CHAPTER V: REASONING
THE NOBLEST ACT OF THE MIND
Reasoning
Reasoning
• the third act of the mind and the highest
level in the mental operation. It is called
inference, which is defined as the
“Mental Operation through which the
mind arrives at a new judgement by
means of previously known judgement”
Two Basic Parts of Inference
• Premise/s- the previously known
judgements
• Conclusion- the new judgement coming
from other judgement.
There are two types of inference:
Immediate and Mediate
Immediate Inference
- which the mind proceeds directly
(without a medium or a middle term or a
middle proposition) from one proposition
to another;
- it is a partial or complete re-expression
or reformulation of the very same truth
expressed in the original proposition.
Types of Immediate Inference
• Eduction or Equipollence/equivalence
of proposition
- a method of rendering in another way the
same fundamental truth in a given
proposition.
- it is a judgement or a statement that re-
expresses the idea given by original proposition.
Example:
• Eat all you can; - Proposition
• Eat as long as you can – New
Proposition
Conversion
- restating the truth of the proposition
by interchanging the subject and the
predicate of the original proposition
without over extending the quantity of
either of the terms.
• Convertend - the original proposition to
be coverted
• Converse- the resulting restatement
Its steps are:
• Interchange the subject and the predicate
• Do not change the quantity
• Do not extend any term
Types of Conversion
• Simple Conversion- it takes place when the
quantity of the original proposition remains unchanged in
converse. This simple conversion is from:
I to I: Some teacher are considerate people; therefore, some
considerate people are teachers.
E to E: No adult person is an infant; therefore, no infant is an adult
person.
A to A: (if the predicate is the definition of the subject of convertend
and if they are interchangeable.)
-A triangle is a three-sided figure; therefore; a three sided figure
is a triangle.
-Mr. Lou Hualda is our Logic Teacher; therefore, our teacher
in logic is Mr. Lou Hualda.
• Partial (Accidental) Conversion- it
happens when the quantity of the original
proposition is change in the converse.
A to I: Every dog is an animal; therefore,
some animals are dogs.
E to O: No tamarraw is a two legged
animal; therefore, some two-legged animals
are not tamarraws.
Obversion
a method of re-expressing truth by
changing the quality of the copula so that
the affirmative is rendered negative and the
negative is rendered affirmative.
• Obvertend- original proposition
• Obverse- the resulting restatement
It involves the following steps:
• Retain its subject and its quantity
• Change the copula/quality
• Put the contrary or contradictory of the original predicate.
All the categorical forms may be observed in the following
manner:
• A to E: Every man is mortal; therefore, no man is
immortal
• E to A: You are not bad; therefore, you are good
• I to O: Few men are weak; ergo, few men are strong
• O to I: Not all days are bright; ergo, some days are dark
Note on Contradictory Terms and
Contrary Terms
• Contradictory Terms- terms that belong to different
genuses or classes. According to Andrew Bachhuber
(1987), these are the simple negation of others.
• Contrary Terms- terms that belong to the same genus,
but are opposite within genus. They “differ from one
another as much as possible within that genus”-
Bachhuber (1987)
Two types of Contrary terms: Immediate and Mediate.
Contraposition
- A combination of conversion and obversion. It has an interchangeable subject and
predicate (like conversion), and it represents contradictories of terms (like
obversion).
It has two types: Simple and Complete.
Simple:
The steps are:
Proposition New Proposition
Subject -use the contradictory of predicate
Copula -Change
Predicate -Put the original subject
Complete:
The steps are:
Proposition New Proposition
Subject -use the contradictory of predicate
Copula -Do not change
Predicate -use the contadictory subject
Inversion
The opposite of obversion for it uses the contradictory of the original subject
unlike in obversion which uses the contradictory predicate of the original
proposition.
It has two types: Simple and Complete
Simple:
The steps are:
Proposition New Proposition
Subject -use the contradictory of predicate
Copula -Change
Predicate -Put the original subject
Complete:
The steps are:
Proposition New Proposition
Subject -use the contradictory of predicate
Copula -Do not change
Predicate -use the contadictory subject
Square of
Opposition
CONTRADICTORIES
LAW OF CONTRADICTORIES
1. If one is true then the other one is false.
2. If one is false then the other one is true.
3. If one is doubtful then the other one is also doubtful.
A O E I
T F T F
F T F T
Examples:
• A – O: Because it is true that every newspaper is a
reading material, it is false that some newspapers are
not reading materials.
• O – A: Because it is true that some BPSC staff are not
Catholics, it is false that every BPSC staff is a Catholic.
• E – I: Because it is true that no Dalmatian is a cat, it is false
that some Dalmatians are cats.
• I – E: Because it is true that some religious priests are
CICM, it is false that no religious priest is a CICM.
• A – O: Because it is doubtful that every Martian is friendly, it
is also doubtful that some of them are not friendly.
CONTRARIES
LAW OF CONTRARIES
1. If one is true then the other one is false.
2. If one is false then the other one is doubtful.
A E E A
T F T F
F ? F ?
Examples:
• A – E:Because it is true that every jeep is a vehicle,
it is false that no jeep is a vehicle.
• A – E: Because it is false that every circle is a non –
sided figure, it is doubtful that no circle is a
non – sided figure.
SUBCONTRARIES
LAW OF SUBCONTRARIES
1. If one is false then the other one is true.
2. If one is true then the other one is doubtful.
I O O I
F T F T
T ? T ?
Examples:
• I – O: Because it is false that some Catholic are
Protestants, it is true that some Catholics are
not Protestants.
• I – O: Because it is true that some doctors are
negligent, it is doubtful that some doctors are
not negligent.
• O – I: Because it is false that some women are not
politicians, it is true that some women are
politicians.
SUBALTERN
LAW OF SUBALTERN
1. If the universal is true then the particular is true.
2. If the universal is false then the particular is
doubtful.
3. If the particular is true then the universal is
doubtful.
4. If the particular is false then the universal is false.
A/E I/O I/O A/E
T T T ?
F ? F F
Examples:
• A – I: Because it is true that every newspaper is a
reading material, it is true that some newspapers
are reading materials.
• O – E: Because it is true that some UB staff are not
Catholics, it is doubtful that no UB staff is a Catholic.
• I – A: Because it is false that some carabaos are not native
to the Philippines, it is doubtful that no carabaos is
native to the Philippines.
• E – O: Because it is false that no dark cloud is sign of rain, it
is doubtful that some dark clouds are not signs of
rain.
MEDIATE
INFERENCE
/
SYLLOGISM
CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
• is a syllogism in which the propositions are all
categorical.
it is a complex logical unit made up of terms and
propositions.
Aristotle defined syllogism as a “Propositional
expressionin which for certain things which have been
laid down (premises), something other than what has
been laid down follows of necessity from being so
(conclusion).”
BASIC PROPOSITIONS IN A CATEGORICAL
SYLLOGISM
1. Major Premise- the premise which contains the
major term. Generally, this premise has greater
extension than other proposition of syllogism.
2. Minor Premise- the premise which contain the
minor term.
Usually, this is the second proposition and is
preceded by the conjunction but.
3. Conclusion- the last proposition which has
been necessarily derived from the premises.
BASIC TERMS IN A CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
1. Major Term- it is the predicate of conclusion and is found
in the major promise.It is usually designated by “P” which
means the predicate of conclusion.
2. Minor Term- it is the subject of the conclusion and is found
in the minor promise.It is usually designated by “S” which
means the subject of the conclusion.
3. Middle Term- it is the term which is found in the two
premises but not in the conclusion.It provides the
connection between the two premises so that the mind may
proceed and form a conclusion derived from the two
premises.Without this medium, there would be no
connection from the premise to another, and thus
impossible to formulate a conclusion.It uses the symbol
“M”.
Example: M P
Every BPSC student is a human being. -------Major
Premise
S M
Mylene is a BPSC student. ------------------Minor
Premise
S P
Therefore, Mylene is a human being.
---------------Conclusion
The major term here is human being since it is the
predicate of the conclusion. The minor is Mylene for it is
the subject of the conclusion. The middle term is the
BPSC student for it is seen in the two premises.
RULES GOVERNING THE
VALIDITY OF CATEGORICAL
SYLLOGISM
Making a good argument is not just putting all the essential
propositions together. One has to follow the rules in order
that the syllogism and ultimately, the argument that it
signifies, will be valid. Otherwise, the syllogism is
fallacious or erroneous.
RULES OF TERMS
Rule No. 1. There must only be three terms. No more, no
less.
Example: Every man is a sinner.
But Pope is a man.
Therefore, Pope is a sinner.
In this syllogism, there are only three terms, “sinner” the
minor term “Pope” and the middle term “man”.
FALLACIES COMMITED ON THIS
RULE
Fallacy of Four Terms or Five Terms
-it is committed when there are more than three terms
which are evident in the syllogism.
Example: Every man is a sinner.
But Pope John Paul II is a man.
Therefore, the parish priest is a sinner.
There are actually four terms in this syllogism: man,
sinner, pope, and the parish priest. Thus, the above
syllogism is invalid or fallacious. The same thing
with a syllogism having five terms.
Example: Every man is a sinner.
But Pope is a man.
Therefore, the parish priest is deceitful.
Fallacy of Equivocation
-it is committed when the term applied to one proposition has a
different meaning as applied to the other proposition in the syllogism.
Example: Every pen is an instrument for writing.
But a pen is an enclosure for pigs.
Therefore, every enclosure for pigs is an instrument for writing.
Fallacy of Ampisiholy
-it is committed when there is the use of analogous terms.
Example: God is love!
But love is blind.
Therefore, God is blind.
Obviously, God is not blind for he is perfect. Furthermore, aside from
being materially false, the syllogism is formally invalid. Notice the
term love in this first premise has been used in the different context
compared to hte second love.
Rule No. 2. The major term cannot become universal in
the conclusion unless it is universal in the premise.
Example: Every plant is a living thing.
Stones are not living things.
Therefore, stones are not plants.
Fallacy Committed in this Rule
Fallacy of Illicit Major
Example: All cats are mammals. - particular
But no dogs are cats.
Therefore, no dogs are mammals. - universal
Rule No. 3. The minor term cannot become universal in hte
conclusion unless it is universal in the premise.
Example: All singers are musicians.
But every musician is an artist.
Therefore, all singers are artists.
Fallacy Committed on this Rule
Fallacy of Illicit Middle Term
Example: All cats are animals.
But no dogs are cats.
Therefore, no cats are mammals.
Rule No. 5. The middle term must be universal at the least
once.
A voilation of the rule occurs only when the middle term is
particular in both premises. No violation occurs when it is
universal in both premises or particular in one premise and
universal in the other.
Fallacy Committed in this Rule
Fallacy of Undistributed Middle Term
Example: The earth is a planet.
But the Mars is a planet.
Therefore, the Earth is Mars.
Notice: The quantity of the middle term
RULES IN THE QUANTITY OF PROPOSITIONS
Rule No. 6. If both premises are affirmative, the
conclusion must also be affirmative.
If two things are both identical with one and the same
thing, the two things are also identical with one another.
Fallacy Committed on this Rule
Fallacy on negative Conclusion
Example: Labanus is a fruit.
But all fruit are delicious.
Therefore, Labanus is not delicious.
Rule No. 7. If one premise is affirmative and the other premise is
negative, the conclusion is negative.
An affirmative premise unites the middle term with either the major or
minor term, while the negative premise separates the middle term from
either the major or the minor term. However, two terms of which one is
identical with the middle term and the one which differ with the same
term, cannot be identical with each other.Thus, the conclusion must
express the non-identity by means of a negative conclusion.
Fallacy Committed in this Rule
Fallacy of Affirmative Conclusion
Example: All insects are not carnivores.
But all birds are carnovores.
Therefore, all birds are insects.
Rule No. 8. If both premises are negative, no conclusion
follows.
There is nothing to learn from the non-relationship of the
terms with one another.
Fallacy Committed in this Rule
Fallacy on Negative Premises
Example: Some insects are not flies.
But some insects are not grasshoppers.
Therefore, some grasshoppers are not flies.
RULES ON THE QUANTITY OF PROPOSITIONS
Rule No. 9. Atleast one of the premises must be
unuversal. If both premises are particular, then no
conclusion follows.
Fallacy Committed on this Rule
Fallacy of Two Particular Premises
Example: Some animals are ducks.
Some animals are penguins.
Therefore, some penguins are ducks.
Rule No. 10. If one premise is universal and the other is
particular, the conclusion must be particular.
Fallacy Committed on this Rule
Fallacy of Universal Conclusion
Example: Some insects are not grasshoppers.
But all insects are small.
Therefore, all grasshoppers are small.
FIGURE AND
MOOD OF
CATEGORICAL
SYLLOGISM
Figure
The arrangement of the middle term in the
premises.
Mood
Classification of the two premises and
conclusion as A , E , I and O
Example
FIGURE SYLLOGISM MOOD
MP All M is P A
SM But all S is M A
SM Therefore all S is P A
Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 1 Figure 1
(Sub – Pre) (Pre – Pre) (Sub – Sub) (Pre – Sub)
MP PM MP PM
SM SM MS MS
SP SP SP SP
SPECIAL RULES FOR FIGURE 1
(Sub –Pre)
1. The minor premise must be affirmative – to avoid an illicit
major when the minor premise is made. Mu Pp Valid
Examples : Sp Mp
Every professional is well respected. Sp Pp
But some Balanga policemen are professionals
Therefore, some balanga policemen are well respected.
Our provinceis agricultural land.
Mu Pp Invalid
But no Samal is a province.
Su Mp undistributed
Therefore, no Samal is an agricultural land. Sp Pp
Middle term
• The major premise must be universal – otherwise
violation of undistributed middle term will be
committed.
Examples :
Every Christian is a believer of God. Mu Pp Valid
But every Catholic is a Christian. Sp Mp
Therefore, Every Catholic is believer of God. Su Pp
Some animals are tameable.
But all mammals are animals. Mp Pp Invalid
Therefore, some mammals are tameable Su Mp undistributed
Middle term
Sp Pp
VALID MOODS FOR FIGURE 1 (SUB – Pre)
1. AAA – BARBARA
A – Every free man is responsible for his act.
A – But all adults are free men.
A – Therefore, all adults arfe responsible for their acts.
2. EAE CELARENT
E – No greedy person is considerate.
A – But all ambitious person are greedy.
E – Therefore , no ambitious person is considerate.
3. AII - DARII
A – All talkative individuals are narrow mindes.
I – But some men are talkative individuals.
I - Therefore , some men are narrow minded.
4. EIO – FERIO
E – No virtuos act is evil.
I – But some punishment are virtuous acts.
O – Therefore, some punishments aref not evil.
SPECIAL RULES FOR FIGURE 2
( Pre - Pre)
1. One premise must be negative to avoid the fallacy of
undistributed middle term.
Examples: Pu Pp Valid
All physician are doctors. Su Mu
But Joe is not a doctor. Su Pu
Therefore, Joe is not a physician.
All men are mortal. Mu Pp Invalid
Su Mp undistributed
But dogs are mortal. Middle term
Su Pp
therefore, all dogs are men.
2. The major premise must be universal otherwise
violation of illicit major term will be committed.
Examples :
All books are reading materials.
But TV is not a reading material. Pu Pp Valid
Su Mu
Therefore, TV is not a book.
Su Pu
Some Filipinos are American citizens.
But no Japanese is an American citizen.
Thus no Japanese is a Filipino. Pp Mp Invalid
Su Mu Illicit
Major
Su Pu
Valid moods for figure 2 (Pre - Pre)
1. EAE – CESARE
E – No virtuous act is mean.
A – But all selfish acts are mean.
E – therefore, no selfish act is virtuous act.
2. AEE – CAMESTRE
A – All circumspection is prudent.
E – But no precipitation is prudent.
E – Therefore, no precipitation is a circumspection.
3. EIO – FESTINO
E – No angel is man.
I – But some animals are men.
O – Therefore, some men are not vain.
4. AOO – BAROCO
A – All vain people are proud
O – But some men are not proud
O – Therefore , some men are not vain.
Special rules for figure 3
( Sub- Sub)
1. The minor premise must be affirmative - to avoid
the fallacy of illicit major.
Examples:
Some endangered species are protected. Mp Pp Valid
But all endangered species are animal. Mu Sp
Therefore, some animals are protected. Sp Pp
All martyrs are saints Mp Pp Valid
But no martyr is a coward. Mu Sp
Sp Pp
Therefore, no coward is a saint.
2. The conclusion must be particular. If not, the
violation of this rule gives rises to the fallacy of illicit
minor.
Examples:
Some congressman are not famous, Mp Pu Valid
But all congressman are rich. Mu Sp
Therefore, some rich men are not famous. Sp Pu
Every strong typhoon is disastrous. Mp Pp Invalid
Mu Sp
But all strong typhoons are natural
Sp Pp
occurrences.
Therefore, all natural occurrences
are disastrous.
Valid moods for figure 3
( Sub - Sub)
1. AAI – DARAPTI
A – All talented musicians are emotional.
A – But all talented musician are artist.
A – Therefore, some artist are emotional
2. IAI – DISAMIS
I – Some greedy men are users.
A – But all greedy men are stoned – hearted man.
I – Therefore, some stone – hearted men greedy.
3. AII – DATISI
A – All heroes are brave.
I – But some heroes are women.
I - Therefore, some women are brave.
4. EAO – FELAPTON
E – No traitor is loyal.
A – But every loyal (person) is brave.
O – Therefore, not all brave (persons) are traitors.
5. OAO – BOCARDO
O – Some lawyers are not honest persons.
A – But all lawyers are not professionals.
O – Therefore, some professionals are not honest.
6. EIO – FERISON
E – No reckless man is prudent.
I – But all lawyers are professionals.
O – Therefore, some brave men are not prudent.
SPECIAL RULES IN FIGURE 4 (Pre - Sub)
1. If the major premise is affirmative, the minor premise must be
universal to ensure the avoidance of the fallacy of the undistributed
middle term.
Examples :
All Aetas are natives.
But some natives are Filipinos, Pu Mp Invalid
Therefore, some Filipinos are Aetas. MP Sp undistributed
Middle term
Sp Pp
Some diligent men are minors. Pp Mp Invalid
But all minors are young people. Mu Sp
Therefore, some young people are diligent. Sp Pp
2. If the minor premise is affirmative. The
conclusion must be particular. Otherwise,
violation of illicit minor term will be committed.
Examples:
All religious are celibates. Pu Mp Invalid
But all celibates are blessed persons. Mu Sp Illicit
Therefore, every blessed person is religious. Su Pu
minor
All movies are innovative.
But all which are innovative are profitable Pu Mp Valid
things. Mu Sp
Therefore, some profitable things are movies. Sp Pp
3. If one of the premise is negative, the major premise must be universal
– the third rule aims to avoid the illicit process of the major term
since it is the subject in the major premise and the predicate in the
conclusion, if one premise is negative, the conclusion must also be
negative. Now if the major premise is not universal, consequentlyits
subject , which is the major term, is particular. This leads to the illicit
process of the major term.
Examples: Pp Mp Invalid
Some carnivorous animals are lions. Mu Su Illicit
But no lion is herbivorous creature. Su Pu process of
major term
Therefore, no herbivorous creature
are carnivorous animals.
Pu Mu Valid
Mp Sp
All law abiders are not bad citizens.
Sp Pu
But some bad citizens are cops.
Therefore, some copes are not law abiders.
VALID MOODS FOR FIGURE 4
(Sub - Sub)
1. AAI – BRAMANTIP
A – All whales are mammals.
A – But all mammals are warm – blooded animals.
I – Therefore, some warm – blooded animals.
2. AEE – CAMENES
A – All mammals are warm – blooded animals.
E – But no warm – blooded animals are reptiles.
E – Therefore, no reptiles are mammals.
HYPOTHETICAL
SYLLOGISM
- is one wherein the major
premise is a hypothetical
proposition, and the minor
premise and conclusion are
categorical propositions.
TYPES OF HYPOTHETICAL
PROPOSITIONS
• CONDITIONAL SYLLOGISM
- one whose major premise is a conditional
proposition and whose minor premise and
conclusion are categorical propositions. It
consists of the antecedent and the consequent for
the truth of the hypothetical judgment lies in the
truth of dependence between the two clauses, the
antecedent (cause) and the consequent (effect).
Major premise – If it will rain,
then the grass will be
wet.
Minor premise – It rains.
Conclusion – ∴The grass is
wet.
VALID MOODS OF A
CONDITIONAL SYLLOGISM
1. Modus Ponens
– the truth of the antecedent implies
the truth of the consequence. The
fulfillment of the condition implies the
occurrence of the consequent.
- also known as positing mood (assert)
or the empirical conditional constructive
syllogism.
Valid mood (accepting the antecedent)
If A is B, then X is Y.
But A is B.
∴ X is Y.
A violation of this rule results to the
fallacy of rejecting the antecedent which is
committed when the antecedent is rejected in the
minor premise.
Invalid mood (rejecting the antecedent)
If a person has cancer, then he is seriously ill.
Mang Kiko is not sick of cancer.
∴ Mang Kiko is not seriously ill.
2. Modus Tollens – the falsity of the
antecedent implies the falsity of the
consequent. If the consequent is rejected in
the minor premise, the antecedent must also
be rejected in the conclusion.
- also known as sublating mood or
empirical conditional destructive syllogism.
Valid mood (rejecting the consequent)
If A is B, then X is Y.
But X is not Y.
∴ A is not B.
• DISJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
- the major premise is a
disjunctive proposition and the minor
premise and conclusion are
categorical propositions. It is an
“either or” statement.
Political candidates are either honest
or corrupt.
Political candidates are corrupt.
∴ They are not honest.
MOODS OF THE DISJUNCTIVE
SYLLOGISM
Complete Disjunctive – parts contradict each other.
VALID MOODS ARE POSSIBLE
1. Ponendo Tollens – positing mood (accept or
affirm), minor premise affirms one of the
alternatives of the major premise and the conclusion
denies the other.
The criminal is either dead or alive.
But he is alive.
∴ He is not dead.
2. Tollendo Ponens – sublating mood
(sublate or negative), minor premises
deny the alternative of the major premise
and the conclusion affirms the other.
Armand is either a liberated or a
conservative person.
But he is liberated.
∴ He is not a conservative person.
• CONJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
- the major premise is a
conjunctive proposition (one that denies
that the two choices can be true at the same
time) and that the main premise and the
conclusions are categorical propositions.
Our system of government cannot be either
presidential or parliamentary.
But it is presidential.
∴ It is not parliamentary.
1. Ponendo Tollens – positing one
conjunct in the minor and sublating the
other in the conclusion.
I cannot be in Zambales and Manila at
the same time.
I am in Zambales. (posited)
∴ I am not in Manila. (sublated)
