e.g.G=
kangaroos
Translatethestatementasauniversalstatement;e.g.
AllKareG

 Copisays(inCh7)thatitis"customary"toreadthesetypes
ofsentencesthisway"automatically"inotherwords,we
simplyinterpretthemthiswaynaturally
Really???
Anotherproblemwiththissolution:translatingthestatement
"Karinisakangaroo"as"AllKareG"ignorestheexistence
claimthattheoriginalstatementismaking.
Standardsolution2:Translate"Karinisakangaroo"asthe
conjunctionofthetwostatements"AllKareG"and"Some
KareG"

BothofthesesolutionsareTERRIBLE.Theyare
nonintuitive(especiallythepartabouttheunit
class),andareinnowayamatchforthecurrent
standardlogicaltreatmentofthesekindsof
statements.

Summary:ProblematicPropositions
Issue1:statementsthatseemcategoricalinnature,
butwhichdon'tcontainanexplicitquantifier.
Solution:wewillgenerallytreattheseasmakinga
universalclaim,unlessgivengoodreasontothink
otherwise.

Issue2:statementscontainingthewords"a,""an,"
or"the"inplaceofaquantifier
Solution:usecontextcluestodeterminewhetherthe
statementismakingauniversalclaimoraparticular
claim.Wherethisisambiguouswewillhavetojust
makeajudgmentcall(Iwilltrynottogiveyou
statementswherethisisthecase)

 Issue3:statementsthatarealmostinstandard
form,butnotquite
Example1:statementsoftheform"XareallY"
Solution:rewritethesestatementsas"AllXareY"
Example2:statementsoftheform"AllXarenotY"
Solution:rewritethesestatementsas"AllXarenon
Y"or"NoXareY"

Issue4:statementsthatarethenegationsof
standardformcategoricalpropositions
Solution:rewritethemasthecorresponding
contradictoryproposition(e.g.,"NotallXareY"
wouldberewrittenas"SomeXarenotY")

 Issue5:statementswithnonstandardquantifiers
suchas"most,""many,""afew,""allbutafew,"
"almostall,""notquiteall,""every,""each,""any"
etc.
Solution:translatenonstandardquantifierslike
"most,""many,""afew,""allbutafew,""almostall,"
"notquiteall,"as"Some,"andtranslatenonstandard
quantifierslike"every,""each"and"any"as"All"

Issue6:statementsinvolving"only"(e.g."Only
mammalsaremarsupials")
Solution:translateallstatementsoftheform"OnlyX
areY"as"AllYareX"

 Issue7:exceptivepropositions(e.g.,"All
exceptemployeesareeligible")
Solution:rewritethesekindsofstatementsasthe
conjunctionofthetwounderlyingstandardform
propositions.Then,ifweneedtousethesestatements
inanargument,wecanjustsplitthemupintotwo
premises,right?.?

Issue8:singularpropositions(e.g.,"Karin
isakangaroo")
Wecannotdealwiththesetypesof
statementsinsyllogisticlogic.Anyattempts
todosoarehighlybizarre.

ProblematicArguments

Issue1:Sorites
Pronouncedsoriteas
Inthiscontext,asoritesisacategorical
argumentthatcontainsthreeormore
categoricalpropositionsaspremises
Likecategoricalsyllogisms,categorical
soritescanalsobesaidtohaveastandard
form

StandardFormCategoricalSorites
1. Allstatementsarestandardformcategorical
propositions
2. Eachtermappearsexactlytwiceinthesorites.
3. Propositionsarearrangedinsuchawaythat
everypropositionhasonetermincommonwith
thepropositionthatfollowsit,exceptforthelast
proposition.
4. Alineisdrawnunderthelastpropositioninthe
sorites.
5. Theconclusionofthesoritesappearsunderthe
line.

Example
1.
Allbabiesareillogicalpersons.
2.
Allillogicalpersonsaredespisedpersons.
3.
Nopersonswhocanmanagecrocodilesaredespisedpersons.__
Thereforenobabiesarepersonswhocanmanagecrocodiles.

Intheory,wecanusetheVenndiagram
techniquetodiagramthisargument,with
alittleadjustment!

Step1:symbolizetheargument

1.
Allbabiesareillogicalpersons.
2.
Allillogicalpersonsaredespisedpersons.
3.
Nopersonswhocanmanagecrocodilesaredespisedpersons.__
Thereforenobabiesarepersonswhocanmanagecrocodiles.

B=babies,I=illogicalpersons,M=people
whocanmanagecrocodiles,D=despised
persons
1. AllBareI
2. AllIareD
3. NoMareD
ThereforeNoBareM

1. AllBareI
2. AllIareD
3. NoMareD
NoBareM
Basically,what'sgoingwithasoritesisthat
thereisasuppressedsubconclusionthatmakesit
allhangtogetherweneedtobringoutthat
subconclusioninordertosplittheargumentinto
twostandardformcategoricalsyllogisms!
1.AllIareD
1.NoMareD
2.AllBareI
2.AllBareD
AllBareD

NoBareM

 Wecanthendiagramthesesubargumentsusingtwo
separateVenndiagrams.
Ifboththediagramsshowthattheindividualsubarguments
arevalid,thetheargumentasawholeisvalid!(ifeither
diagramshowsinvalidity,thentheargumentisinvalid)
1.AllIareD 1.NoMareD
2.AllBareI 2.AllBareD
AllBareD
NoBareM

Issue2:Argumentswith
InconsistentPremises
Explainwhyitisimpossibleforastandard
formcategoricalsyllogismtohave
inconsistentpremises,makinguseofwhat
youknowaboutinconsistentpremisesand
therelationshipsbetweenstandardform
categoricalpropositions,aswellasthe
definitionofastandardformcategorical
syllogism.

Walkingitthrough
Whatisthedefinitionofasetofinconsistent
premises?
Asetofpremisesisinconsistentifandonlyifitis
impossibleforthemalltobetrueatthesametime
Whatistheonlywaytwocategoricalpropositionscan
beinconsistent?(Hint:thinkabouttheSquareof
Opposition)
Answer:theyhavetobecontradictorystatements!
(note:thisisnotuniversallytrueofasetof
inconsistentstatements,butistrueinanysetoftwo
statementswhichareinconsistent)

Okay,sopickanytwopairsofcontradictory
statementsandmakethemthepremisesofyour
argument:
1. AllXareY
2. SomeXarenotY
Therefore.

Whatdoyounoticeaboutthisargument?
Itisnotinstandardform,becausethereisno
middleterm!!
Andthatmychildreniswhyitisimpossibleto
haveastandardformcategoricalsyllogismwith
inconsistentpremises.

 Butwaitdidn'twesayearlierthatall
argumentswithinconsistentpremisesare
valid?
Doesthatmeanthattherearesomevalid
categoricalsyllogismsthatwecan'tanalyze
usingourVennDiagramtechnique??
Well,maybe.butmaybewecan.is
thereawaythatwecanusetheVenn
Diagramtechniquetoshowthatan
argumentwithinconsistentpremisesis
valid?

1. AllSareP
2. SomeSarenotP__
NoSareM
Whathappensifwe
trytodiagramthis
argument?

Thepremises
basicallycanceleach
otherout

Problem:conclusion
isnotdiagrammed
So,notreallyafitfor
thetechnique

Issue3:argumentswith
exceptivepremises
Considerthefollowingstatement:"All
exceptstudentsarewealthy."
Wecouldexpressthissymbolicallyasthe
conjunctionofthesetwostatements:All
nonSareWandNoSareW(S=students,
W=wealthypeople)
Okay,whatsortofconclusioncouldfollow
fromthis?

1. AllnonSareW
2. NoSareW____
Therefore.?
Oneoption:

Wcouldbethemiddleterm,inwhichcase
nonSwouldbethemajortermandSwould
betheminorterm.
However,that'snotreallyrightthat'sseeing
threetermswherethereareonlytwo

1. AllnonSareW
2. NoSareW____
Therefore.?
Easiestfix:

NoSareW=>NoWareS(conversion)=>
AllWarenonS(obversion)

1. AllnonSareW
2. AllWarenonS____
Therefore.?
Ooops!Notastandardformcategorical
syllogism!

1.
2.
3.

Couldthisproblembefixedbyaddinganotherpremise?
Inotherwords,supposethiswasreallyasorites,in
disguise
Example:Allexceptstudentsarewealthy.Allwealthy
peoplearehappy.Thereforeallnonstudentsarehappy.
AllnonSareW
AllWarenonS
AllWareH______
AllnonSareH
Yes,thiswouldfixitallwewouldhavetodois
ignoretheextraneouspremise(P2).(notehoweverthatit
isn'treallyasorites,though,becausewestillonlyhave
threeterms).?

Issue4:Cantheexistential
fallacybefixed?
Considerthefollowingargument:
1. Allcatsarecutethings.
2. Allcutethingsaresoftthings.
Thereforesomecatsaresoftthings.
Theproblemwiththisargumentisthatit
dependsoncatsexisting,whichisn'tgiven
bythepremisesbutwhichweknowtoin
factbethecase.

Howaboutthisasasolution?

RecallwhatCopisaidinChapter3itisn'treallya
problemthatuniversalsdon'timplyexistenceinthe
Booleaninterpretation,becausewhereexistenceis
necessaryforanargument,wecanalwaysadditinby
writingtherelevantuniversalstatementbothasa
universalandaparticularstatement.

1. Allcatsarecutethings.
2. Somecatsarecutethings.
3. Allcutethingsaresoftthings.
Thereforesomecatsaresoftthings.
Again,likeinthepreviousexample,itfixesthe
issue,butdoessobyignoringoneoftheoriginal
premises(P1).?

1. Allcatsarecutethings.
2. Somecatsarecutethings.
3. Allcutethingsaresoftthings.
Thereforesomecatsaresoftthings.
Again,likeinthepreviousexample,it
fixestheissue,butdoessobyignoring
oneoftheoriginalpremises(P1)
Again,thisisn'treallyaproblem(wecan
andshouldignoreirrelevantpremises),
butit'sweirdandnonstandard.

Issue5:Argumentscontaining
singularstatements
1. Allkangarooscanfly.
2. Karinisakangaroo.__
Karincanfly.
Sincewecan'tanalyze"Karinisakangaroo"
asastandardformcategoricalproposition,
wearenotabletoanalyzethisargument
usingtheVennDiagramtechnique,even
thoughitisclearlyvalid.

 Moral:whiletheVennDiagrammingtechnique
canbeexpandedsomewhattodealwithsome
kindsofnonstandardcategoricalarguments
(sorites)thereareotherargumentsthatarevalid
categoricalargumentsthatwecan'tprovetobeso
usingthesetools.(likewise,wealsocan'tprove
certainargumentinvalidusingthesetools,either)
Doesn'tmaketheVennDiagrammingtechniquea
badtechnique,justmeansitislimited.(whichis
whyweneedpredicatelogic,whichwewillnotbe
abletocoverinthisclassifyouareinterestedin
thisyoushouldtakePHIL122inthesummeror
fall!)

Summary:ProblematicArguments
Issue1:Sorites
Thingsyoushouldknowfortheexam:
Inthiscontext,asoritesasacategoricalargumentthat
containsthreeormorecategoricalpropositions
Likestandardformcategoricalsyllogisms,thereissuch
athingasastandardformsorites.
Intheory,wecanuseourVennDiagramtechniqueto
dealwiththesetypesofarguments
Youshouldunderstandhowtodothisintheory,but
youwillnotbeaskedtoactuallydoitontheexam.

 Issue2:argumentswithinconsistentpremises
TheVennDiagrammingtechniquecannotbeadapted
toanalyzethesearguments

Issue3:argumentswithexceptivepremises
Thesesometimeswork,butsometimesdon'tit
dependsonthenumberofpremisesintheargument
andtheformofallofthosepremises.?

Issue4:fixingtheexistentialfallacy
Ifanargumentcommitstheexistentialfallacy,butin
thiscasetheexistenceoftherelevantclass(es)isnotin
question,thenwecansimplyaddinthenecessary
particularstatements..?
Importantcaveat:Onlyworksifweknowthecontentof
theargumentcan'tbedoneifallwehaveistheform.

 Issue5:argumentscontainingsingular
propositions
Sincewecannottranslatesingular
statementseasilyintostandardform
categoricalpropositions,thismeansthatwe
can'tdealwithanyargumentsinvolving
thesetypesofstatementsusingtheVenn
Diagramtechnique.