(F) Lesson 7: Categorical Syllogism Flashcards
When did Aristotle develop syllogisms in their original form?
350 BCE
What was the name of Aristotle’s original work where they developed syllogisms?
Analytica priora
Represent the earliest branch of formal logic
Syllogisms
The formal analysis of logical terms and operators and the structures that make it possible to infer true conclusions from given premises
Syllogisms
A categorical syllogism has ____ categorical propositions
Three
An argument that has three categorical propositions
Categorical syllogism
A form of deductive reasoning consisting of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion
Syllogism
Three compositions of a syllogism
Major premise, minor premise, conclusion
The predicate of the conclusion
Major Term
Subject or predicate of one of the two premises
Major Term
The subject of the conclusion
Minor Term
Subject or predicate of one of the two premises
Minor Term
Often found in the two premises (can be the subject or the predicate), which serves to link them with each other
Middle Term
The major premise contains the?
Major Term
The minor premise contains the?
Minor Term
The ____ should never be in the conclusion, only in the premise.
Middle Term
The arrangement of terms in the argument or syllogism
Figure
Figure can be easily identified with the location of?
the Middle Term
What are the four figures of categorical syllogism?
Figure 1: Sub-Pre
Figure 2: Pre-Pre
Figure 3: Sub-Sub
Figure 4: Pre-Sub
Teh, review-hin mo na ‘to please.
Depends upon the type of a categorical proposition that consist a categorical syllogism
Mood
A list of the types beginning with the major premise and ending with the conclusion
Mood
Based on their quantity (universal or particular) and its copula (affirmative or negative)
Mood
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
Distribution
____ of the proposition dictates the distribution of the subject
Quantity
Universals ____ while particulars ___
Distribution of Terms
Universals distribute, particulars do not
____ of the proposition dictates the distribution of the predicate
Quality
Negatives ____, affirmatives ____
Distribution of Terms
Negatives distribute, affirmatives do not
Syllogism can be validated by looking on the ____ and ____ of the syllogism itself
Mood and Figure
How many possible syllogism forms can there be?
256
These are formulated so that errors in making syllogism would be noted in case that there are violations
Syllogistic Rules
What are the six syllogistic rules?
Teh, review-hin mo ‘to isa-isa pls.
- Rule 1: Avoid 4 Terms (Fallacy of Four Terms/Ambiguous Middle)
- Rule 2: Distribute the Middle Term in at least 1 Premise (Fallacy of Undistributed Middle)
- Rule 3: Any Term Distributed in the Conclusion must be Distributed in the Premises (Fallacy of Illicit Process)
- Rule 4: Avoid Negative Premises (Fallacy of Exclusive Premises)
- Rule 5: If Either Premise is Negative, the Conclusion must be Negative.
- Rule 6: From Two Universal Premises, No Particular Conclusion may be Drawn (Existential Fallacy)
Name the Fallacy
If this is done, the latter says more about the term than the premises did
Rule 3: Any Term Distributed in the Conclusion must be Distributed in the Premises (Fallacy of Illicit Process)
Name the Fallacy
Major term is undistributed
Fallacy of Illicit Major (Rule 3)
Name the Fallacy
Minor term is undistributed
Fallacy of Illicit Minor
Name the Fallacy
Two negative premises deny class inclusion thus cannot yield a linkage towards the conclusion
Rule 4: Avoid Negative Premises (Fallacy of Exclusive Premises)
Name the Fallacy
There should be no affirmative conclusions as well with two negative premises
Rule 4: Avoid Negative Premises (Fallacy of Exclusive Premises)
Name the Fallacy
A negative premsie must always have a negative conclusion, not an affirmative one.
Rule 5: If Either Premise is Negative, the Conclusion must be Negative.
Name the Fallacy
If the premises of an argument do not assert the existence of anything at all, the conclusion should be unwarranted when the existence of something may be inferred
Rule 6: From Two Universal Premises, No Particular Conclusion may be Drawn (Existential Fallacy)
