sons nn Me Ingres be Me ants Stans Ma re ‘assuming the last nt it each nana Peep a ba cree Some Singer ar aust ‘Some arsts ae hte people No gamblers ae au Al gutters are srs fo losers are sombles Sgr propane oe SRL parame ae es ean Some TV programmes "TV programmes ore not ubpish, 2M los isk: ttere Somme pilots are not Nappy oo Some Psk-takers te not happy uy an ci hero ST com Chappe? CATEGORICALSYLLOGISN ‘AND ITSRULES anrropucTION once 1 heard this story tlt A professor’ car ran out of ‘nking oen by the sie of (eatcantnaed hosting te cams The pressor repeat, he ee om bt span recorved no mswer In guste wae of es town ater ses fn vale-severol paca, the former yale, pe professe”wrned ond Yoho angi Why ct you tl me that wile Las stoning hare in fon of youre The armas response was simple but rae at a count give a pods ans unl so how fat ou wolkes™ ‘the professoe was omazeé this farmer understood the i eer reserving” Joageant unt he had gsthered ‘ificentevence for an cece response, Ts ls the same ‘Stde ot we have to exten we cen ith argument ‘CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISH ‘the categorlcl sylogiem the logical precass in whic the Peni ee terms wt tr (mae) and the iadoncip fs expressed in te concuslon thot fer Uns of ase fait trea, ts case, the conlsion il Sefer be in te aftrmative ot Im the nepative, depending on how the terns are rolated in the Premises. ‘The rus ofthe categorie! sapien ere Ue Inte tw secions the Art fur pera (0 ules goverang the terms,4 asta Spend on he fast four refer to rues governing the prope Ute here are te eight ese SO¥e™nB ue RULES OF THE CATEGORICAL SvLLOGisM TRIEEAY The midato term must stways be taken In the same Sense; athersse, te sylogism would conan en than thee tems and would therefore com the Pao ee ‘aulvocation o the Fallacy of Four Terms Gren dee Head's the upper vision ofthe human body; ‘But a leader fs head ‘leader's the upper avision ofthe human body 4 fathers 2 mate parent But he Maly Pope father; The Holy Boge is 2 male paren A tablets» compressed sls material for writing; ‘but, paracetmol ie tablon, Paracetamol 3 compressed sold materia for ring, ‘The major term and the minor term cannot cor ‘in the conclusion than inthe ‘romis: otervie, the effec (concuston) Became (ate ‘han the couse (premises) which (simpseno, ‘epee spa an ees 1 1 4 term hos 9 greater extension in the cincuson than ta the premise, then itcannot be formally the sane term th been compared in the premise at shovld be If Shy of ee ‘romes is particolr inthe premise, means tht only ee fs extension is compared wah the mia term. Thea, Sa {is art shouldbe expressed the bass of Is egreeméng minor term (pare) + attrmative propotion * negative proposition Examples ‘i panmer oe tos (arate) » ut cists are homers, 5 Therefore, no chsee are tol. (negative) 5 {ie major term “tools” In the mejor premso belng the presieato of an affirmative propestion 's pertain extepion et us check its extension in. the. conclusion Shas one ncusion is negative, the extension therefor, of tool Univers. Hence, the Fallacy of ite Major Terp iadgui phage nd aon AN ors have wings; Me ‘uty a ls are animals; paricur) ue Therefore all arise (uverso}) hove wings, 3 “The tine tern Yanfmate” Inthe minor premise beng the prodeate ofa afemative proposition a poreeuor in exten Tat us chock ts extension nthe canchison. Al! animale Universal in exterian. The conclusion averstates the promises, Saying more than the evidence allows. ence, the Fallacy of lt Minor Term. The middle term should ot occur in the ‘conclusion. The midaie tan te the ont of comnpareon between the to externes. The cmparson shoul ond to 3 thew tr which Is expressed in the corcunion. Sin each feteme is 10 Be compared with tne mile ter, tho ler fnust cur flea in the premises. Un the conision, the minor term becomes the subjec: end the mejor term the prada, ‘hele tert as No place Inthe conehion. Shaul fe BS feed in the eancusion, wil only repeat what Nas already Daa stated in te premisas ih whe cane thing Winfred 3 su Vileon Rae 32 carly of Mlpace Mie ‘A goddess is 2 remate: Mee ‘uta goddess ss city; Mee Thevetore, a godess Is emale dety, b+ ps Tsay is iaaye Hep osay 8 te was Tous} 8 tne Fidey. Mt ep The middle term must be distributed universaly, 2t least once, in the premises. the ti tetremes are compared vith two ciferane carts of tno missle {erm then there wil be wo dierent suppastions ot tre se ‘FI Mwover, tone of the waremes agrees withthe whole Srtenson of the mille term and te ober agetes uth © pat Ofte extension, ane then comparison ls pesibe bens what {5 tue of the whole i true of pars. the mile term Is twice universal, then its extersion and suppostion in bath Bremsen are xacly the sare Vaiation of ths rule calles Fallacy of Undistributed Middle Term. Exape! Al sharks are Ash ‘Buta much are isn Thereof, i much are sharks. ‘The mide term fs the one tat appears n bth oremies — In this ease es te cass of “Veh” whch fs the predate of Aammative gropostions ant, terefore, twice partial ee Uinasbueed because rene of Hs Uses apie to all she 3 «Somme Caren persons are mothers, a st anes: Ai mates are winks) 2em ‘Some tvntars are men nee Some women are Maes Trp — OMEEETA Two affirmative presiises cannot give 2 tive conclusion, since the major te mo the mt mare wertied wih Oe teme meter, then the eusion should express tn wy. A nagatve conclusion OUI express someting that it contaies nthe prerase5 elation of ths tle. scaled Falacy of 2 Negative fusion drawn from Airmative Premises Exar A stones are ha Meo Some clamonds are not hard. s = P‘an 998m ar Ree ‘From ‘two negative premises, nothing Since the middle term is prediabe of net oe mol not the minor term, there can be no elatcnea Gets A chairs nota tae: ‘ut, a cabo nota pen; Aven isnot a cha We canna looially draw a conclusion because the subject CAEN ond he predeate “chate” are’ exchange toe uses the mile term "table, Asa Fesue he et ‘lo sno way to reat the cases "pen" and tohaeeey sek encluson attempts 10 do. we dr 6 concusen fons oe peoetve premises, we comm the’ Pelayo Aeeaee Promives! Arotnel: 10 tenor 2 soprano; No soprano eg barene; ‘ho anton tence white athe propositions are tive, the sylogism is fevertheless vata becouse it possbis'ta Rove's sclcnegs faving the same form vinere the premises se oe ean conclusion i false, 35 ts example Ast is nota dog: but 2 possyent not a dog: Apiissycatlenota cat. FIEMETA rom two particuiar premises, nothing follows. One ofthe premises must be Universal ithe ae, fem $9 voll connect the moor and’ minor torte eat Intrenet things are based on some inverse nctudes that, “This vegetable contains (8 yor the eyes." We reasons tera {Be general promise, “Anyéhing thet contains Visas forthe ayes” But some gays atts ‘Some aster men Jn ais example, the midale ter “gaye” i tice particular $06, therfore, commits the Fallacy of Undlat ies idan ‘6. I both particular premises aro negative, then the ‘syllogism violates Rule #6, a2 In this onsinier ‘Some wives are not naggers; ‘Some wives are not mabey than hat? ‘Some cats are res; ‘But, some pyttons ae not cats; Some pythons ae not pets Somme horse back-ridere are noe males; Some tvers ae horse becker; ‘Some drivers oe not mates ie fst example, the sylogism commits the Fallacy of Tile Major Term; is the second, i's tne ede meee ‘Midate Term. onciesion should” Ge. parca amimts the Fallacy of Universal Conetonicy Particular Promice, Satie,SROs Sop a ee AU mengovid ae, iat sa ggoie mangceis ere soecarehloran, 1 ¢? Mec csr are menatyretaieg”” 222 The minor promis, in tis example, fe, conclusion must be porscaer of Ick Miner Ferm aa tn occa amen Ns example, nae there, "e conclusion muse be haga oe anne wat ana negative, the contsion ‘ust be partelar and negate, eae