Logic: Syllogism

Introduction to Philosophy of Man

 Syllogism

(Greek: συλλογισμός syllogismos,
"conclusion, inference") It is a kind
of logical argument that applies deductive
reasoning to arrive at a conclusion based
on two or more propositions that are
asserted or assumed to be true.
 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
 The in the conclusion)
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)
 Categorical Proposition
•A (universal affirmative) :
All S are P
•E (universal negative):
No S are P
•I (particular affirmative):
Some S are P
•O (particular negative):
Some S are not P
 Categorical Proposition
•A (universal affirmative) :
All S are P
•E (universal negative):
No S are P
•I (particular affirmative):
Some S are P
•O (particular negative):
Some S are not P
 The Square of Proposition:
All S are P Tradition No S are P
A Contrary E

T F
Co
Subalternates

n t or y

Subalternates
i ct
d di
t ra ct
o n or
C y

F T

O
I Subcontrary
Some S are not P
Some S are P
 Mood
(A,E,I,O) Major premise
(A,E,I,O) Minor premise
(A,E,I,O) Conclusion
F1 F2 F3 F4
M– P– M– P–
P M P M
S– S– M– M–
Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4

bArbArA cEsArE dAtIsI cAlEmEs

cElArEnt cAmEstrE dIsAmIs dImAtIs
s
dArII fEstInO fErIsOn frEsIsOn
fErIO bArOcO bOcArdO cAlEmOs
bArbArI cEsArO fElAptOn fEsApO
cElArOnt cAmEstr dArAptI bAmAlIp
Os
Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4

AAA EAE AII AEE

EAE AEE IAI IAI
AII EIO EIO EIO
EIO AOO OAO AEO
AAI EAO EAO EAO
EAO AEO AAI AAI
Syllogism 1

All bloggers are insufferable

No writers are insufferable
Therefore, No writers are
bloggers
Syllogism 2

No humans are mortal

Some humans are women
Therefore, some women are not
mortal
Syllogism 3

All burglars are dishonest people

Some shopkeepers are burglars
Therefore, some shopkeepers are
dishonest people