Critical Thinking

Chapter 9
A Little Categorical Logic

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2013 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved.

 Categorical Statements
 A Categorical Statement makes a claim about the
relationship between two or more categories or classes of
things.
 Standard-Form Categorical Statements
 All S are P (e.g., All Democrats are liberals).
 No S are P (e.g., No Democrats are liberals).
 Some S are P (e.g., Some Democrats are liberals).
 Some S are not P (e.g., Some Democrats are not liberals).

9-2
 Venn diagrams
 Venn diagrams are ways to represent categorical
statements (or test categorical arguments) with a
series of overlapping circles that represent the
suggested groups and their relations.
 Open circles represent groups.
 Overlapping circles suggests that that there are things
which are members of both groups.
 An “X” is a portion of a circle entails that there is at
least one thing within that portion
 Coloring in a portion entails that there is nothing within
that portion.
9-3
Standard-Form Examples
All S are P. Some S are P.

No S are P. Some S are not P.

9-4
Four Basic Parts of Categorical
Statements

9-5
 Translating into Standard
Categorical Form
 Tip 1: Rephrase all nonstandard subject and predicate
terms so that they refer to classes.
 e.g., “All actors are vain” becomes “All actors are
vain people.”
 Tip 2: Rephrase all nonstandard verbs.
 e.g., “Some students walk to school” becomes
“Some students are persons who walk to school.”
 Tip 3: Fill in any unexpressed quantifiers.
 Examples:
 “Koalas are marsupials” becomes “All Koalas are
marsupials.”
 “Californians are health nuts” becomes “Some
Californians are health nuts.” (Be charitable.)
9-6
 Translating into Standard
Categorical Form
 Tip 4: Translate singular statement as all or no statements.
 Singular statement refers to a particular person or thing.

 e.g., “This flower is blooming” becomes “All things identical

with (that are) this (particular) flower are things that are
blooming.”
 This may seem silly, but if we do this Venn Diagrams can be
used on more arguments.
 Tip 5: Translate stylistic variants into the appropriate
categorical form.
 e.g., “Only if something is a fish is it a salmon” becomes “All
salmon are fish.”
 See lists on page 243-5.
9-7
 Categorical Syllogisms
 Syllogism: three-lined deductive argument.
 Categorical Syllogism: syllogism made of all categorical
statements.
 Example:
1. No doctors are professional wrestlers.
2. All cardiologists are doctors
3. So, no cardiologists are professional wrestlers.

Let’s look at how to evaluate this argument with a Venn

Diagram.

9-8
 Using Venn Diagrams to Test
Validity
 Since it has three
category terms
(Doctor, Cardiologist,
and Pro Wrestler) we
need three interlocking
circles.

9-9
 Take it one statement at a time.
1. No doctors are
professional wrestlers.

9-10
 Take it one statement at a time.
1. No doctors are
professional
wrestlers.
2. All cardiologists are
doctors (i.e., there
are no non-doctor
cardiologists).

9-11
 Take it one statement at a time.
1. No doctors are
professional
wrestlers.
2. All cardiologists are
doctors (i.e., there
are no non-doctor
cardiologists).
3. So, no cardiologists
are professional Since the conclusion suggests the shared
area between Cardiologists and Pro
wrestlers. Wrestlers is empty (shaded), and the first two
premises already shaded that area, the
argument is valid.
9-12
Some Hints for “some” statements
 They don’t involve shading, but placing an “X” and
can be tricky so…
 Always diagram them last (do your shading first).
 If part of the placement area has already been
shaded, place the X in the un-shaded area.
 If neither part of the placement area has been
shaded, place the X on the line that separates the
area.
(See examples on page 251.)

9-13
 Another example
1. Some Baptists are
coffee-lovers.
2. All Baptists are
Protestants.
3. So, some Protestants
are coffee-lovers.

9-14
 Another example
1.

2. All Baptists are

Protestants.

Notice we do the “all” statement first

because it requires shading.
9-15
 Another example
1. Some Baptists are
coffee-lovers.
2. All Baptists are
Protestants.

Since part of the area that represents the

overlap of Baptists and Coffee-lovers is
already shaded, we place the “X” in the
un-shaded part of that overlap.
9-16
 Another example
1. Some Baptists are
coffee-lovers.
2. All Baptists are
Protestants.
3. So, some Protestants
are coffee-lovers.

Since the conclusion suggests that there is at least one

individual within the overlap of Protestants and coffee-
lovers, and the first two premises place an “X” in that
area, the argument is valid.
9-17
 Example with an invalid argument.
1. All painters are artists.
2. Some magicians are
artists.
3. So, some magicians
are painters.

9-18
 Example with an invalid argument.
1. All painters are artists.

Notice we start with the first

premise because it is an “all”
statement and thus requires
shading.

9-19
 Example with an invalid argument.
1. All painters are artists.
2. Some magicians are
artists.

The second premise suggests there is at

least one thing in the overlap of
magicians and artists. Since neither
section of that overlap (the painters vs.
non painters) is shaded, and we don’t
know if that thing would be a painter or
not, we place the X right on the line that
divides the overlap.

9-20
 Example with an invalid argument.
1. All painters are artists.
2. Some magicians are
artists.
3. So, some magicians
are painters.
Since we already know that the rest of the
overlap between Magicians and Painters
is empty, in order for the conclusion to be
true, there would need to be an “X” in the
middle overlap—where the “?” is. But the
first two premises don’t give us enough
information to know if the “X” goes there or
not. So the argument is invalid.

9-21
Step by Step
 For step by step instructions on using Venn
Diagrams to Test the Validity of Categorical
Syllogisms, see p. 257-258.

9-22