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
