Categorical Syllogism Flashcards

1
Q

Around 350 BCE, Aristotle developed syllogisms in their
original form in his work entitled

A

Analytica Priora.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

represent the earliest branch of formal logic.

A

Syllogisms

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

is the formal analysis of logical terms and operators and the structures that make it
possible to infer true conclusions from given premises.

A

A syllogism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

is an argument that has three categorical propositions.

A

A categorical syllogism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

is a form of deductive reasoning consisting of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion.

A

Syllogism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

It has three categorical terms: major, minor, and middle terms.

A

categorical syllogism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

The predicate of the conclusion; subject or predicate of one of the two premises

A

MAJOR TERM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Subject of the conclusion; subject or predicate of one of the two premises

A

MINOR TERM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Often found in the two premises (can be subject or predicate), which serves to link them with each other

A

MIDDLE TERM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

The major premise contains the major term while the minor premise contains the minor term.
tf

A

true

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

is the arrangement of terms in the argument or syllogism.

A

Figure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

It can be easily identified with the location of the middle term.

A

figure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

There are four figures because there are two premises and two possible positions in each premise.

A

true

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

depends upon the type of categorical propositions that consist a categorical syllogism (A, E, I or O)

A

mood

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

It is a list of the types beginning with the major premise and ending with the conclusion.

A

mood

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Every categorical proposition contains a subject and a predicate term that belong into different quantities: this can be referring to all members of a class, a portion, or none at all.

A

distribution

17
Q

is an attribute that describes the relationship between a categorical proposition and its terms, whether or not the proposition makes a statement about every member of the class represented by a given term.

A

Distribution

18
Q

A syllogism can be validated by looking on the mood and figure of the syllogism itself.

19
Q

Syllogistic rules are formulated so that errors in making syllogism would be noted in case that there are violations.

20
Q

Each of the rules may be concerned in terms of distribution, copula (on negation), and quantity.

21
Q

If there are four terms in a categorical syllogism, it commits the

A

Fallacy of Four Terms, or Fallacy of Ambiguous Middle

22
Q

If the middle terms are left undistributed, it commits the

A

Fallacy of Undistributed Middle

23
Q

If the term is undistributed in the premise yet distributed in the conclusion, the latter says more about the term than the premises did.

A

fallacy of illicit processs

24
Q

Two negative premises deny class inclusion, thus cannot yield linkage towards the conclusion.

A

This commits the Fallacy of Exclusive Premises.

25
A syllogism containing a negative premise should always have a negative conclusion and not an affirmative one.
true
26
In the Boolean interpretation of categorical propositions, universal propositions (A & E) have no existential import.
RULE 6: FROM TWO UNIVERSAL PREMISES, NO PARTICULAR CONCLUSION MAY BE DRAWN
27
If the premises of an argument do not assert the existence of anything at all, the conclusion will be unwarranted when the existence of some thing may be inferred.
(Existential Fallacy)