PREFACE

The complexity on human relationships and affairs demands that we think critically,
responsively, and creatively in order to maintain the momentum of development in all spheres of
our civil and religious life. To address these life predicaments, logic is a conventional tool in
acquiring the relevant skills for sound and effective thinking, especially in the area of reasoning,
and in instilling a sensitivity for the nuances of language which is indispensable to clear, correct
and meaningful conversation. This workbook is a humble contribution to the realization of this
endeavour.

In this world of the academe, the need to train students how to think and reason out
correctly and critically is urgent considering the fast and massive development of technology and
the unimaginable expansion of information which make it imperative to innovate for new ways
of organizing concepts and ideas brought about by the advancement of science. With the
foregoing observation, this workbook is conceived and is intended to serve as a guide in the
collegiate level as a modest and responsive contribution to the need for a convenient workbook
in logic primarily for college freshmen and sophomores. As such, an easy and simple
presentation is adopted.

This workbook provides numerous contemporary examples extensively and practical

exercises in order to expose the students to actual situations and help them apply the principles
they have learned. It also opens for students the opportunity to participate directly in problem
solving such as identifying sound and/or invalid arguments. The book is far from perfection but
it will certainly promote the critical thinking of students and offers them relevant experiences to
face real life challenges. Hence, to best serve the students, this workbook will be revised and
improved after two consecutive years of use.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Philosophy and its Nature

Philosophy is traditionally defined in two fashions. Etymologically, philosophy comes

from the two Greek words philos means “love” and Sophia, “wisdom.” So literally, philosophy is
the “love of wisdom.”
Classically, on the other hand, philosophy deals on investigating the real essence and the
ultimate causes of things. It searches on all things and probes the depth into the nature of reality.
Both the etymological and classical definitions show that philosophy is an investigation
through constant inquiry, curiosity, and wonder. It is not only concerned with questions, it also
verifies the answers to questions raised. With these reasons, philosophers are indeed “lovers of
wisdom.”
Nevertheless, wisdom which all philosophers are concerned with is not a mere and simple
knowledge. Hence, for knowledge, it only answers the questions of “what’s” but does not clarify
the questions of “why’s.” A human is an intelligent being who is knowledgeable, who knows
what he/she is doing, so human may know many things but may not necessarily be wise. For a
human being who is characterized by wisdom probes instead more on the answers of “why”
questions rather than the “what” questions. Furthermore, the quest to answer why brings two
great significant inquiries of the mind: the reason for doing it and the purpose for doing it. A
wise human being therefore tries to understand his/her thoughts and actions. To this, Socrates
remarked that “the unexamined life is not worth living.”
Philosophy, therefore, is a wise human activity, an activity of inquiry. Because of that,
philosophy differs from other disciplines like biology, medicine or theology for it seeks to
uncover the ultimate causes of things while the other disciplines are only concerned with
knowing the immediate and proximate meaning of things. Although these bodies of knowledge
also deal with real beings, they do not carry on their search on knowledge beyond their
immediate or proximate reasons. Their goals are merely to describe contingent reality in terms of
its empirical features. Philosophy, on the other hand, is not only contented to know or describe,
but to find the ultimate explanation or cause of the actual existence of reality. For instance,
philosophers are not just satisfied at knowing who they thought they are, but ultimately to know
why they are philosophers.
Since philosophy has primarily to search for the ultimate purpose of things,
philosophizing is a challenging task. It requires that if one reasons out, it has to be critical,
consistent and careful about conventional beliefs and assumptions which are unreasonably
accepted and are reluctantly contested of their veracity. A philosopher confronts everything –
common beliefs, traditional statements, unverified theories, and hypotheses. Philosophy likewise
verifies its own theories and conclusions. It emphasizes on subsequent inquiries and analyses
rather than on the formation of mere personal beliefs or personal philosophy. The intellectual
demand by philosophy is rigid. It is a preference between becoming wise or just be one of the
intellectuals.
Although philosophy discipline is rigid as it requires continuous use of reason, this,
however, postulates independent thinking, that is to say, the freedom of being able to make
judgments and decisions for oneself through the aid of sound and correct reason. It also moulds
one to become intellectually sufficient, without having to rely with someone else to influence
one to having the right decision. Life is live critically and responsively only by one with an
independent mind.
Philosophy is an interactive discipline to various sciences into a coherent whole. Hence,
it is incorrect to say that philosophy alone is useless. It may not provide all the ultimate answers
to make life more meaningful, but it can help in the understanding and in the appreciation of life.

History of Philosophy

The definition just examined regarding philosophy exposes what, how and where it
begins.
Humanity has lived for thousands of years driven by a desire to understand their
experiences, thoughts, actions, environment and the other human beings. “All humans by nature
desire to know” (Aristotle).
The chronicle of philosophy is believed to have started in the late sixth century B.C. in
Greece, particularly in the region of Ionia. This period is known as the Cosmo centric or Pre-
Socratic age when philosophers were pre-occupied with rational solutions to certain fundamental
problems o mankind, asking questions about the nature of the cosmos (universe). They were
concerned with specific problem: What is the basic stuff of the cosmos? The three men who
attempted to answer this question were Thales (c.624-528 B.C.), Anaximander (c.610-545 B.C.),
and Anaximenes (fl. 585-328 B.C.). They are regarded as the first philosophers (Alba, et, al.,
1998).
Thales of Melitus had left no writings and all that is only accessible accounts about him
were fragmentary which made a later writers who were amused of Thales’ extraordinary
knowledge such as predicting the eclipse of the sun on May 28, 585 BC (Fieser & Stumpf, 2008).
Thales became famous during that due to his practical and general wisdom that introduced
fundamental thoughts of principles about the cosmos which made him earned the title as “first
Philosopher.” His principal contribution to philosophy was his inquiry on the fundamental nature
of reality by postulating a single substance, a universal stuff that holds the universe, water. It is
water which is the basic principle comprising the cosmos.
On the other hand, the ultimate cosmic matter, according to Anaximander consists of
Apeiron, the Boundless or the Infinite from which all this come. It is neither water or other
elements but the undetermined, indestructible and ever changing primary substance of being
(entire universal existence). Meanwhile, the third among the Milesian philosophers was
Anaximenes, a young associate of Anaximander. For him, the fundamental cause of the universe
is the air, the basic component of the cosmos which he proved and supported the principle of
condensation. These Milesian philosophers indeed proceeded with scientific inquiry through
reduction and raised the questions about the ultimate reasons of things and directly investigate
into what nature really consists of (Fieser & Stumpf, 2008).
Explicitly, it can be traced back in the history of philosophy that there are countless
questions which struck the probing minds of the philosophers. Question like: “What are the
differences, if any, between matter and organic life? Is there a soul or a God? How can things
change and yet remain the same things? What is the highest good for man to pursue? Answers to
these questions were also profoundly introduced by the Greek Triumvirate: Socrates (470-399
BC), Plato (427-347 B.CX and Aristotle (384-322 BC) (Alba et al.,1998).
First was Socrates, the great teacher of Plato who taught that the good means a virtuous
life due to our knowledge of the good. This determines of true happiness which involves good
actions, an action that in conformity with one’s real purpose in life: Thus, he said that “an
unexamined life is not worth living.”
On the other hand, Plato the most distinguishes student of Socrates, philosophized that
truth as the ultimate, ideal reality can be grasped by human intellect. It is the idea which consists
of the ultimate reality. The idea signifies the object’s permanent essence, a prototype to which
every particular object is a copy of the realms of ideas. This is elucidated in his Allegory of the
Cave.
Meanwhile, Aristotle is accorded the title of The Philosopher. He was the most gifted of
Plato’s students. He taught that truth is the agreement of knowledge with reality. On the good, he
emphasized that a life lived in moderation is what makes life good.
Subsequently thereafter, for the love of wisdom, philosophy has found its place in the
minds of the different philosophers.
Some fields of study which are regarded as philosophical sciences are:

Cosmology – the study on the nature of inanimate being(universe)

Ethics – study of the nature and morality of human acts

Social/ Political Philosophy – the study of man, his place in society, and existing relationship in
various social institutions

Theodicy – the study of the essence and existence of God based mainly on reason
Aesthetics – the study of beauty, its nature and appreciation

Rational/ Philosophical Psychology – the study of the life principle, particularly that of the
psychological aspect of man

Metaphysics – the study of being and its essence as being

Epistemology – the study on the certainty of human knowledge

Philosophy of Man – study on the nature and essence of human being and relationship his/her
own self, and with other human beings

Logic – the study of the nature of correct reasoning

The Nature of Logic

Logic is the study of reasoning soundly. It deals with the study of the methods and
principles which are used to distinguish from incorrect reasoning.
Logic is commonly defined also as the science and art of correct reasoning. It is a science
because it furnishes man with systematized body of knowledge guided by the principles and
rules of correct thinking. Logic is also an art because it involves the construction of valid and
true arguments with the least possible error (only if perfection is achievable). Although logic is a
branch of philosophy, it is not exclusively for philosophy. It has a universal function which can
be realized in all forms of human discourses.
Logic also postulates correctness which means that as a tool, it bridges the gap between
truth and absurdity of reality. Correct when the reasoning conforms to the truth of reality, while
incorrect if it is otherwise. Finally, thinking is the workshop of an intellectual mind. It is a mental
operation different from all other mental activities like recalling, memorizing, day dreaming,
imagining and among others. Thinking on the other hand is not a mere mental activity but an
operation leading into the attainment of truth or answer.
Logic is not an end for itself. It is an indispensable tool for one who would aim at
developing intellectual skills. With that, logic is not possible in a space without any subject
matter. It is only through contact with areas of other disciplines either natural or human science,
or any form of human activity that logic becomes significant.
Logic helps students to make valid arguments. It develops in particular, the habit of
critical thinking. It therefore, makes students who are intellectually independent and critical in
not constantly relying on anyone one for the “right answer.”
EXERCISES I

Fill in the Blank:

Write the correct word that will identify the sentence.

1. a term used to define the word philosophy based on its root word “ Philo ” –Lover and “
“Sophia “ – wisdom.

2. an ancient 6k. Philosopher who said that “ all human by nature desire to know.

3 the basic and fundamental question where the pre- socratic philosophers want to find an answer.

4. He earned the title as the “ First Philosopher.”

5. a Melesian Philosophers whose : AIR “ is the basic stuff and fundamental cause of the universe.

6. the Three known 6k. Triumvirate Philosophers.

7. it deals with the study of the methods and principles w/o one used to distinguish from incorrect
reasoning .

8. a branch of philosophy that deals with the study of the certainly of knowledge and its extent.

9 the date where in the Chronicle of philosophy is believed to have been started in Ionia , Greece.

10. an ancient 6k. Philosopher who said “ that “ unexamined life is not worth living. “
Chapter 2
SIMPLE APPREHENSION
The Generation of Ideas (first operation of the intellect)

“Human Being,” Aristotle wrote in his Metaphysics, “naturally desires to know.” Aside
from human’s natural inclination to know and understand the things around, Aristotle also
believed that they could arrive at a reasoned comprehension of the world (Pasigue & Sumabat,
1994). The Philosophers, Aristotle furthered, are committed to the claim that the world is in itself
intelligible – it is structured subject to rational inquiry and understanding. Thus the world and
human have co-naturality which makes the world understandable to human beings.

Although human is born with an intellect to explain the world, he is not born with
complete comprehension of it (world). This raises the question of how such an understanding is
to be acquired. However, the data which we begin to understand that is common to all human
beings is in part given by simple apprehension. Aristotle clearly stated that nothing can be known
but through experience, that knowledge is grounded in sense experience. “There is nothing in the
intellect,” he wrote, “that was not first in the senses.”
For Aristotle, a full understanding of what human beings have in common requires an
understanding of the essence of a human being, that is, the characteristics or qualities that make
an individual human being as a member of the group “human beings.” To understand the essence
of a human being is to grasp the principle that makes human beings as such. This principle is
reached in the process of inquiry; but it is first in the order of explaining that same principle. The
things perceived in the world are readily accessible, and can therefore initiate the process
towards understanding them; but these things are no self-explanatory. It is by understanding the
essence of something that may lead to no further explanation.

What Simple Apprehension Is

How does a man understand essence? How does he generate ideas? When does he form ideas? It
is only when he begins to explore external reality. It is the mind that generates ideas, and these ideas are
about material things outside the mind. When the mind grasps the essence of a thing without affirming or
denying what that thing is, that is the time when man forms ideas. This process is called simple
apprehension. In this process, the mind simply understands what the thing is. It simply grasps the
“quiddity” or the “whatness” or “essence” that makes what the thing is without saying something about
the object. The mind does not say, “That plant is tall,” but it simply grasps the meaning of the object
“tree.”

The Importance of the Senses

The mind is an immaterial faculty. External reality, however, is material. Thus, there seems to be
a problem here, for an immaterial power cannot directly know what that material is. There must be
connaturality between the subject knower and the object known, both must be of the same nature.
There has to be a bridge that links the immaterial to the material. The senses serve as the bridge.
Without having sensed the object, one cannot have an idea about that object. Without having seen a
beautiful object, nobody can have an idea about beauty. An idea is just like a photograph. There will only
be a photograph when the cameraman focuses his camera (loaded with film, of course) on someone and
clicks it. His image, then, may be captured on its film. When the film is developed, he will have his
photograph. After all, ideas or concepts are mental images or mental representations of extra-mental
reality; a picture or photograph of any object in extra-mental reality, captured not in film but in the mind
(Alba et al., 1998). Human senses serve as a vacuum cleaner so to say absorbing practically anything
without discrimination but unintelligently. But only the mind understands all sensible realities.

The Process of Simple Apprehension

Sensible data (external realities perceivable by the five senses) are presented to the five senses
(sight, hearing, touch, taste, smell) which collect the data according to the proper object of each sense,
i.e., the sense of sight – color; hearing – sound; etc.
Data gathered according to this mode are scattered and do not make real sense for the senses are
not intellectual enough to understand those which they grasp. Thus, the data gathered by these senses are
presented to the internal senses. The first of the internal senses that collate all apprehended realities to
form a perceptual whole is the precept.
Then it becomes the stimulus for the other internal senses – estimative sense, memory and
imagination, the product of which is the phantasm.
Then the active intelligent goes to work – it illumines the phantasm (image), and in the process, it
removes all the material characteristics (abstraction) clinging to it. After the phantasm has been cleansed
of its material elements, the active intellect presents its product to the passive intellect (mind) which
grasps the essence of the object without affirming and denying anything about the said object. The
product of the passive intellect is called the idea.

Definition of Idea

The term idea is drawn from a Greek word eidos, and image produced in the mind. Idea is formed
due to sense perception, a mental representation of the intelligible reality as they are understood by the
mind. This means that the mind has no discretion of its own to assign conventional meaning to the
perceived reality. Thus, the essence of reality is independent from the dictates of the mind; instead
realities are conceived with their implied meaning.

Qualities of Ideas (Babor, 2003)

1. Comprehension (connotation) refers to the total qualities or characteristics attributed to an idea.

e.g. man as rational, sensitive, living, material provides the sum total of man’s complete
characteristics

2. Extension refers to which the comprehension of idea is applicable to other individual or group.

e.g. Asian country, the characteristics of which are applied to all other countries like the
Philippines, China, Thailand among others

Kinds of Ideas

1. a. First intention, It is an idea that expresses objects not only as they are in the mind but also as they
are outside the mind. This kind of idea presents an object in the mind the same as it exist outside it, as
really it exist in reality. This kind of idea is not any object that may just exist in the mind or an object
resulting from imagination. This idea expresses a real thing, i.e. a being or an object that is found in extra-
mental reality.
e.g. Jose Rizal as in “Jose Rizal is a national hero.”
“Natural environment degradation is a global problem.”

b. Second Intention. It is an idea which expresses what a thing is according to the special mode of
existence that the thing has as it exists in the mind. This concept expresses mental existence of things that
exist as a result of being thought of.

e.g. Election as in “Election is the topic of the symposium.”

Mulawin as in, “Mulawin is a Filipino hero.”

The ideas Jose Rizal and Natural Environment are called first intention for they represent objects
of the mind found in reality. It is a fact that there is Jose Rizal as national hero and a natural environment
degradation challenging all world leaders.
On the other hand, “Election is the topic of symposium,” and “Mulawin is a hero,” “Election”
and “Mulawin” in both statements are not ideas in real existence, but subjects that exist only as a result of
being thought of.
This means that if an idea of the mind is presented as it really is in reality, it’s first intention, but
if the idea is presented not what it is really in reality, it’s a 2nd intention.

2. a. Concrete. It is an idea that expresses a form as inhering in a subject. There are two elements that are
involved here: a form and a subject.

e.g. beautiful landscape, bright student

Beautiful and brilliant imply the forms beauty and brilliance, while landscape and student are the
objects. Hence the form is meant the descriptive quality or attribute, while object is meant the owner of
those qualities or attributes.
“Beautiful” (form) without lanscape, (subject), is still concrete which seemingly an idea that can
stand alone, however, it does not really stand alone. It needs a subject to modify. Likewise, “student,”
without “brilliant” is concrete because it is implied that there is a form which modifies it. There is no
subject without any characteristic.
Concrete ideas are those which represent as an object together with their attributes.

b. Abstract. It is an idea that determines only which are not identified with a particular subject/object. It
means separated from its subject. All adjectives are abstract ideas.

e.g. beauty, brightness, humanity

“Beauty,” “brightness,” and humanity” are attributes which are separated from their material
subjects. They are forms which can stand alone without their respective subjects.

3. a. Absolute. It is an idea that expresses a thing as a substance or an independent reality. All

abstract ideas are also absolute ones.

e.g. Humanity as in, “ Humanity of Peter.”

Beauty as in, “Beauty of the planet Mars.”

b. Connotative. It is an idea which expresses an accident or quality inhering in a substance.

All adjectives are considered connotative
e.g. beautiful, brilliant

The same is true with nouns such as cook, dancer, janitor, for they connote accidental
quality other than the essential quality itself.

The idea “human” in the sentence “Sarah Geronimo is human” is absolute, for it refers to
as an essence of Sarah as human. But when Sarah sings so that she is called a singer, then the
idea becomes a connotation for what Sarah can do as a singer but not the actual expression of an
essential quality that clings to the essence of Sarah as human being.

4. a. Positive. It is an idea that implies what a thing is or what it has which postulates favourable
acceptance, recognition or acknowledgement from the agent (one who possess the idea).

e.g. being healthy, prosperity, rational being

b. negative. It is an idea which expresses a thing according to what it is not, or what the thing
lacks. These ideas may cause explicit rejection or dislike by the thinker.

e.g. death, failure, poverty

Other Classifications of Ideas (Babor, 2003)

5. Derivative Ideas are those which denote no form or subject, intangible idea as product of
intuition. Hence these are also considered as abstract ideas.

e.g. love, justice, freedom

6. Identical. These are two or more ideas possessing the same comprehension or extension.
Whereas, ideas with the same comprehension are formally identical like “car” and a
“vehicle,” while ideas with the same extension such as “Carmona Campus and Cavite State
University”

7. Different. These are non-identical ideas. Plants and stars are ideas that are absolutely not
identical. Plants are living creatures while stars are heavenly bodies. Different idea is also known
as contradictory idea for there is no common ground that associates them.

8. Associative. These are ideas which are mutually related like “solvent” and “liquid.”

There are two types of opposing ideas: the contrary and the contradictory.

Contrary ideas exclude each other but with other alternatives that may complement to
these ideas such as large and small where there are other sizes between them like medium, extra
small, etc.
Contradictory ideas absolutely exclude each other with no other ideas that can mend
between them such as virtue and vice. If a certain act is virtuous then it cannot be otherwise or a
vice action is in no time not a vice one.

10. Singular Ideas are those with comprehension but no possible extension of its own like
earth, Jose Rizal, Mindanao, etc.

11. Particular Ideas are deducted partially from universal idea as part of its extension. This
happens in order to exclude rationally parts that cannot be reasonably represented either by those
parts or the whole.
e.g. some people, most individuals, etc.

12. Universal Ideas are those that represent the entire object of the idea which denote all
possible extensions. e.g. animal, philosophy, government, etc.

13. Collective Ideas are those that signify many definite objects of idea but taken as single idea.

e.g. Crowd, jury, etc.

EXERCISES 2

1. Etymologically, Philo means love; Philo is:

a. second intention
b. first intention
c. negative
d. abstract

2. In the statement, “Antonio Luna’s painting is priceless,” “priceless” is:

a. absolute
b. positive
c. abstract
d. negative

3. An example of a positive idea is:

a. cheerful
b. late
c. weak
d. dark

4. An example of negative idea is:

a. lost
b. Moses
c. Einstein
d. Batman

5. In the statement, “Robin Padilla was an idealistic peacemaker,” Robin Padilla is:
a. connotative and concrete
b. first intention and abstract
c. negative
d. positive

6. In the statement, “Honest men are rare in politics,” Honest men is:
a. first intention and absolute
b. positive and second intention
c. connotative and concrete
d. negative and absolute

7. Examples of connotative ideas are:

a. tender, loving, caring
b. man, skillful, doctor
c. impulsive, reckless, driver
d. planets, moons, stars
8. Nurses care for their patients is:
a. associative
b. absolute
c. negative
d. positive

9. In the statement, “Poverty is man’s creation,” Poverty is:

a. collective
b. contrary
c. absolute
d. negative

10. Examples of identical ideas are:

a. brave and heroes
b. limitless and boundless
c. Good and evil
d. Big and small
EXERCISE 3

Write the correct that will identify the whole sentence.

1. It is called the first mental operation. .

2. It is the product of the passive intellect w/c grasps the essence of the object without cloying or
affirming it. .

3. It refers to the total qualities attribute to idea. .

4. It refers to w/c the comprehension of ideas is applicable to other individual or group

5. An idea that determines only w/c are not identified with a subject / object or it means
separated from its object. .

6. An idea that signify many definite object idea, but taken as a simple idea.
Ex: Faculty crowd. .

7. An idea with comprehension but no possible intention of its own.

Ex: Jesus Christ, Philippines. .

8. It is an idea that expresses what is not or explicit rejection or dislike by the thinker.

9. A kind of idea that expresses objects not only they are in the mind but also outside
the mind. .

10. Stated that “ there is nothing in the intellect , that has not first perceived by
the senses. .
TERMS: THE SENSIBLE MANIFESTATION OF IDEAS

In the discussion on idea, it was expressed that idea is a mental representation of reality
as the product of simple apprehension. It was also presented that the external world is understood
by the mind as to its inherent and independent nature. However, for an idea to have value and
understand its correlative meaning to which object it signifies, a sensible tool is imperative to
express ideas in order establish a smooth social engagement, the term.

Definition of Term

A term is a sensible representation of an idea. Since ideas are mental representations of

external objects, and since terms represent ideas, ultimately, terms are also representations of
extra-mental objects.

Term is a conventional sign. Conventional in the sense that term is an exclusive tool to
signify a particular idea.

Since a term represents an idea, there is a one to one correspondence between ideas and
terms. For every idea, there is also a corresponding term, i.e. for the idea “man,” there is also the
term “man.”

Furthermore, terms are also words. Words, however, are not necessarily terms. Thus,
there is no one to one correspondence between terms and words.

e.g. a tree (word) – tree (term) – tree (idea) – tree (object) – can stand with its own
meaning, it can be understood even if not used in a statement
“a” (word) – a (no term) – a (no idea) – a (no object)- no meaning of its own, but
supports term to be more meaningful

The article “a” is a word; but it is not a term, for there is no idea that the “a” word
represents. In turn, there is no object “a” to be represented by an idea. “Term” should not be
equated with “word.” They are not synonymous. However, all terms are words.

Properties of Terms

A term has two qualitative properties such as there are also two qualities of ideas:

a. Comprehension – It is the sum total of all the qualities which constitute the meaning of a
term. The comprehension of a term expresses the essence/total qualities of the object being
signified by the term.

e.g. The comprehension of “plant” is a living creature; “ball” is a material object;

“vehicle” is a mechanical device;” and “mammal animal” is sentient, etc.
b. Extension – Like what we have in idea, extension of term refers to all the individuals or
objects to which the comprehension of a term is also applicable.

e.g. The extension of the comprehension “living creature,” of plant is tree or grass, etc.;
“material object” for ball could be tennis ball, volley ball, etc.; and “sentient” for mammal could
be human being, whale, among others.

The Relationship between Comprehension and Extension

Comprehension and extension are inversely proportional. The greater is the

comprehension of a term, the lesser is its extension; the lesser its comprehension, the greater is
the extension.

EXTENSION
SUBSTANCE Substance, spirits, mineral, plants, brutes, men
BODY Material, substances, minerals, plants, brutes, men
ORGANISM Living, material, substances, plants, brutes, men
ANIMAL Sentient, living, material, substances, brutes, men
MAN Rational, sentient, living, material, substances, men
COMPREHENSION

In the above illustration, the comprehension substances have five extensions such as men,
brutes, plants, minerals, and spirits. As the element for its comprehension increases i.e.
“material, substance,” the elements in its extension decreased. Eventually, when there are five
elements for its comprehension such as rational, sentient, living material substances, the
elements in its extension was reduced to just one, “man.”

From the two discussed properties, terms can be classified into several modes:

According to Extension

1. Singular. The concept of singularity in logic applies only to definite individual or

group which is different from that in English. In logic, the concept of definiteness is important.
For a much easier identification, indicators of singularity are hereby provided:

a. the definite article “the”

e.g. the singer, the book
But this article may be employed as universal quantifier thru universal statement i.e.
“The earth is a planet.”

b. proper names (person, places, things)

e.g. Andres Bonifacio, Cubao, acasia

c. demonstrative pronouns/ adjectives(all words preceding are considered singular)

e.g. this house, that car, these buildings, those people

d. superlative adjectives (terms following are singular)

e.g. most illustrious fellow, best student

e. personal pronouns
e.g. he, her, we, our

2. Particular. It is a term that refers to an indefinite individuals or group of the whole.

Indicators for particular terms are the ff:

a. the use of the indefinite articles “a” or “an”

e.g. a senator, an apple

However, article “a” and “an” may also be used as universal quantifier in a sentences
having universal idea i.e. “A human being is a rational animal.” An elephant is a mammal” No
one can contest on the universality of these statements as to the idea.

b. the use of definite numbers

e.g. 10 little Indians

c. general propositions – propositions that are true in some instances but not in all
instances.
e.g.” Filipinos are hospitable.” “Women are gossip-mongers.” In these statements, there
are if not many some Filipino who do not show hospitality such as there are women who do not
gossip, in fact some men may do.

d. indefinite pronouns/ adjectives

e.g. some politicians; a few good men; several members

e. other modifiers like not all, most, almost all, not everybody, not everyone

3. Universal. It is a term which refers to all individuals signified by the term.

Indicators of universality are:

a. universal quantifiers
e.g. all members of the band, each student, any member, every, whoever, everyone,
everybody, no, whichever

b. universal ideas
e.g. Man is a rational animal.
A dog is an animal.

Certainly, it is not just one man or one dog that is being referred to here, but all of its
extension even if no universal quantifier is present.
c. articles the, a, an

Terms According to Exactness

Borne in the mind, it has three ways of understanding terms in the context of exactness.

1. Univocal. It is the used of term that is used in at least two occurrences yielding exactly the
same meaning in a given situation.
e.g. Paul is a man; John is a man. Man here is univocal for both implied the same
meaning in two instances.

2. Equivocal. It is a term that is used in at least two occurrences which are totally different in
meaning. This is the reason why, sometimes, a person means one thing, but is understood by
another differently.
e.g. I bend waiting at the bend of the road. The first bend refers to the angle of the body
while the other base in the curve of the road.

There are three ways by which a term may be equivocal:

a. In speech and in writing – i.e., when they have the same pronunciation and the same spelling.
e.g. ruler (leader/head); ruler (measuring device)
head (leader); head (part o9f the body)

b. In speech, but not in writing – i.e., when they have the same spelling but different in
pronunciation.
e.g. desert (dry land) desert (to abandon)
resume (to continue) resume (biodata)

3. Analogous – a term that expresses not entirely the same or different. There are similarities as
well as differences on the meanings. In English, it is known as figures of speech.

e.g. head of the family; my shining star

Notice how the terms head and star are used. Both are associated just with, but not in
exactly the same sense, nor in a totally different sense.

Terms According to Opposition

Terms may be classified as contradictory, contrary, and paradoxical.

a. Contradictory. As mentioned in the earlier discussion, these are terms that opposed each
other due to their different meaning in which they both absolutely deny each other.

e.g. human cannot be reconciled with non-human. Categorically, no one can be human
and non-human at the respect.
b. Contrary. They however opposed with each other in terms of their meaning, still they have
possibility of other alternative relations such as large and small where they can still have the
medium. With this, contrary terms may not necessarily contradictories.

c. Paradoxical. Terms that seems to be contradictories and yet room for reconciling them is
possible. e.g. cariño brutal, strongest weakness, etc.

Supposition of Terms

Although terms are conventional representation of our idea, their meaning may largely
dependent on how they are used in the sentences. In essence, the precise meaning of terms is
manifested as they are employed in sentences. Their meanings may be understood in terms of the
following:

Object
a. Real Supposition, the meaning matches with the actual existence of the thing signified
by the term in the external world.

e.g. Philippines in Asian region

b. Ideal Supposition, its meaning is in reference to imagination

e.g. Mulawin, Darna

c. Intramental Supposition, its meaning is purely a construct of the mind.

e.g. flying house, scotch on the rock

Comprehension

Terms may be understood as simple, compound, concrete, and abstract

Simple e.g. cat Compound e.g. multi-party Concrete e.g. stone

Abstract e.g. hardness

Extension

Terms as singular, particular, universal, collect

EXERCISES 4

1. A. Write on the space provided the term with the greater extension.
______________ 1. Creatures - plants
______________ 2. Mazda - vehicle
______________ 3. Logic book - book
______________ 4. Philosopher - Socrates
______________ 5. Physician - Dr. Reyes

B. Write on the space provided the term with the greater comprehension.
______________ 1. Volcano - mayon
______________ 2. CvSU - school
______________ 3. Dragon fruit - fruit
______________ 4. Professionals - teacher
______________ 5. Victory Liner - bus

II. A. Classify the italized terms into singular, particular, or universal. Write your answer on the
space provided before each number.

__________ 1. All men are sentient.

__________ 2. An animal is intelligent.
__________ 3. Athletes are skillfull.
__________ 4. Gabriela Silang is a hero.
__________ 5. Whoever knocks at the door is welcome.
__________ 6. Few students attended the convention.
__________ 7. Any wooden thing is flammable.
__________ 8. This project is successful.
__________ 9. Some animals are man’s friends.
__________ 10. The Philippines is a beautiful island.

III. Indicate whether the italicized items are univocal, equivocal, analogous by proportionality or
analogous by attribution.

Write your answers on the space provided before each number.

____________ 1. Father is the head of the home while mother is the lamp.
____________ 2. Practice is the key to success.
____________ 3. Logic is an interesting book to read.
____________ 4. Mirriam Defensor and Juan Ponce Enrile are senators.
___________ 5. A pitcher of water is not enough to quench the thirst of the pitcher.
___________ 6. Both John Lennon and Paul McCartney are versatile vocalist.
___________ 7. The ruler is the King.
___________ 8. I bend my knees at the bend of the road.
___________ 9. Some individuals lie too much – some on their beds, and some in their speech.
___________ 10. His taste for delicacies is more developed than his taste for literature.
CHAPTER 3
ON LANGUAGE

Although language plays a significant role in life, it is also imperative to us human beings
for a meaningful engagement with one another. It is an indispensable and the most functional
tool to address rationally any given situation. Language interprets the world and everything
contained in it. It is an instrument which enables him to acquire, to provide and to share
knowledge.
Human being uses certain words and phrases to describe people, places and things.
Through language, he calls a friend, gives warning, order meal, and opens up his feelings, likes,
and dislikes. He can also purposely say something to humiliate, to embarrass, or use phrases to
complain. At this point, a few general roles of language can be identified. In determining the
primary function of language, one has to consider the general context, including the intentions of
the speaker or the writer (Alba, et.al., 1998).

Furthermore, language describes everything, and such descriptions offer facts and
communicate information. This is the informative function of language. However, information
does not exclude the possibility of misinformation. Language too can communicate fraud,
dishonesty and errors.

In reports, surveys, or studies, the language function is primarily informative. A news

report about certain events purposely coveys facts as to what, where, when, or how they
happened. By the communication of facts, information is obtained. Informative function in fact is
the most utilized in human communication.

The other function of language is expressive used to express feelings, attitudes, or

emotions. The expression of feelings is primarily done either to simply reveal them to another
person, or to ignite that person to sympathy by evoking the same feelings in him. This is the
expressive function of language. Poetry is a best example of this function.

There are other functions like directive or imperative when giving command or request,
interrogative when asking questions, and persuasive function when convincing someone.

Nevertheless, no single function can be derived during human interaction. Multi function
is always manifested; however, one will always be prevailing to determine which specific
function in employed.

Having delineated the general functions of language, the next point to raise is the
significance of language in the pursuit and construction of good arguments. The knowledge of
the primary functions of language helps to distinguish, in a simple way, the good argument from
bad argument. Arguments are composed of propositions. Propositions are either true or false.
Such being the case, only those propositions constitute arguments. Therefore, it is the
informative function of language that furnishes the best tools in constructing good arguments. If
an argument is tainted with emotional reactions as expressions of feelings, attitudes, or emotions,
it becomes potential for fallacious elements. These however are the technical aspects of
language. But what about the essential aspect of language which makes it an indispensable tool
for human interaction?
Although language in itself is meaningless as it only represents sensibly the meaning of
the world, it can cause both psychological and social impact. Misuse of language can create an
enemy, humiliate people, gives insult, can discriminate, abuse and destroy relationship. On the
other hand, if language is used appropriately and responsively, in can establish a lifetime
friendship, build esteem, postulate respect and creativity. Language is powerful.
EXERCISES 5

Write on the blank the language function illustrated in each item below.

____________ 1. Get your things and leave the room!

____________ 2. Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and my soul shall
be healed.
____________ 3. Genetic engineering is a technique used by the scientist in directly
manipulating or altering the heredity of an individual.
____________ 4. No smoking.
____________ 5. Culture us perpetuated through language, since, when man interacts, he
communicates and through communication ideas are transmitted from generation to generation.
____________ 6. Do not ask what your government can do for you but ask what you can do for
the government.
____________ 7. Thirty days hath September, April, June and November. All the rest have
thirty-one, excepting February alone, and that has twenty-eight days clear. And twenty-nine in
each leap year.
____________ 8. Oh, my love is like a red rose, red rose, that’s newly sprung in June; Oh my
love is like the melody that’s sweetly play’d in tune.
____________ 9. Bear always in mind that the love of God is also the love of country, and this
too is the love of one’s fellowman,
____________ 10. Oh! Yes! After God the, the mother is everything to man.
____________ 11. King Solomon, a popular character in the Bible and son of King David, was
said to have 700 wives and 300 concubines.
____________ 12. Seize an opportunity when it occurs. The next one may never come.
____________ 13. I am soft as clouds can be; I do bleed the rain of tears; which now leaves me
rusting on a blue day.
____________ 14. Check out your fortune with the new Philips Savvy!
____________ 15. Happy is the man who wins first love of a woman but happy is a woman who
wins the last love of a man.
____________ 16. Illegal drugs, insurgency. Illegal gambling and blast fishing in coastal towns
emerged as among the very serious problems facing local government units in various regions of
the country today.
____________ 17. Take good care of our name. That is the only legacy I can leave you.
____________ 18. Cry if you must, they help ease the pain. Don’t hold it, let it fall like the rain/
Frozen tears are not for you to keep – Melt it down, and comfort you will reap.
____________ 19. Love yourself. Respect yourself – enough not to let him treat you like a slave.
After all, he courted you. He’s not hiring you to be his maid.
____________ 20. Don’t wait until somebody dies to express your love and respect. Do it today.
Definition

Definition is the “manifestation of the conceptual features of a term or an idea” (Piñon,

1973). To define a term, one may write or verbally provide for the feature or nature of a thing
presented by an idea and represented by a term.

Indeed, definition eliminates ambiguity while it also establishes the limit within which a
term must be used, explained and understood. In eliminating ambiguity, definition also avoids
the occurrence of absurdity and confusion.

Kinds of Definition

Generally, definition maybe classified as nominal or real.

1. Nominal definition. This type of definition is sometimes referred to as the “stipulative”

(Copi & Cohen, 1998) whereby a “deliberate assignment of meaning” is given to a term. It does
not point out the nature or essence of the thing which is represented by the idea. Norminal
definition maybe done through:

a. Pointing out the object meant or by simply giving example

e.g. quadruped – cow, carabao

b. Etymological definition provides the derivation of the term.

e.g. alumnus – pupil. Alumnus is Latin for pupil.

Philos- love; Sophia- wisdom

c. Definition by synonym. It cites a word with the same meaning.

e.g. conventional is also means exclusive.

well is also means healthy.

2. Real definition. This type of definition is the verbal/written manifestation of the

nature/essence of a thing represented by the term or idea. This definition may be in several
fashions:

a. Definition by genus and species. Genus is the essential feature of a thing which it
possesses in common with other things. Species is an essential feature of a thing which makes it
different from other things.

e,g,. Man is a rational animal. – by genus

Biology is the science of living things. – by species

b. Genetic Definition. It is definition which explains the process origin of a thing.

e.g. Artificial insemination is injecting the semen or sperm directly into the female sex
organ by the use of a tuberculin syringe.

c. Causal definition. It is definition based either on an efficient or final cause.

Efficient cause is that which produced a thing. Final cause is the purpose or objective
for which a thing is produced.

e.g. Fire produces smoke. - efficient cause

Infrastructures are for public utility. – final cause

d. Descriptive definition. This definition is either by:

1) Citing essential properties derived from the specific nature of a thing, e.g. Plants are
reproducing living creatures.

2) Citing physical properties that comprising the collective characteristics of a thing,

e.g. water is a substance made of hydrogen and oxygen.

3) Citing external physical features, e.g. an elephant is a huge greyish animal.

Rules of Definition

A definition is made up of two parts: 1) the definiendum, the term to be defined; and 2)
the definiens, the written/verbal nature/feature of what the term means. For a good definition, the
following rules must be observed

1. The definiens should be clearer than the definiendum, otherwise it does not eliminate
ambiguity. One cause of ambiguity in a definition is the use of metaphors.

2. The definiens should not contain the definiendum. It is a poor definition to define
“democratic government” as “a government which espouses the ideals of democracy.”

3. The definition should be expressed in the affirmative manner, e.g. Man is a rational
animal. Philosophy is the science of ultimate causes.

4. The definition must be adequate, i.e., it must neither be too broad or too narrow. It is
not a good definition if “university” is defined as “a sectarian institution of higher learning,”
which broader than the term signified; neither the definition of “Filipino” as “a person who lives
in the Philippines” which is narrower than the signified term.
EXERCISES 6

Indentify the kind of Definition employed to the following:

1.____________ A square is a figure with four equal sides.

2.____________ Jose Rizal is a Filipino linguist.

3.____________ A semi-concrete house is made of cement and combustible materials like woods.

4.____________ Photosynthesis provides foods for the plants.

5.____________ Snakes are animals that crow.

6.____________ Man is an embodied being.

7.____________ Heat is produced by a friction.

8.____________ Plants are creatures that help in the production of oxygen.

9.____________ The sun is the center of the universe.

10.___________ Arts is the study of precision and perfection.

CHAPTER 4
JUDGMENT AND PROPOSITIONS

What Judgment Is

The mind forms ideas/concepts about objects. However, these concepts become
meaningful and understandable unless the mind sees and expresses the relationships between
them. When the mind recognizes relationship of one idea with another, the mind affirms
something about the concept, but the mind separates one idea from the other, then it denies
something about the concept. Thus, that process of affirming or denying of the mind on the
relationships of ideas, this is called judgment. Judgment is the second basic mental operation; it
is a mental sentence either an affirmation or denial.

Meanwhile, the proposition is an external statement, written or spoken, which represents

judgement. When the proposition expresses an agreement between two ideas or disagreement,
the proposition is called categorical proposition. While when the proposition expresses a
tentative relationship between two or more ideas, it is called hypothetical proposition.

The Categorical Proposition

Unlike other statements, the categorical proposition expresses an absolute or straight

forward manner in affirming or denying a relationship between two ideas. The ideas are
represented in the proposition by a subject term and predicate term which are joined together by
a verb to be, referred to in the proposition as the copula. In the categorical proposition, therefore,
there are three elements: subject term (S); predicate term (P); and copula (C). The statement
below is an example of a categorical proposition illustrating the logical structure by which it is
constructed.

Logic is a philosophy subject.

S C P

More so, the categorical proposition has two properties: quality and quantity. The quality
refers to the relationship between the subject and the predicate terms, i.e., their agreement or
disagreement as expressed by the copula verb to be. When the subject and the predicate terms are
are in agreement or identical, the predicate affirmed the subject through the copula; but when the
two terms disagree or are non-identical, the predicate, through the copula, denied the subject. On
the basis of quality, then, the categorical proposition can be classified only as an affirmative
proposition or a negative proposition. The quality is manifested by the copula verb-to-be.

Affirmative: Philosophy is the study of correct reasoning.

Philippine Eagle is an endangered species.
Every natural environment is important for human survival
Many professionals are teachers

Negative: An idea is not an external being.

All vehicles are not environment friendly.
No priest is a politician.
Not all cowards are losers.

The use of negative prefixes like mal, un, mis, dis, ir, non, etc cannot determine the
quality of proposition.

e.g. Logging in the protected natural area is illegal.

Some politicians are dishonest.
The shape of a rectangle is irregular
Government employees are non-partisan.

All the propositions are still affirmative unlike, “Senator Grace Poe is not illegal alien.
Since the copula is negative, the proposition is negative.

On the other hand, Quantity of terms refers to the extension or quantity of the subject
term of which the predicate term may affirm or deny. Thus, the basis of the quantity of the
proposition is the quantity of the subject term as may also be modified by quantifiers.

“Lorenzo Ruiz is the first Filipino saint” is a singular categorical proposition because its
subject term, a proper noun, is a singular one. In “Several martyrs are Catholic saints” is a
particular proposition since its subject is particular as it is also modified by particular quantifier
several. Then ‘All martyrs are Godly.” is a universal proposition because its subject is universal
due to its modifier all.

Singular Proposition

She is a doctor.
That house is for sale
Those who failed are disqualified.
The leader is reliable.

Particular Proposition

Not all drivers are irresponsible.

Farmers are rich.
Few people are involved in charitable work.
Some workers are professionals.

Universal Proposition

All soldiers are loyal to the country.

No priest is unholy.
Every mother is dedicated to their children.
Animals are tameable.
Symbols of Proposition.

Since quantity and quality are properties found together, categorical proposition can be
classified according to quality and quantity. Each quality is represented by letters A,E,I,O which
are dummy symbol for they have no significant idea contributed to the propositions that they
represent. However, these are useful to classify proposition as A proposition, E proposition, I
proposition and O proposition.

Quantity Quality Symbols

Universal Affirmative A – All teachers are degree holders.
Particular Affirmative I – Some Filipinos are inhospitable.
Universal Negative E – No dog is a biped.
Particular Negative O – Many businessmen are not profiteers.

A proposition with singular subject is regarded as a universal one. The extension of a

singular term has for its member the only definite thing or group it represents. The predicate,
then, is either affirmed or denied of the totality of the subject.

The Quantity of the Predicate Term

In determining the quantity of the predicate term certain rules must be observed:

1. If the categorical proposition is affirmative, such as A and I, the predicate is a particular term,
provided that it is not singular. This is so because the predicate of an affirmative proposition is
just a partial extension of the comprehension which is the subject term.

e.g. A-All farmers are innovative.

Su C+ Pp

2. If the categorical proposition is negative, such as E and O, the predicate is a universal term,
provided that it is not singular. The predicate is universal since neither totally nor partially, the
extension of the predicate term is not identified with the subject term- comprehension.

e.g. O- Most of religious groups are not partisans.

Sp C- Pu

VENN DIAGRAM
Reduction of Categorical Proposition

Logically, categorical proposition shall deny or affirm the subject term explicitly
qualified by the copula. Meaning if the copula is negative, the subject is denied but if
affirmative, the subject is affirmed. However, some categorical propositions may have subject
that are neither affirm or denied, but serves only as a grammatical subject of the proposition.

e.g. God loves the flock. The grammatical subject here is God loves. But this is not
categorically denied nor affirmed by the flock. Unlike if, “The one whom God loves is the flock.
Here the one whom God loves is affirmed by the predicate.

For a proposition to be categorical has to be reduced in its logical form.

e.g. Birds can fly. Birds are animals that can fly.
Birds are capable of flying.
EXERCISES 7

I. Classify the propositions according to quantity and quality. Then indicate the correct symbol.

1. The UN is an organization which advocates climate change solution.

2. Peace is fundamental requisite for genuine development.
3. Human greed is the workshop of many other evils.
4. A person who is not at peace within cannot be at peace with others.
5. Many Orientals, like Gandhi, are teachers of peace.
6. Justice and forgiveness are values of a true lover of humane society.
7. Every Christian is peace-giver.
8. No just individual is an oppressive person.
9. Some community leaders are religious leaders.
10. Those people in the industry are mindful of their corporate responsibilities.

II. Classify each of the following propositions by writing its symbol.

_________ 1. Freedom is every human’s pursuit for .greater happiness.

_________ 2. No culture is such that it does not recognize conscience as a fact.
_________ 3. Not all criminal are in dire need for survival.
_________ 4. Some families are recipients of the 4Ps project of the government.
_________ 5. Philosophy is an ancient art that seeks its worth in every human epoch.
_________ 6. Five pillars of Islam are fundamental for the Muslim communities.
_________ 7. Law is a social control.
_________ 8. A number of ethical systems are confined with the norms of their religion.
_________ 9. Many State Universities are found in the provinces.
_________ 10. Every citizen is obliged to follow the laws of the state.

III. Underline the predicate term and identify its quantity.

________ 1. Above the earth are various kind gases.
________ 2. Plants are living creatures that protect the environment.
________ 3. Some sources of food are those trees which are rare in the country.
________ 4. Mining and logging are major opponents of our environment.
________ 5. Fidel Ramos is not a dictator leader.
________ 6. Tree planting is a form of protecting our water resources.
________ 7. Some substances, like insecticides, are not environmentally friendly substances.
________ 8. To maintain peace among Filipinos, sufficient jobs have to be provided.
________ 9. Not all Filipinos are aware of their moral obligations with regards to the
environment.
________ 10. Environmental degradation is not a problem that should be solved by government
alone.

IV. A. Indicate whether the following propositions are A, E, I or O propositions.

B. Indicate whether the predicate of each sentence is Singular, Particular, or Universal. Write
your answer on the space provided.

1. Not all dictators are military.

A. _______________
B. _______________
2. Our national hero is Dr. Jose P. Rizal.
A. _______________
B. _______________
3. Generally, men are muscular.
A. _______________
B. _______________
4. Human beings are emotionally determined.
A. _______________
B. _______________
5. Actions are louder than words.
A. _______________
B. _______________
6. No priest is a family man.
A. _______________
B. _______________
7. Most Asians are identified with their environment.
A. _______________
B. _______________
8. Some political figures are in showbiz.
A. _______________
B. _______________
9. A true believer lover of God is not corrupt.
A. _______________
B. _______________
10. Religion is not an end in itself but a means to an end.
A. _______________
B. _______________
V. Reduce the following categorical propositions into their logical forms:

1. Love hurts.

2. Familiarity causes disrespect.

3. The present bridges the past and the future.

4. A true leader models his/her principles.

5. Compassion holds no boundaries.

6. A postmaster delivers messages.

7. Social media provides influx of information.

8. The hunter picks the best prey.

9. Fish swims.

10. Evils separates man from God.

The Hypothetical Proposition

The next proposition that logic is concerned about is the hypothetical proposition. The
difference that exists between a categorical proposition and a hypothetical one is that the
categorical shows an explicit agreement or disagreement between the subject term and the
predicate term, while the latter does not express this agreement of terms. Hypothetical
proposition on provides tentative idea.
The proposition “If I pass logic, then, I shall graduate” does not assert anything. It
neither asserts that “I pass logic” nor “I shall graduate” but what it states is only on condition that
if I pass logic, then shall I graduate.
There are three hypothetical propositions, namely: conditional, disjunctive and
conjunctive.

The Conditional Proposition

The conditional proposition is a hypothetical proposition which expresses a logical

relationship between an antecedent (condition) and a consequent (result). This means that the
consequent is necessitated by the antecedent.

e.g. If a person is seriously sick, then his life is endangered.

The part of the conditional proposition introduced by “if” is called antecedent. It is also
sometimes called as “condition clause.” While the part which follows the antecedent and maybe
introduced by “then” is called consequent or “conditioned clause.” “If” is regarded as the copula
of the proposition and together with “then” it expresses the necessary relationship between the
antecedent and consequent.
A conditional proposition, though, need not always begin with “if.” There are some
expressions which can substitute for it, e.g. provided that, on condition that and unless, which, in
particular, is used when the antecedent is a negative one. “If I do not study, then I will fail” can
be stated as: “Unless I study, then I will fail.” However, conditional proposition maybe true or
false (Alba, et al., 1998).

The truth of the conditional proposition is based on the necessary relationship of

antecedent and consequent, or on the real dependence of the consequent on its antecedent, i.e., if
the antecedent is true, the consequent is also true. Thus the following propositions are true
conditional propositions:

If it rains today, the streets will be wet.

If a person has cancer, then he is seriously sick.
Provided that being is human, it is a material being.
These examples are true because the all the consequences are the natural results of the
antecedents.

The following are false conditional propositions:

If I pay taxes, I am a good citizen.

On condition that I am in love, I’ll get love in return.
Unless I review, I shall fail the examinations.
The examples are false for their consequent are doubtful.

The Disjunctive Proposition

The disjunctive proposition is the second type of conditional proposition under discussion
here which contains two or more alternatives which are so related that one of them must be true.

e.g. An action is either good or not good.

A student is either neglectful or responsible.
Water is either hot or cold or warm.

The disjunctive proposition is distinguished from the other hypothetical by the expression
“either “or” or simply by “or.” The truth of the disjunctive proposition is based on the possibility
of any of the expressed alternatives to be true. Thus, to ensure a true disjunctive proposition, the
proposition should exhaust all possible alternatives. The disjunctive “Water is hot or cold or
warm” is a true proposition since it contains all possible temperatures for water, while the
disjunctive “A material substance is either solid or liquid” is a false once since a material
substance may not be any of solid and liquid but “gas.”
The use of contradictories or terms which are directly opposites such that they do not
allow the existence of a third or a middle ground can be used to produce a true disjunctive
proposition. Example: Today is my birthday or not.

The Conjunctive Proposition

Finally, the conjunctive proposition is a hypothetical proposition which contains

alternatives of which only one must be true, otherwise it is a false conjunctive proposition. The
expressions “can not be… at the same time” and “cannot be both” emphasize this incompatibility
of the alternatives.

e.g. A person cannot be both walking and running.

I cannot be asleep and awake at the same time.
An object cannot be located in two places simultaneously.

The conjunctive proposition may also be a true or a false one. It is true if one of the
alternatives is true, the rest would be false. The examples given above are true conjunctive since
their alternatives exclude one another.

The conjunctive proposition “A book cannot be both new and expensive” is certainly a
false proposition because it contains alternatives which can be both true. A new book can be also
expensive.
Reduction of the Hypothetical Proposition

Each hypothetical proposition can be reduced to the other two modes. However, this
process does not allow the strict compliance to the rules of the truth of each hypothetical
proposition to the new proposition.

The reduction is only of form or structure and not of validity or truth.

1. Reduction of conditional proposition.

Given: If the temperature is cold then it is winter.

Disjunctive: The temperature is either cold or it is winter.
Conjunctive: The temperature cannot be cold and it’s winter at the same time.

2. Reduction of disjunctive proposition

Given: A number is either one or two.

Disjunctive: If a number is one, it is not two.
Conjunctive: A number cannot be one and two at the same time.

3. Reduction of the conjunctive proposition

Given: A dragon cannot be both real and unreal.

Conditional: If a dragon is real, then it is not unreal.
Disjunctive: Either a dragon is real or unreal.
EXECISES 8

I. Write on the blank if the following propositions are True or False. Identify also the kind of
hypothetical proposition.

A.
_______ 1. A material object is either hard or soft.
_______ 2. The suspect is either an innocent or guilty.
_______ 3. The President can be a good speaker and good speech writer at the same time.
_______ 4. A university student is a freshman, then the student is not a sophomore.
_______ 5. Unless you have a permit, you will not be allowed to take the examination.

B.
_______ 1. A communist cannot be also a lover of democracy.
_______ 2. An argument cannot be valid and at the same time invalid.
_______ 3. Ideas cannot be both concrete and abstract.
_______ 4. You cannot be a graduate student and be illiterate at the same time.
_______ 5. You cannot be a true Christian and also hate you enemy.

C.
_______ 1. If you love God, then you love your neighbor.
_______ 2. On condition that you have cancer, you are seriously sick.
_______ 3. Unless you pay taxes, you are not a good citizen.
_______ 4. If you are in love, then you will marry.
_______ 5. You are happy, provided that you are wealthy.
CHAPTER 5
THE STUDY OF ORDINARY ARGUMENTS

We read them in newspapers and books, hear them from television and radios, and often
formulate them in our conversations with friends and associates. So arguments are not new to us.
However, there are some principles involved which we must study before we can accurately
assess the soundness or weakness of arguments, their validity and invalidity. A knowledge of
these principles will help us improve greatly our reasoning power and critical thinking.

The Nature of Argument

Meaning and Structure of Argument

An argument is a group of propositions in which one proposition is claimed to follow

from the other propositions which are regarded as providing support or ground for its truth
(Irving Copi, Introducttion to Logic). Thus, an argument must contain at least two propositions
and there must be a claim that one proposition follows from the other. This claim may either be
explicit or implied in the context and formulation of the propositions. Take for instance the
following arguments:

e.g.
Since the good, according to Plato, is that which furthers a person’s real interest, it
follows that men will seek it. (Aurom Stroll and Richard Popkin, Philosophy and the Human
Spirit).

The Philippines is actually a very rich country and not poor as usually depicted by
domestic and international media. It is blessed with abundant natural resources, and it can boast
of an intelligent and talented people.

In the first example, the claim that “men will seek the good when known” follows from
the proposition “The good is that which furthers a person’s real interests.” It is made explicit by
the phrase “it follows that.” In the second argument, the claim that one proposition follows of
proceeds from the others is not made explicit but it can inferred to follow from the others. By
analyzing the purposes of the propositions it can be deducted that the first proposition, “The
Philippines is actually a very rich country and not poor as usually depicted by domestic and
international media,” follows from the propositions: “It is blessed with abundant natural
resources” and “it can boast of an intelligent and talented people.” It can be easily inferred that
the latter two propositions serve as the support or reasons for the claim that the Philippines is a
very rich country and not poor. Thus, for an argument to exist, there must be a claim that one
proposition follows from one or more propositions and that the latter propositions must be
claimed to provide support or ground for the truth of the former (Alba, et al., 1998).

An argument is composed of conclusion and premise or premises. The conclusion and the
premise may be expressed or implied. The conclusion is the proposition that is claimed to follow
from one or more propositions, while the premise is the proposition that is claimed to provide
support or reason for the truth or probability of the conclusion. In other words, the premises
constitute the evidence while the conclusion is that which is claimed to follow from the evidence.

Conclusion and Premise Indicators

It will be helpful to the student to recognize certain words which usually indicate
conclusions and premises. These words are called conclusion indicators and premise indicators.

The following are common conclusion indicators:

Therefore, Implies that, wherefore

Hence, entails that, accordingly
Whence, we may conclude that, consequently
Thus, we may infer that, it follows that
So it must be the case that, as a result

The following are premise indicators:

Because, seeing that, in as much

Since, as indicated by, given that
As, for this reason, for the reason that
For, on the basis of this, in that
Owing to, based on the, maybe inferred from

It must be noted that when these words are not explicit, it does not necessarily mean that
no argument exists. However, presence of these indicators may not always provide an argument.

e.g.

I chose philosophy to be my course because I planned of becoming a lawyer someday.

Here, the word because does not serve to indicate a premise of an argument, but serves
only as an explanation of one’s decision to pursue philosophy as a course.

It must also be analyzed that not all propositions in a passage create an argument as
premises and conclusion. Only propositions that actually support something to prove whether it
is or not by the premises and eventually arriving to conclusions is considered as argument. A
proposition that has nothing to do with the conclusion or is intended to make only a passing
comment about the argument should not be made part of the argument.

e.g.,

Because of inequality in the distribution of wealth in the Philippines, where wealth is

concentrated in the hands of very few families, the gains of economic growth do not trickle down
to the masses. This is a tragic situation for the Philippines.
In the above argument, the conclusion is “The gains of economic growth do not trickle
down to the masses,” while the premise is “There is inequality in the distribution of wealth in the
Philippines, where wealth is concentrated in the hands of very few families.”

The proposition “This is a tragic situation for the Philippines” is just a passing comment.
It is not part of the argument.

The position of the conclusion in an argument varies. The conclusion may be stated
before the premise; it may be sandwiched between premises; or it may be stated at the end of the
premises.

Example: Conclusion is stated first.

Science students are most likely to pass their subjects (Conclusion). Science students are
bright and diligent students who can produce scholarly assignments and projects (Premise 1).
They are also well behaved, being preoccupied more with studies than leisure and idle talks
(Premise 2).

Example: Conclusion is sandwiched between premises.

Anyone familiar with our prison system knows that there are some inmates who behave
little better than brute beasts (Premise 1). But the very fact that these prisoners exist is a telling
argument against the efficacy of capital punishment as a deterrent (Conclusion). If the death
penalty had been truly effective as a deterrent, such prisoners would long ago have vanished
(Premise 2).

(“The injustice of the Death Penalty,” America quoted in A Concise Introduction to Logic by
Patrick J. Hurley.)

e.g.: Conclusion is stated last.

All men are rational beings (Premise 1) while animals, plants and machines are not
(Premise 2). It follows that only men can reason out (Conclusion).
EXERCISES 9

I. Identify the premises and the conclusion of the following arguments:

1. We often learn about causes from the cures: if ingesting a chemical cures a disease, we may
learn that the disease was caused by the lack of that chemical.

2. Deficits are bad because they enable our representatives to vote for spending without having to
pay for the spending.

3. The rule in the diamond district is that no stranger is ever admitted to these private offices.
Since dealers commonly carry on their persons millions of dollars’ worth of diamonds such
stringent precautions are indispensable.

4. Since reduction of sodium may prevent the development of hypertension in some people, and
since a high salt diet is almost certainly not beneficial, reduced salting of food and reduced
consumption of salty snack foods is probably a good idea.

5. In order to sell, you have develop a positive attitude, and in order to develop positive attitude,
you have to exercise, said a chic, young woman attempting to motivate a team of a middle aged
sales ladies before opening time. Therefore, in order to sell, you have to exercise.

6. To say I believer in spanking children implies that spanking are in some way essential to their
proper upbringing. I do not hold that opinion; therefore, I do not believe in spankings.

7. No human subject may be used in a medical experiment without his informed and freely given
consent. But prisoners, by virtue of their total custody, cannot give free and uncoerced consent.
Hence, prisoners, no matter how valuable experimentation with their cooperation may prove
must be excluded from all populations of subjects in medical experimentations.

8. The Philippines is actually a very rich country and not poor as depicted by domestic and
international media. It is blessed with abundant natural resources, and can boast of intelligent and
talented people.

9. A country with a weak national leadership is like a wayward ship struggling to find its way
through the waves. The Philippines was such during the Aquino administration. That is why that
period was characterized by chaos.

10. Lawyers are nothing but a bunch of unscrupulous liars. They often make the right things
wrong, and the wrong, right.
II. Determine whether the following passages are arguments, reports, explanations, statements of
opinion or belief, pieces of advice, warnings, illustrations, descriptions, historical sketch or other
forms of writings.

1. If our public education fails to improve the quality of instruction in both the primary and
secondary schools, then it is likely that it will lose more students to the private sector in the years
ahead.

2. Freedom of expression is the most important of our constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.

Without it our freedoms would be immediately threatened Further-more, it provides the fulcrum
of the advancement of new freedoms.

3. It is strongly recommended that you have your house inspected for termite damage at the
earliest possible opportunity.

4. Four people, including a jailguard and a nine-year-old girl, were wounded when two rival
groups clashed anew at the Manila City Jail on Saturday night. Jail officials did not disclose the
name of the wounded girl who has treated in the jail’s infirmary.

5. The Philippines will be better off without policemen and without congressmen. We will
become a prosperous country if our public officials are economists, scientists, engineers and
medical practitioners.

6. The Philippines contains many long mountain ranges. Thus, the Sierra madre, Carabello del
Sur, Caraballos Occidentals and the Mindanao ranges are all hundreds of kilometers long.

7. The active resistance against the Spaniards heightened from 1718-1762 and from 1850-1978,
during the so-called Moro Wars. Starting with the re-establishment of Fort Pilar in Zamboanga in
1718, the Spaniards failed miserably to subjugate the Moros in the 1750’s.

8. I like classical music more than rock n’ roll. The former is smooth and peaceful, while the
latter is pure noise.

9. He was sitting in a branch of a narra tree with his head bowed towards the North. His hands
rested peacefully on his lap. A few meters away, I can see tears trickling down slowly like
raindrops. At his right, about five meters away, little brown Podey kept anxious watch of his
master.

10. President Magsaysay was the best Filipino President ever because he was accepted and loved
by so many people.
CHAPTER 6
INFERENCE

Aristotle’s system, known as syllogistic from the prominence it gives to the syllogism,
constitutes an elementary but important part of the logic of terms or as it would be called today
the logic of non-empty classes. It needs not be emphasized that the logic of classes is one of the
cornerstones in the foundation of modern logic.

The Inference

Do you memorize or recalling something? With this, there is no inference; and when
you think of an alibi, there is reasoning. Inference is another mental activity that when one does,
implications are drawn from previously known facts. Reasoning, or inferential thinking, is a
mental process by which the mind proceeds from known truths (the premises) to new truths (the
conclusion).

Sequence of Inference

However, for an inference to be valid, it must follow a valid process. By sequence is

meant the logical relationship between the premises and the conclusion. By this sequence, the
premises must necessarily flow into the conclusion. Otherwise, the reasoning process is
fallacious or erroneous.

All spirits are immaterial. - premise

But an angel is a spirit. - premise
Therefore, an angel is immaterial - conclusion

The above is an example of an interference which has sequence since the premises
necessarily flow into the conclusion. In fact, there cannot be any other conclusion that can be
drawn aside from the stated conclusion.

However, the interference below is fallacious:

All spirits are immaterial - premise

But an angel is a spirit. - premise
Therefore, a ghost is immaterial - conclusion

Although it is true that a ghost is immaterial, it must be noted that the inference is
fallacious, for it is out of sequence. The conclusion just appeared from nowhere, and that the
premises do not necessarily flow into the conclusion, or that the conclusion is not necessarily
derived from the premises. In the example above, the conclusion has no sequential connection
with the premises.
Methods of Inference: Deduction and Induction

When the mind proceeds from the universal to the particular (or specific), this method is
called deduction.

All men are embodied beings. - universal

But John is a man. - specific
Therefore, John is an embodied being. - specific

However, when the mind proceeds from the specific to the universal, this method is
called induction.

Danny, Boboy, and Jim are men - specific

But men are creatures - universal
Therefore, all men are creatures - universal

Kinds of Inference: Immediate and Mediate Inference

Immediate inference is a kind of mental reasoning where the mind passes directly from
one premise to the conclusion without the use of a medium like another proposition. In this kind
of inference, the conclusion being the new proposition is just a reformulation of the premise or
the first proposition. Thus, there is no new truth but just a repetition of the same truth.

e.g.
Floods are not uncommon in Manila during the rainy season.

Therefore, floods are common in Manila during the rainy season

On the other hand, when the mind passes from one premise to another proposition
(medium proposition) before arriving to the conclusion, is called mediate inference. In this kind
of inference, there is a new proposition, and also a new truth which is drawn by the mind from
the first two propositions which are logically related or connected. Thus mediate inference is
inference in the strict or proper sense; whereas immediate inference is inference in the broad
sense.

All men of integrity are honest.

But the Secretary of Education is a man of integrity.
Therefore, Secretary of Education is honest.

All men are intelligent - premise

But Mar is a man - premise
Therefore, Mar is intelligent - conclusion

From the premise “all men are intelligent,” the mind was able to conclude that “Mar is
intelligent.” It must be noted, however, that the mind was able to do this only by the use of the
medium “Mar is a man,” which bridges or links the first proposition to the conclusion. Without
the bridge or medium, then the mind cannot make a valid conclusion nor arrive to a new truth.
Hence, its external product is syllogism.

Syllogism

Mediate inference is an activity of the mind; and as such, its result or product, which is
an argument, exists only in the mind. To represent the argument existing in the mind, it must be
expressed by a sensible or concrete medium, again the use of terms. Once an argument is
illustrated externally through terms, we will have a syllogism. Syllogism therefore is an external
representation of the argument. It is a series of propositions in which the first two are known as
the premises, and the third one is a conclusion. The conclusion is necessarily derived from the
two given premises; otherwise it is invalid or incorrect.

Kinds of Syllogism (mediate inference)

As there are two kinds of propositions in the previous chapter, there are also two kinds
of syllogism (for it is propositions that compose a syllogism) to be discussed here. The kind of
syllogism depends on the kind of propositions used in the syllogism.

1. Categorical Syllogism. It is a syllogism with propositions which are all categorical

propositions

2. Hypothetical Syllogism. It is a kind of syllogism wherein at least one proposition is a

hypothetical proposition.
CHAPTER 7
IMMEDIATE INFERENCE

Immediate inference is also significance for the following reasons:

1. It develops facility in recognizing the quantity and quality of propositions.

2. It helps in recognizing and constructing the equivalent propositions.

3. It helps in the understanding of the relationship of propositions with one another regarding
their truth and falsity.

Kinds of Immediate Inference

1. Oppositional inference
2. Eduction/ Logical Equivalence

Oppositional Inference

By the term opposition is meant the relationship between propositions having the same
subject, the same predicate, but may be different in quality, or in quantity or in both quantity and
quality. A more vivid and clearer illustration is shown in the following square of opposition.

Contraries
A E

Sub- sub-
alterns alterns

Contradictories

I O
Sub-contraries

Types of Opposition

1. Contradictories. It is the relationship between propositions with the same subject and
predicate but different in both quantity and quality. (AO,OA,EI,IE)
e.g.
I - Some politicians are corrupt.
E - No politician is corrupt.

If the original proposition, i.e., “Some politicians are corrupt” is analyzed, it will be
determined that its quantity is particular while its quality is affirmative. Since its contradictory
must be different in quantity and quality, the contradictory proposition, therefore, must be
universal and at the same time, negative i.e., “No politician is corrupt.” This will be the same
with all the other combinations.

Rules for Contradictories

If a given proposition (1st proposition) is True, the contradictory is false; and if the given
is false, the contradictory must be true.

If “All men are intelligent creatures” is True,

Then, “Some men are not intelligent creatures” is False.

2. Contraries. It is the relationship between propositions with the same subject, same predicate,
the same universal quantity but different in quality. (AE, EA)

e.g.
A - All philosophers are lovers of wisdom.
E - No philosopher is a lover of wisdom.

When the given proposition (1st proposition), i.e., “All philosophers are lovers of
wisdom” is universal and is affirmative, Thus, the contrary must also be universal but negative.
Hence, “No philosopher is a lover of wisdom.”

Rules for Contraries

If a universal proposition is True, the contrary is False; but if a universal proposition is

false, the contrary is doubtful, i.e., it may either be true or false. Notice that contrary propositions
cannot be true at the same time, but may be simultaneously false.

3. Sub-Contrary Opposition. It is the relationship between propositions with the same subject,
the same predicate, the same particular quantity but different in quality. (IO, OI)

e.g
I - Some cops are good traffic enforcers.
O - Some cops are not good traffic enforcers.

Rules for Sub-Contraries

If a given proposition is False, the sub-contrary is true and if the given proposition is
true, the sub-contrary is doubtful.
4. Sub-Alterns. It is the relationship between propositions having the same subject, the same
predicate, the same quality but different in quantity. (AI,IA,EO,OE)

e.g.
I - Some Filipinos are rebels.
A - All Filipinos are rebels.

E - No violent person is at peace to oneself.

O - Some violent persons are not at peace to themselves.

Rules for Sub-Alterns

1. If the universal proposition is true, the particular is also true.

2. If the universal proposition is false, the particular is doubtful.
3. If the particular proposition is true, the universal is doubtful.
4. If the particular proposition is false, the universal is false.

The Square of Opposition

The square of opposition is a good visual aid in understanding and remembering the
various kinds of opposition and their respective rules.
EXERCISES 10

I. A. 1. If we have the proposition, All men of justice are fair individuals,

a. give the contradictory

b. give the contrary
c. give the sub-altern

2. If we have the proposition, Not all government officials are honest individuals,

a. give the contradictory

b. give the sub-contrary
c. give the sub-altern

3. Some priests are married,

a. give the contradictory

b. give the sub-contrary
c. give the sub-altern
4. Citrus fruits are rich in Vitamin C,

a. give the contradictory

b. give the contrary
c. give the sub-altern

5. Most philosophers are level headed individuals,

a. give the contradictory

b. give the contrary
c. give the sub-altern

6. Social media is a good source of information,

a. give the contradictory

b. give the contrary
c. give the sub-altern

7. NGOs are for humanitarian purposes,

a. give the contradictory

b. give the contrary
c. give the sub- contrary

8. Public transpo is efficient in metro manila,

a. give the contradictory

b. give the contrary
c. give the sub- contrary

8. Some endangered species are mammals

a. give the contradictory

b. give the sub- altern
c. give the sub- contrary

9. Foreign investors are good employers

a. give the contradictory

b. give the sub- altern
c. give the sub- contrary

10. Students are responsible youth leaders,

a. give the contradictory

b. give the sub- altern
c. give the sub- contrary

B. Determine the truth-value of propositions a, b and c.

1. If “All communists are idealists” is True, then

a. No communist is an idealist” is ______________________.

b. Some communists are not idealists” is ______________________.
c. Most communists are idealists” is ______________________.

2. If “No honest man is without integrity” is True, then,

a. All honest men are with integrity” is ______________________________.

b. Some honest men are with integrity” is ____________________________.
c. Not all honest men are without integrity ” is _________________________.

3. If “ Any one is capable of learning fast” is False, then,

a. No one is capable of learning fast” is____________

b. Some are capable of learning fast” is ___________
c. Not everybody is capable of learning fast” is_______

4. If “ Most rebels are not lovers of country” is False, then,

a. “No rebel is a lover of country” is_________________
b. “Most rebels are not lovers of country” is___________
c. “Many rebels are lovers of country” is____________

5. If “All religions are God-Centred” is True, the,

a. “No religion is God-centered” is_____________

b. “Not all religions are God-centered” is________
c. “Many religions are God-centered” is_________

II. Give the following answers

a. the symbols of the opposites
b. the type of opposition involved
c. the truth value

1. It is true that of the twenty-four senators, several are corrupt. Therefore, it is ______ that none
of the senators are corrupt.
a. _________________
b. _________________
c. _________________

2. It is true that many congressmen are rich because all of them are businessmen. Therefore, that
many congressmen are not rich is ______.
a. _________________
b. _________________
c. _________________

3. It is ______ that a few CvSU students are not college students because it is false that every
CvSU student is not a college student.
a. _________________
b. _________________
c. _________________

4. Because it is false that no argument is invalid since there are some which are invalid and some
which are not, then it is _________ that every argument is invalid.
a. _________________
b. _________________
c. _________________

5. Without exception, Filipinos are industrious. This is true, so not all Filipinos are industrious is
____.
a. _________________
b. _________________
c. _________________
Logical Equivalence (Eduction)

In the process of inference, another type is also discussed here, also known as eduction.
Propositions are formulated differently, but their meanings are retained and equivalent from the
given proposition. Hence it will develop facility in recognizing the relationships of subject and
predicate and recognizing equivalent propositions which are expressed in various forms. There
are four kinds of equivalence: Conversion, Obversion, Contra-position and Inversion.

1. Conversion

The original proposition is reconstructed by interchanging the subject and the predicate.
The subject of the original proposition becomes the predicate of the conclusion and the original
predicate becomes the new subject. The quality is unchanged. The original proposition is called
convertend, while the new proposition is called converse.
e.g.
I - Some politicians are corrupt officials - convertend
I - Some corrupt officials are politicians - converse

Rules:

1. Interchange the subject and the predicate of the convertend in the converse (the
subject of the given proposition becomes the predicate of the resulting proposition while the
predicate of the given proposition becomes the subject of the latter)

2. Retain the quality.

3. Do not extend any term.

There are two kinds of conversion: complete and partial. Conversion is complete if both
the quality and quantity of the convertend are retained; it is partial if the quality is retained, but
its quantity is changed.

Complete Conversion: I to I and E to E

I Some writers are singers.

I Some singers are writers.

E No cow is a carabao.
E No carabao is a cow.

Partial Conversion: A to I and E to O

A All capitalists are rich men;

I Some rich men are capitalists.
E No environmentalist is a miner;
O Some miners are not environmentalists.

On the other hand, not all conversion of a proposition with a particular predicate is valid
such as A to A, which may commit error on illicit extension of terms.

A All Filipinos are Catholics.

A Whoever is a catholic is a filipino.

The conclusion manifests an illicit generalization. It could be correct to assume that

filipinos are catholics but it is a fallacy to assume that whoever is is necessarily a filipino.

However, an A proposition may be converted completely as long as the subject is

interchangeable with its predicate or when it involves definition.
e.g.
A Water is the universal solvent.
A The universal solvent is water.

A Logic is the science of correct reasoning.

A The science of correct reasoning is logic.

Likewise, an O propposition cannot be converted. It always involves the extension of

terms, false conclusion, and violation of the principle of logical equivalence.
EXERCISES 11

Give the conversion of the following and determine if it is of complete or partial conversion.
Give also the symbols.

1. No honest is corrupt.
______________________________________________________________________________

2. Cobra is the deadliest snake.

______________________________________________________________________________

3. Some students are working individuals.

______________________________________________________________________________
4. All books are reading materials.
______________________________________________________________________________

5. No rebel person is a lover of country.

______________________________________________________________________________

6. Several religious are fake individuals.

______________________________________________________________________________

7. Many policemen are guardians of peace and order.

______________________________________________________________________________

8. Philosophers are level headed and broad minded persons.

______________________________________________________________________________

9. Books are good literary materials.

______________________________________________________________________________

10. Friendship is an invaluable relation.

______________________________________________________________________________
II. Obversion

This is a process of eduction where a new proposition is formulated by changing the

quality. The original predicate is contradicted in the conclusion. The original proposition is
called obvertend, while the next proposition is called obverse.

A - All flowers are attractive Obvertend

E - No flower is unattractive Obverse

Rules:

1. Retain the subject and its quantity.

2. Change the quality.
3. Use the contradictory of the original predicate in the obverse.

e.g.
A Every spring is a natural wealth.
E No spring is non-natural wealth.

E No mosquito is safe.
A All mosquitoes are unsafe.

I Some historical structures are condemned.

O Some historical structures are not non-condemned.

O Some drugs are not prescription.

I Some drugs are non-prescription.
EERCISES 12

Give the obverse of the following and its symbol.

1. All underground economies are not paying taxes.

_________________________________________

2. Some institutions are for charity.

_________________________________________

3. All men are capable of innovation.

_________________________________________

4. Wood is combustible.
_________________________________________

5. Some judges are not just.

_________________________________________

6. Some Filipinos are voters.

_________________________________________

7. Not every businessman is a politician.

_________________________________________

8. No senior citizen is unretired.

_________________________________________

9. Narra is an expensive lumber.

_________________________________________

10. Illegal logging is prohibited.

_________________________________________
III. Contraposition

Contraposition is another form of logical equivalence that formulates new proposition

by transposing the subject of the original proposition into a predicate in the new proposition. It is
the combination of conversion and obversion. It involves conversion in the sense that it includes
an interchange of the subject and predicate of the original proposition in the new proposition. It
also involves obversion since it includes the addition of the contradictory term of the predicate
term in the new proposition or both the subject and the predicate in the new proposition.

e.g.
E No communist is a capitalist;
I Some Non-capitalists are communists.

Rules:

1. Change the quality of the given and contradict the original predicate.
2. Tranpose the subject and the predicate
3. For complete contraposition, the transposed subject and predicate are both
contradicted

Partial Contraposition: A to E, E to I, and O to I

A Fruits are rich in fibers.

E No non-rich in fibre is a fruit.

E No bad bacteria is healthy for the body.

I Some non-healthy for the body is bad bacteria.

O Some vegetables are not sources of vitamin A.

I Some non-sources of Vitamin A are vegetables.

Complete Contraposition: A to A, E to O, O to O

A Trees are protectors of land erosions.

A Non-protectors of land erosions are no- trees

E No toxic waste is safe for our water resources.

O Some non-safe materials for our water resources are not non-toxic wastes.

O Some institutions are not exclusive;

O Some non-exclusive places are not non- institutions.
EXERCISES 13

Identify the kind of contraposition. Give the symbols.

______ 1. Every A is B;
Every non-B is a non-A.
______ 2. No foreigners are voters;
Some non-voters are foreigners.
______ 3. Some district representatives are not competent legislators;
Some non-competent legislators are not non-district representatives.
______ 4. Philippine eagles are endangered animals.
No non-endangered animal is a Philippine eagle.
______ 5. Not all pagan rituals are barbaric traditions.
Many non-barbaric traditions are pagan rituals.
______ 6. Most of the frequent flooding in Metro Manila are not caused by small drainage
system;
Most non-small drainage systems cause the frequent flooding in Metro Manila.
______ 7. Respect of environment is everybody’s survival;
Non-everybody’s survival is non-respect of environment.
______ 8. No pollutant is healthy for our society;
Some non-healthy substance for our society is not non-pollutant.
______ 9. Every A is Z.
No non-Z is A.
______ 10. Many farmers are not land owners.
Many non-land owners are farmers.
IV. Inversion

It is another method of constructing a new proposition (Inverse) from a given

proposition (Invertend). This is of two types: simple & complete. Both the subject and predicate
of the original proposition are retained in the new proposition. However, the subject term in the
new proposition or both the subject term and predicate term are contradicted in the new
proposition.

A - All criminals are dangerous; Invertend

O - Some non-criminals are not dangerous. Inverse

Rules of Simple Inversion: A to O and E to I

1. Retain the subject and predicate in their original proposition.
2. Change the quality.
3. Contradict the original subject.

e.g. A Every schools is a transmitter of culture .

O Some non-schools are not transmitters of culture.

E No violent movie is morally appropriate to minors.

I Many non-violent movies are morally appropriate to minors.

Rules of Complete Inversion: A to I and E to O

1. Retain the subject and predicate and its quality in the original proposition.
2. Change the quantity.
3. Contradict both the subject and predicate in the new proposition.

e.g. A Citrus fruits are rich in vitamin C.

I Some non-citrus fruits are non-rich in Vitamin C.

E Fatty foods are not safe to human body.

O Several non-fatty foods are not non-safe to human body.
EXERCISE 14

Give the simple and complete inversion of the following propositions. Give the symbol.

1. Every fantasy movie is not realistic.

Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________

2. All fantasy movies are realistic.

Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________

3. No fanatic is liberal.
Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________

4. Some snakes are not colorful.

Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________

5. Most Filipino men are sports enthusiasts.

Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________

6. All athletes are physically strong.

Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________

7. Many Filipino traditions are not forgotten practices.

Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________

8. Water is the life-source of all living things.

Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________

9. Wood is a flammable material.

Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________

10. Physical fitness is relatively beneficial to anybody.

Simple: _______________________________________________________________
Complete: _____________________________________________________________
Synopsis of Logical Equivalence

I. Conversion
Complete I to I and E to E (A to A)
Some S is P; Some P is S.
No S is P; No P is S.
Every S is P; Every P is S.

Partial A to I and E to O
Every S is P; Some P is S.
No S is P; Some P is not S.

II. Obversion A to E, E to A, I to O, O to I
Every S is P, No S is Non-P.
No S is P, Every S is Non-P.
Some S is P, Some S is not Non-P.
Some S is not P, Some S is non-P.

III. Contraposition
Partial A to E, E to I and O to I
Every S is P; No non-P is S.
No S is P; Some non-P is S.
Some S is not P; Some non-P is S.
Complete A to A; E to O and O to O
Every S is P; Every non-P is a non-S.
No S is P; Some non-P is not non-S.
Some S is not P; some non-P is not non-S.

IV. INVERSION Simple A to O and E to I

Every S is P; Some non-S is not P
No S is P; Some non-S is P.
Complete A to I and E to O
Every S is P; Some non-S is a non-P.
No S is P; Some non-S is not non-P.
EXERCISES 15

Write on the blank the kind of equivalence: conversion, obversion, contraposition,

inversion.

___________ 1. No cake is a salty food; No salty food is a cake.

___________ 2. All professionals are degree holders; Most non-professionals are not degree
holders.
___________ 3. Some policemen are not lawyers; Some non-lawyers are not non-policeman.
___________ 4. Israel is the land of God; No Israel is non-land of God.
___________ 5. Jose Rizal is our national hero; Our national hero is Jose Rizal.
___________ 6. No criminal is a considerate person; Some considerate persons are not
criminals.
___________ 7. Many flowers are odorless things; Many odorless things are flowers.
___________ 8. Several forests are not protected; Several forests are non-protected.
___________ 9. Few rich politicians are not honestly paying their tax dues; Few dishonestly
paying their tax dues are not non-rich politicians.
___________ 10. No “winter” is an “El Nino”; “Winter” is a non ‘El Nino.”
EXERCISES 16

Convert the following propositions.

1. No square is a circle.

2. All papers are made from trees.

3. Some non-leaves are non-green.

4. Most illegal drugs are not being sold.

5. Every puppy is adorable.

6. All non-priest are not male.

7. Some lawyer are not non-doctors.

8. The Philippines is a tropical country.

9. Some toys are expensive.

10. No animal is a plant.

Obvert the following propositions.

1. Flying is impossible.

2. There is no misunderstanding.

3. Almost all students were attendees.

4. No chocolate is non-white.

5. Some mothers are not irresponsible.

6. A wedding is not unhappy occasion.

7. Not all vegetables are healthy.

8. Many berries are poisonous.

9. Each movie is not worthy.

10. Seatbelts are not unsafe.

Contrapose the following propositions.

1. Some jugs are blue.

2. iPad’s are not made by Samsung.

3. Many libraries are not filled with non-books.

4. Most non-alcoholic beverages are inexpensive.

5. All pizzas are not non-flat.

6. Donuts are sweet.

7. No ghost is alive.

8. Some clothes are not made of non-cotton.

9. Not all non-teachers are strict.

10.Every burger is not made of non-beef.

Invert the following prepositions.

1. Vitamins are important.

2. The weather is not sunny.

3. Almost all employees got laid off.

4. All guests were unhappy.

5. None of his children were adopted.

6. A leather shoe is not non-black.

7. No disrespectful person is successful.

8. Each ruler should be wise.

9. Some bottles are made of plastic.

10. All non-musicians are not non-composers.

CHAPTER 8
CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM

A categorical syllogism is comprised of the propositions which are all categorical.

Usually, it consists of categorical propositions which are logically related to one another so that
the subject and the predicate of the conclusion are united or separated from each other through
the mediate proposition. As also stated earlier, categorical syllogism is an external representation
of the mediate inference.

As to composition, categorical syllogism is composed of three propositions: two

premises and conclusion. The first two propositions are closely related leading to a sequential
relation that proceeds to a valid conclusion. The sure indicator of a valid syllogism is the
presence of logical relation between the two premises to postulate true conclusion.

No living creature is an angel. premise

But every plant is a living creature. premise
Therefore, no plant is an angel. Conclusion

Indeed, this is a valid syllogism. There exists a logical flow from the first premise to the
next premise down to its conclusion. The premises are connected by the term living creature
relating the angel and the plant terms.

The moment this logical relation is violated, no valid categorical syllogism is possible.
Observe the following example.

All farmers are industrious premise

But all doctors are professionals premise
Ergo, no beggar is a professional conclusion

The above syllogism is invalid because no interdependence of the premises with one
another is present. In addition, a categorical syllogism generally is either formally correct or
materially correct or both.
When we say formally correct, the premises are sequentially related to one another down
to its conclusion but an invalid conclusion.

e.g. Man is a living creature;

But plant is a living creature;
Ergo, man is a plant.
Formally valid since the premises are connected through the term living creature down
to a logical conclusion which is incorrect. Although both posses the same comprehension living
creature but not within the same extension. Hence equating man with plant is absurd.

Meanwhile, materially correct syllogism is composed of true premises and conclusion

but no logical relationship whatsoever. Still the syllogism is invalid.

e.g. Man is rational;

But plant is a material being;
Ergo, the earth is round.

As illustrated, all the categorical propositions are true but with no connection to each
other. Thus no syllogism is made.

Basic Structure of a Categorical Syllogism

A categorical syllogism has three basic propositions:

1. Major Premise. Regardless of its quantity and quality, it is the first premise, and generally,
this is the premise that has the greater extension than the other propositions of the syllogism.

2. Minor Premise. Regardless of its quantity and quality, it is the second proposition and
preceded by the conjunction “But.” Generally it has the lesser extension.

3. Conclusion. It is the last proposition in the syllogism. This is the proposition that has been
necessarily derived from the premises. Its quality and quantity is very much dependent on the
two premises.

Every angel is immortal. - major premise

But Gabriel is an angel. - minor premise
Therefore, Gabriel is immortal. - conclusion

Basic Components of Categorical Proposition

A categorical syllogism has three basic terms: the major, the minor and the middle
terms. Whereas it was Aristotle that gave middle term its definition, the meaning of each f the
other two terms is not his. Instead, the definition of the other two terms is to be found in the
commentary to the Prior Analytics by Philoponus (A.D. 500).

1. Major Term. It is always the predicate term of the conclusion. The major term appears
usually, but not always in the major premise. The major term is usually represented by “P”
(Predicate of the Conclusion).

2. Minor Term. It is always the subject of the conclusion. It appears in the conclusion and
usually, but not always in the minor premise. It isrepresented by “S” (Subject of the Conclusion)

3. Middle Term. It is the term which is found in both premises but not in the conclusion. It is
this term that provides the connection between the two premises in order to form a conclusion
derived from the two premises. Without this medium called the middle term, there will be no
connection of one premise to the other, and thus, the mind cannot make a conclusion from the
premises. The symbol “M” refers to the middle term.

M P
e.g. Every car is a machine;
S M
But Toyota is a car.
S P
Therefore, Toyota is a machine.

The major term is “machine” since it is the predicate of the conclusion. The minor term
is “Toyota” for it is the subject of the conclusion. The middle term is the term “car.”

Validity of Categorical Syllogisms

Unlike any other ordinary arguments, categorical syllogism is a formal argument that
implies formal rules to ensure its validity by employing premises that which are true statements
of facts that consequently make the conclusion also valid. More, expressing an argument in the
form of syllogism is not just putting together several propositions, one has to follow rules in
order that the syllogism, and ultimately, the argument that it signifies will be valid. Otherwise,
the syllogism is fallacious or erroneous. Here is a list of the syllogistic rules.

A. Rules on Terms

1. There must be three univocal terms only (major term, minor term, middle term). The
processes to a valid flow of premises to the conclusion are the terms. Terms provide the
sequential relation of the proposition. More than three terms or less than three make a syllogism
invalid. Although six terms in the syllogism, all are in a univocal mode to limit them only into
three. Examine the example below.

e.g.
No man is immortal.
But Bong is a man.
Therefore, Bong is not immortal.

In this syllogism, there are only three terms: the major term “immortal” is univocal to
the predicate of the major premise, the minor term “Bong” is also univocal to the subject of the
minor premise, and the middle terms “man” are likewise univocal. But analyze this syllogism:

e.g.
No man is immortal.
But Drilon is a man
Therefore, Noynoy is not immortal.

There are actually four terms in this syllogism: immortal, Drilon, man and Noynoy. The
middle terms Drilon and Noynoy did not follow any sequential relation for they represent two
absolutely different men. Thus, the above syllogism is invalid or fallacious. This fallacy is called
the “Fallacy of Four Terms.” If there are five terms, then the fallacy is called Fallacy of five
terms, and so on.
The syllogism below is also fallacious:
e. g.
A ruler is a person with leadership skills.
But a ruler is a measuring device.
Therefore, this device is a person with leadership skills.

When counting the number of terms, there seems to be only three of them. But closely
analyzing their meanings, there are actually two different meanings for the term ruler in the
syllogism. They are equivocal terms which are prohibited in a syllogism for they express two
different meanings. If equivocal terms are used in the syllogism as middle term, this fallacy is
called the Fallacy of Equivocation.

Likewise, it is also prohibited to use analogous terms in a syllogism. Otherwise, the

Fallacy of Amphiboly is committed.
e.g.
A man is in need of rest.
But the statue of Rizal is a man.
Therefore, the statue of Rizal is in need of rest.

A statue does not need any rest for obviously the conclusion is materially false, that
makes the syllogism formally invalid for it violates the first formal rule. The term man in the
major premise does not have exactly the same meaning as “man” in the minor premise. The first
man means in the flesh and blood, a real man, while the second man refers to just a thing with
the shape or form of a man. Here we have four terms.

The syllogism below is also fallacious:

Peter needs an operation.

But tubal ligation is an operation.
Therefore, Peter needs tubal ligation.

Peter is a man, but tubal ligation is applicable only to women. Thus, the syllogism is
materially false and also formally invalid since it also violates the first rule of terms. Seemingly,
it has three terms only but reducing each proposition to its logical form, the exact number of
terms will be five. This fallacy is called fallacy of five terms.

Peter is a man who needs an operation.

But tubal ligation is an operation.
Therefore, Peter is a man who needs tubal ligation.

2. Each one of the terms must appear twice in the syllogism.

This is the reason why in the first rule, equivocation or amphiboly is disallowed for it
may present any of the term once only which is an outright violation of this second rule.
Univocal terms warrant the fulfilment of this rule. Take the preceding example.
e. g.
All plants are living creatures.
But narra is a plant;
Ergo, narra is living creature

All the terms such as plant, living creature/s, and narra appeared only twice due to their
univocal meaning respectively.

3. The middle term must not appear in the conclusion.

This is so because once the middle term is seen in the conclusion, rules 1 and 2 are
automatically violated.

4. a. The major term cannot be universal in the conclusion unless it is universal in the
major premise.

b. The minor term cannot be universal in the conclusion unless it is universal in the
minor premise.

What are the implications of rules 4a and 4b? There is only one instance when the major
or the minor term may be the source of fallacy; this is the jumping from particular term to
universal term.

Example violation of 4a:

particular
All cats are mammals.
But no dogs are cats.

universal
Therefore, no dogs are mammals.

This fallacy is called “Illicit Major,” for it is the major term that jumped from the
particular to the universal. In principle, the predicate “mammals” in the major premise is
particular because the statement is affirmative while the predicate “mammals” in the conclusion
is universal because the statement is negative.

The example below is a violation of 4b:

Every circle is a round.

particular
But every circle is a figure.
universal
Therefore, every figure is round.
This fallacy is called “Illicit Minor.” The predicate “figure” in the minor premise is
particular being the predicate of an affirmative statement while subject “figure” in the conclusion
is universal being the subject of a universal proposition.

Synopsis for valid major term and minor term:

Universal, universal, particular

MAJOR/MINOR TERM
Universal, particular, particular

c. At least once, the middle term must be universal.

A violation 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 while
universal in the other or vice-versa. The example below is fallacious:
particular
The earth is a planet. particular, universal
Particular MIDDLE TERM
But Mars is a planet. ( valid scheme) universal, particular
Therefore, the earth is Mars.

Notice that the middle term “planet” is particular in both premises being the predicate of
affirmative propositions. This is a clear violation of the rule 4c. This fallacy is called Fallacy of
Undistributed Middle.

The essence of these rules is that one cannot derive more from lesser extension. But
deriving something from a greater extension is possible.

B. Rules on Propositions

Rules on Quality

5. If both premises are affirmative, the conclusion must also be affirmative. This is when the
major premise and the minor premise are both affirmative in the syllogism regardless of their
quantity.

e.g.
A- affirmative major premise; Every Angel is holy;
But, A- affirmative minor premise; But Gabriel is an angel;
Ergo, A- affirmative conclusion. Ergo, Gabriel is holy

A- affirmative major premise; All trees are good for the environment;
But, I - affirmative minor premise; But some trees are fruit bearing plants;
Ergo, I- affirmative conclusion. Ergo, Some fruit bearing plants are good for the
environment.

I- affirmative major premise; Some Senators are industrialists;

But, A- affirmative minor premise; But every industrialist is landowner;
Ergo, I- affirmative conclusion. Ergo, some landowners are senators.

6. If one premise is affirmative and the other premise is negative, the conclusion is negative.

Both affirmative premises unite the middle term with either the major or minor term,
while one negative premise in the syllogism separates the middle term from either the major or
minor term which makes one identical with the middle term and the other differing with the same
term. With this the major and the minor terms cannot be identical with each other. Thus, the
conclusion must express the non-identity by means of a negative conclusion. The following
syllogism is a violation of this rule.

e.g.
E- No spirit is material;
A- But ghost is a spirit
A- Ergo, ghosts are material

The conclusion “ghosts are material” is invalid due to its affirmative quality. Note the
next valid example.

e.g.
E- No spirit is material;
A- But ghost is a spirit;
E- Ergo, ghost is not material.

7. If both premises are negative, no conclusion follows. There is nothing to learn from the
non-relationship of the terms with one another. Two negative premises cannot yield new truth
since there is nothing to conclude about. All the three terms are non-identity with each other
which means the mind cannot flow into the conclusion since no source to draw any conclusion
anyway.

Rules on Quantity

8. At least one of the premises must be universal. This is either the major premise or the minor
premise regardless of their quality but not both negative.

e.g.
A- Every forest is a natural habitat;
O- But some natural habitats are not protected;
O- Ergo, some forests are not protected.
9. If one premise is universal and the other is particular, the conclusion must be particular.
This is either the major premise or the minor premise but not both negative in quality.

e.g.
A- Every forest is a natural habitat;
O- But some natural habitats are not protected;
O- Ergo, some forests are not protected.

10. If both premises are particular, then no conclusion follows. (The violation of this rule
entails violation of rules 4c, 8, and 9)

e.g.
Some animals are cats.
Some animals are dogs.
Therefore, some dogs are cats.

The example above illustrates the fallacy of particular premises.

EXERCISES 17

CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM

I. Modified TRUE OR FALSE. Write true if the given statement are correct. If the statement is
incorrect , supply the correct answer by changing the underlined word in the given statement
(no need to write false , just changed the underlined word ). Write your answer on the space
provided before the number. ( 2pts each).

1. CATEGORAL syllogism is composed of three propositions namely , Major premise, Minor

premise and conclusion.

2.The minor term, which is the subject of the conclusion, is usually found in the first premise of
the categoral syllogism.

3.Undistributed middle term is being committed if the middle term is found in the conclusion.

4. This term displays the connection between the subject and the predicate. It is present in both
major and minor premises. It is called as middle term.

5. The rule says that there will be no logical conclusion if both premises are negative. This
fallacy is called fallacy of negative premises.

6. The second premise in categorical syllogism is also known as major premises.

7.The conclusion affirms or denies the connection between the subject and the predicate. It is
also the last proposition in the syllogism.

8.Fallacy of illicit major is committed when major term in the premise is particular but in
conclusion it is universal.

9. The first rule in categorical syllogism says that there must only be three univocal term.

10.There can be no logical conclusion from two particular prepositions. This rule is known as

Fallacy of particular premises.

II. Make your own categorical syllogism from the given syllogistic form.
1. A: M + p 6. E : M - P
A: S + p I:m+S
A: S + p O:s-P
2. E : P – M 7. O: p - M
A :S+ M A: S + m
E :P- P O: s - P
3. I : M + p 8. A : P + m
A:M+ s E: S-P
I : S + p O:s-P

4. O : m – P 9. I : M + p
A:M+S E:S-P
O:S -P O:s-P

5. A : P + m 10. E : P - M
A:M+s A:M+S
I: s +p O:s–P

III. On the space provided before each number, write the letter of the fallacy committed.
1. Equivocation
2.. Illicit minor
3. Illicit major
4.Undistributed middle term
5. Particular Premises
6. Negatively Premises
7. Universal conclusion drawn from a particular premise.
8. Affirmative conclusion drawn from a negative premise.
9. Misplaced middle term.

1 .Some priests are not celibate;

But, all priests are ordained ministers;
Hence, no ordained ministers are celibate.

10. Some terrorists are suicide- bombers;

But, some suicide- bombers are Catholics;
Therefore, Catholics are terrorists.

3. No politicians are honest;

Diego is not a politician;
Hence, Diego is not honest.

4. Some prisoners are innocent;

But , Jake is innocent;
Therefore, Jake is prisoner.

5. Crooked lines are bending lines;

But, some politicians are crooked;
Hence, some politicians are bending lines.

6. Filipinos are hardworking;

But, James is a Filipino;
Therefore, James is a hardworking Filipino.

7. Some teachers are efficient educators;

But, some efficient educators are women;
Therefore, all women are efficient educators.

8. My mother is industrious;
But, my mother is a doctor;
Hence, no doctor is industrious.

9. Some habits are pleasurable;

But, eating is pleasurable;
Hence, eating is not pleasurable.

10. All swimmers are trained athletes;

But some scholars are swimmers;
Hence, all scholar are trained athletes.

IV. Analyze the following syllogistic form and identify which one of the syllogisms is.
Invalid. If syllogism is invalid write the fallacies being committed.

1. E : P – M 6. O : p - M
A:s+m O:s -M
E:P- P O:s -M

2. I : m + p 7. A : P + m
O:m–S A:S+m
O:s -P A:S+P

3. E : M – P 8. E : P - M
E:M–S A:S+m
E:S–P A:S+p

4. A : P + m 9. I : p + m
A :S + m I:m+s
I:s +p I:s +p

5. I : p + m 10. A : M + p
I:m+s A:M+p
O:s -P A: S+p
Figures and Moods of the Categorical Syllogism

As applied to the categorical syllogism, figure refers to the arrangement of the middle
(M) term in the premises while the mood is the arrangement of premises and conclusion as A, E,
I and O propositions.

In the first figure, the middle term is subject of the major premise and predicate of the
minor premise. In the second figure, the middle term occurs as the predicates of the major and
minor premises, and in the third figure, it occurs as the subjects in both the major and minor
premises. While the fourth figure contains the middle term as the predicate of the major premise
but the subject of the minor premise. The division of syllogisms into figures has, of course, no
logical significance. It only aids the systematic examination of all ordered pairs of categorical
propositions with a view to establishing which of them, if used as premises, give rise to
syllogisms. However, as an imperative rule, not one of the syllogistic rules shall be violated in
establishing the right figure and the valid mood.

Figure 1 (Sub-Pre)

M P All M is P
S M But all S is M
S P Therefore, all S is P.

It can be seen that the middle term in the first premise is the subject “sub”of the
premise, whereas the middle term in the minor premise is the predicate “pre” of the premise.
Thus, the name of the figure is “Sub-Pre.”

Special Rules:

1. The minor premise must be affirmative.

2. The major premise must be universal.

The purpose of the first special rule in figure one is to avoid an illicit major when the
minor premise is made negative.

M
e.g. A- All philanthropists give unconditional help; MuPp
` M
I- But some politicians are philanthropists; SpMp
I- Thus, some politicians give unconditional help. SuPu Valid

A- All well educated individuals are well-respected. MuPP

E- But no beggar is well educated. SuMu
E- Therefore, no beggar is well-respected. SuPu Invalid
The second rule is also necessary on order to obtain a distributed middle. Otherwise,
there is a violation of a general rule as indicated in the second example where the middle term
was undistributed.

e.g. A- Every Christian is a believer of God. MuPp

A- But every Catholic is a Christian. SuMp
A- Therefore, every Catholic is a believer in God SuPp Valid

I- Some animals are trainable. MpPp

A-But all mammals are animals. SuMp
I- Therefore, some mammals are trainable. SpPp Invalid

Valid Moods for Figure 1 (Sub-Pre)

The following valid moods of figure 1 also ensure compliance to the general rules and to
its special rules.

1. AAA – BARBARA
A – All free men are responsible for their acts.
A – But all adults are free men.
A – Thus, all adults are responsible for their acts.

2. EAE – CELARENT

E – No greedy person is considerate.

A – But all ambitious persons are greedy.
E - Ergo, no ambitious person is considerate.

3. AII – DARII
A – All boisterous individuals are shallow- minded.
I – But some students are boisterous individuals.
I – Therefore, some students are shallow-minded.

4. EIO – FERIO
E – No criminal act is good.
I – But some professionals are doers of criminal acts.
O – Therefore, some professionals are not good.

Figure 2 (Pre-Pre)

P M The middle term is the predicate of both.

S M major and minor premises
S P

Special rules:

1. One premise must be negative,

2. The major premise must be universal.

e.g.
A-All nurses are medical practitioners. PuMP
E-But Joe is not a nurse. SuMu
E-Therefore, Joe is not a medical practitioner. SuPuValid

A-All whales are mammals. PuMp

A-But all shark whales are whales. SuMp
A-Therefore, shark whales are mammals. SuPpInvalid

Any of the two premises may be negative. But if both premises in this figure are
affirmative, the middle term will be undistributed.

Since the major term is universal in the negative conclusion, then it must be universal in
the major premise. To avoid an illicit major term in this figure, the major premise must be
universal.

e.g.
A-All books are reading materials. PuMp
E-But TV is not a reading material. SuMu
E-Therefore, TV is not a book. SuPu Valid

I-Some Filipinos are American citizens. PpMp

E-But no Japanese is an American citizen. SuMu
E-Thus, no Japanese is a Filipino. SuPu Invalid

Valid Moods for Figure 2 (Pre - Pre)

1. EAE – CESARE
E – No virtuous act is evil.
A – But all selfish acts are evil.
E – Therefore, no selfish act is virtuous.

2. AEE – CAMESTRES
A – All farmers are frugal.
E – No criminal is frugal.
E – Therefore, no criminal is a farmer.

3. EIO – FESTINO
E – No angel is man.
I – But some creatures are men.
O – Therefore, some creatures are not angels.

4. AOO – BAROCO
A – All vain people are proud.
O – But some men are not proud.
O – Therefore, some men are not vain.

Figure 3 (Sub-Sub)

M P The middle term is the subject of both the

M S major and the minor premises.
S P

Special Rules:

1. The minor premise must be affirmative.

2. The conclusion must be particular.

If the minor premise is negative, the major premise must be affirmative, for no
conclusion can be inferred from two negative premises. The violation of the rule of the figure
can lead to an illicit major.

e.g.
I-Some animals are an endangered species. MpPp
A-But all animals are protected. MuSp
I-Ergo, some endangered species are protected. SpPp Valid

A-All martyrs are courageous. MpPp

A-But all martyrs are resourceful. MuSp
E-Therefore, No resourceful is courageous. SuPu Invalid

The conclusion must be particular since the minor term in the affirmative minor premise
is a particular predicate. The violation of the rule gives rise to an illicit minor/undistributed
middle.

e.g.
O-Some kind people are not famous. MpPu
A-But all kind people are rich men. MuSp
O-Therefore, some rich men are not famous. SpPu Valid

A-Every strong earthquake is disastrous. MuPp

A-But strong earthquakes are natural occurrences. MuSp
A-Therefore, all natural occurrences are disastrous. SuPp Invalid

Valid Moods for Figure 3 (Sub-Sub)

1. AAI – DARAPTI
A – All talented actors are emotional.
A – But all talented actors are artists.
I – Therefore, some artists are emotional.
2. IAI – DISAMIS
I – Some greedy men are users.
A – But all greedy men are stone-hearted men.
I – Therefore, some stone-hearted men are users.

3. AII – DATISI
A – All soldiers are brave.
I – But some soldiers are women.
I – Therefore, some women are brave.

4. EAO – FELAPTON
E – No traitor is patriotic.
A – All traitors are greedy people.
O – Therefore, some greedy people are not patriotic.

5. OAO – BOCARDO
O – Some lawyers are not honest.
A – But all lawyers are professionals.
O – Therefore, some professionals are not honest.

6. EIO – FERISON
E – No reckless man is prudent.
I – But some reckless men are drivers.
O – Therefore, some drivers are not prudent.

Figure 4 (Pre-Sub)
P M The middle term is the predicate of the major
M S premise and the subject of the minor premise.
S P

Special Rules:

1. If the major premise is affirmative, the minor premise must be universal.

2. If the minor premise is affirmative, the conclusion must be particular.
3. If one of the premises is negative, the major premise must be universal.
The first rule shall ensure the non-commission of the fallacy of undistributed middle.
Once the major premise is affirmative, it implies a particular predicate which disallow a
particular minor premise, otherwise, the middle term will be undistributed.

e.g.
A-All Igorots are natives; PuMp
I-But some natives are Filipinos; MpSp
I-Therefore, some Filipinos are Igorots. SpPp Invalid

I-Some diligent (men) are minors. PpMp

A-But all minors are young people. MuSp
I-Thus, some young people are diligent. SpPp Valid

On the second rule, if the minor premise is affirmative, its predicate, minor term, will be
particular. But in this figure, the minor term is also the subject of the conclusion. Therefore, to
avoid fallacy of illicit minor, if the minor premise is affirmative, the conclusion must be
particular.

e.g.
A-All religious are celibates. PuMp
A-But all celibates are blessed persons. MuSp
A-Every blessed person is a religious. SuPp Invalid

A-All movies are innovative. PuMp

A-But all innovative are profitable things. MuSp
O-Therefore, some profitable things are movies. SpPp Valid

The third rule aims to avoid the illicit process of the major since it is the subject in the
major premise and predicate in the conclusion. If one premise is negative, the conclusion must
also be negative. Now if the major premise is not universal, consequently its subject, which is the
major term, is also particular. This leads to illicit process of the major term.

e.g.
I-Some carnivorous animals are snakes. PpMp
E-But no snake is herbivorous creature. MuSu
E-Therefore, no herbivorous creatures are SuPu Invalid
carnivorous animals.

E-All law violators are not good citizens. PuMu

I-But some good citizens are cops. MpSp
O-Therefore some cops are not law violators. SpPu Valid

Valid Moods for Figure 4 (Pre-Sub)

1. AAI – BRAMANTIP
A – All whales are mammals.
A – But all mammals are warm-blooded animals.
I – Therefore, some warm-blooded animals are whales.

2. AEE- CAMENES
A – All mammals are warm-blooded animals.
E – But no warm-blooded animals are reptiles.
E – Therefore, no reptiles are mammals.

3. IAI – DIMARIS
I – Some native people are kind men.
A – But all kind men are likable persons.
I – Therefore, some likable persons are native people.

4. EAO – FESAPO
E – No brute is capable of speech.
A – But all beings capable of speech are organisms.
O – Therefore, some organisms are not brutes.
EXERCISES 18

I. Determine the major term, minor term, middle term, major premise and the minor premise of
the following syllogisms:

1. All metals are conductors of electricity.

But silver is a metal.
Therefore, silver is a conductor of electricity.

Major Term: ____________________________________

Minor Term: ____________________________________
Middle Term: ___________________________________
Major Premise: __________________________________
Minor Premise: __________________________________

2. No wood is a good conductor of electricity.

But copper is a good conductor of electricity.
Therefore, copper is not a wood.

Major Term: ____________________________________

Minor Term: ____________________________________
Middle Term: ___________________________________
Major Premise: __________________________________
Minor Premise: __________________________________

II. A. Determine the figure of each syllogism.

B. Determine the mood of each of the following syllogisms.

1. All heroes are lovers of country.

But Gen. Aguinaldo is a hero.
Therefore, Gen. Aguinaldo is a lover of country.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________

2. No outstanding artist is a lousy singer.

But some musicians are lousy singers.
Therefore, some musicians are not outstanding artists.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________

3. Every “Chrysler” is an American car.

But every American car is a contribution to the American economy.
Therefore, some contributions to the American economy are Chrysler cars.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________

4. All quack doctors are believers in spirits.

But many quack doctors are Filipinos.
Therefore, some Filipinos are believers in spirits.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________

5. No radio repair shop is a quite place.

But a quite place is a well-kept convent.
Therefore, some well-kept convents are not radio repair shop.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________

6. All subjects of rights are persons.

But apes are not persons.
Therefore, apes are not subjects of rights.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________

7. All objects that provoke unhealthy emotions are objectionable.

But some objects that provoke unhealthy emotions are objects of art.
Therefore, some objects of art are questionable.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________

8. An act of obedience is not an act of vice.

But drunkenness is an act of vice.
Therefore, drunkenness is not an act of obedience.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________

9. Every sincere individual is honest.

But every honest individuals is a likable individual.
Therefore, some likable individuals are sincere.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________

10. Some organisms are sentient beings.

But all sentient beings are material beings.
Therefore, some material beings are organisms.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
III. Analyze each syllogism and write the required answers on the blank.
a. is it valid or invalid
b. if valid, what are its figure and mood
c. if invalid, what fallacy
1. All teachers are professionals.
My mother is a professional.
Therefore, my mother is a teacher.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________

2. All medical students are rich students.

Many medical students are scholarly.
Therefore, many scholarly students are rich.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________

3. All fishes are beings that swim.

But all fishes are animals.
Therefore, all animals are beings that swim.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________

4. No lawbreaker is a good citizen.

Some politicians are lawbreakers.
Therefore, some politicians are not good citizens.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________

5. Since majority of Filipinos are Catholics.

And Catholics are Christians.
Therefore, many Christians are Filipinos.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________

6. According to Shakespeare, lovers are blind.

But many blind persons are beggars.
Therefore, many beggars are lovers.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________
7. All voters are political-minded persons.
Nobody who is political-minded is illiterate.
Therefore, no illiterate is a voter.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________

8. Beauty is a relative thing.

Anything relative is subjective.
Therefore, nothing subjective is beauty.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________

9. Euthanasia is an immoral act.

No immoral act is in conformity with the law.
Therefore, something in conformity with the law is euthanasia.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________

10. Every philanthropist is a lover of men.

Many prominent citizens are philanthropists.
Therefore, many prominent citizens are lovers of men.
A. ______________________________
B. ______________________________
C. ______________________________
EXERCISES 19

V. Translate the following syllogisms into syllogistic forms. Then identify the validity of
each syllogism. If the given syllogism is valid simply write valid on the space before the
number. If the syllogism is invalid write the fallacy / ies being committed.

Syllogistic Form
1. No irresponsible individuals are good people;
But , some teachers are irresponsible;
Ergo, No teachers are good people.

2. Magicians are entertainers;

But, actors and actresses are irresponsible;
Hence, actor and actresses are magicians.

3. Some old people are sickly;

But, Lola basyang is old;
Therefore, Lola basyang is sickly.

4. Not all men are good;

Not all men are saints;
Ergo, not all saints are good.

5. No government officials are dishonests;

Aldub is not a government official;
Therefore, Aldub is not dishonests.

6. Many impoverished people work in factory;

All my relatives work in factory;
Hence, all my relatives are impoverished.

7. Some girls are career women;

But, Janet is a girl;
Therefore, Janet is a career women.

8. No drug addict is thoughtful;

But, not all drug addicts are insane people;
Ergo, no thoughtful person is insane.

9. Carabao eats grass;

But, horse eats grass;
Hence, horses are carabaos.

10. All dishonest people are cheaters;

But, many students are cheaters;
Ergo, all students are dishonest.
EXERCISES 20

FIGURES AND MOODS

I. Determine the major term, minor term, middle term, major premise and minor premise
of the following syllogisms:

1. All metals are conductors of electricity.

But, iron is a metal;
Therefore, iron is a conductor of electricity.

Major Term : .
Minor Term : .
Middle Term : .
Minor Premises: .
Major Premise: .

2. No insulators are good metal conductor of electricity;

But, cooper is a good inductor of electricity;
Hence, cooper is not an insulator.

Major Term : .
Minor Term : .
Middle Term : .
Minor Premises: .
Major Premise: .

3. Few women are skydivers;

All skydivers are thrill- seekers;
Hence, some thrill- seekers are women.

Major Term : .
Minor Term : .
Middle Term : .
Minor Premises: .
Major Premise: .

4. Dogs are not centipedes;

But, hounds are dog;
Ergo, hounds are not centipede.

Major Term : .
Minor Term : .
Middle Term : .
Minor Premises: .
Major Premise: .

5. All human are mortal;

But, Jane is a human;
Hence, Jane is mortal.

Major Term : .
Minor Term : .
Middle Term : .
Minor Premises: .
Major Premise: .

II. A. Translate the following into syllogistic form: write your answer on opposite side of
each syllogism.
B. On the first blank, identify the figure of each syllogism.
C. On the second blank, identify the mood of each syllogism.

Syllogistic Form

1. Teachers are educators

But some teachers are corrupt.
Hence, some teachers are corrupt.

2. All political leaders are community serving

But, Alex is a political leader.
Therefore, Alex is community serving.

3. Apple is crunchy.
But apple is fruit
Hence, some fruits are crunchy.

4. Apolinario H. Rizal is God-fearing individual.

But Apolinario H. Rizal is a Filipino.
Hence, some Filipinos are God-fearing.

5. Faculty teachers from department of Social Sciences and

Humanities are generous.
Jeff is a faculty from the Department of Social Sciences and Humanities.
Therefore, Jeff is generous.

6. All artists are lovers of wine

But, some artists are not lovers of nature.
Ergo. Some artists are not lovers of wine.

7. Some domestic animals are herbivores;

But, cow is a domestic animal;
Hence, cow is herbivore.

8. A square is a four sided polygon;

But, A circle is not a four sided polygon;
Ergo , circle is not a square.

9. Some that glitter are not gold;

But, all that glitters are precious;
Therefore, some precious things are gold.

10. No Sultan is a slave;

But, some slaves are shipbuilder;
Hence, not all shipbuilders are sultan.

III. Supply the missing conclusions of the following syllogisms. Then identify the figure and
the mood. Write the figure and mood on the space provided before the number
respectively.

1. No civilized persons are terrorists;

But, all head-hunters are terrorists;

2. An impostor is a deceiver;
But, some seductresses are impostor;

3. All good players are sportsmen;

But, some losers are not sportsmen;

4. All comedians are entertainers;

But, some entertainers are actors;

5. No domestic helper is a corporate manager;

But, some Filipinos are domestic helper;

6. All plants need sunlight;

But, Daisy is a plant;
7. Gadgets are battery generated;
But ,cellular phone is a gadget

8. All moral obligations must be fulfilled;

But ,some difficult tasks are moral obligations;

9. All Filipinos are Asian;

But, Alfred is a Filipino;

10. Some guitars are expensive;

But, all guitars are musical instruments;
CHAPTER 9
HYPOTHETICAL SYLLOGISM

Before exploring the three hypothetical syllogisms, it is but wise to discuss the unique
features of categorical syllogism from that of the hypothetical one. Distinguishing their peculiar
features will give us clear grasp between the two syllogisms that will free us from any possible
confusion.
The categorical syllogism employs all categorical propositions as its basic structures and
the validity of which is very much illustrated in the relationship among its terms: major term,
minor term and the middle term, the following of the syllogistic rules, figures and moods with
special rules. All must be formally and materially valid to ensure a sound and valid formal
argument.
While the rules of categorical syllogism, figures and the special rules do not matter to
hypothetical syllogism. Hence, hypothetical syllogism is composed at least of one hypothetical
proposition from which the minor premise and the conclusion are derived. Its validity is
dependent on the logical relations among its propositions.

Hypothetical Syllogism

A hypothetical syllogism is consists of at least one hypothetical proposition. It starts

from a tentative statement as a major premise which the proposition is belonging to the
hypothetical category, i.e., a conditional, disjunctive, and conjunctive propositions expressing
sequentially related concepts or statements.

e.g. Conditional
If you love God, then you love your neighbors. – major premise
But you love God; - minor premise
Therefore, you love your neighbors. - conclusion

Disjunctive
You either you love God or hate your neighbours - major premise
But you love God; - minor premise
Ergo, you do not hate your neighbours. - conclusion

Conjunctive
You cannot both love God but hate your neighbours; - major premise
But you love God; -minor premise
Then you do not hate your neighbours. - conclusion

Unlike the categorical syllogism, hypothetical syllogisms have no major, minor nor
middle terms. The minor premise and the conclusion are drawn from the major premise only
analogously. Furthermore, this kind of syllogism does not express the agreement or disagreement
between terms but the agreement or disagreement of statement upon the truth or falsehood of
another statement. The rules governing the categorical syllogism do not apply to the hypothetical
syllogism.
Kinds of Hypothetical Syllogism

As there are three kinds of hypothetical propositions so are there three kinds of
hypothetical syllogism, for it is these kinds of hypothetical propositions that comprise the
hypothetical syllogism:

1. Conditional Syllogism
2. Disjunctive Syllogism
3. Conjunctive Syllogism

Conditional Syllogism

A conditional syllogism is a hypothetical syllogism which contains at least one

conditional proposition. There are two kinds of conditional syllogism.

1. Pure Conditional. It is a conditional syllogism premises and conclusion of which are all
conditional propositions.

2. Mixed Conditional. It is a conditional syllogism, the major premise of which is a conditional

proposition, but the minor premise and conclusion are categorical propositions.

This workbook shall only tackle the mixed conditional syllogism and the other mixed
hypothetical syllogisms.

e.g.

If Peter has terminal cancer, then he is seriously sick. Major premise

But Peter has terminal cancer. Minor premise
Therefore, Peter is seriously sick. Conclusion

Valid Moods of the Conditional Syllogism

1. Modus Ponens or Affirming Process

Rule: If the antecedent is true, and affirmed or posited, the consequent must be true and
must be affirmed, but not vice versa. Affirming the consequent first before the antecedent may
lead to an invalid conditional proposition.

This rule is the result of the necessary relationship between the antecedent and the
consequent. If the antecedent is true, that which necessitates the consequent as you can observe
in the example below, then, the consequent must also be true.
If Mark has terminal cancer, then he is seriously sick.
But Mark has terminal cancer.
Therefore, he is seriously sick.

This is an example of Modus Ponens or the Positing Process. What was done was
affirmed both the antecedent in the major premise and in the minor premise, then affirmed as
well the consequent in the conclusion. This process warrants a valid conclusion, thus a valid
hypothetical conditional modus ponens syllogism. However, the consequent cannot be posited
first before the antecedent; otherwise, the syllogism will be fallacious.

Take note of this example:

If Mark has terminal cancer, then, he is seriously sick.

But Mark is seriously sick.
Therefore, He has terminal cancer.

The consequent was posited first before the antecedent. The result is a fallacious
syllogism, for it may be true that Peter is seriously sick, but it does not necessarily follow that he
has terminal cancer. He may have AIDS, or TB, or other serious illness other than terminal
cancer. The syllogism is invalid.

Other Examples of Modus Ponens

1. If Castro is sociable then, he is a flexible individual.

But, He is sociable.
Therefore, he is a flexible individual.

2. If kings are leaders, then they are respectable.

But they are leaders.
Therefore, they are respectable.

2. Modus Tollens or Excluding Process (also known as destructive conditional syllogism)

Rule: The consequence has to be denied first in the minor premise, and then the
antecedent must be denied also in the conclusion. Sublating or denying first the antecedent in the
minor premise before the consequent is fallacious for it does not warrant the conclusion. It is an
invalid hypothetical conditional modus tollens syllogism.

If Mark has terminal cancer, then, he is seriously sick.

But he is not seriously sick;
Therefore, he has no terminal cancer.

In the minor premise, the consequent was sublated or denied first, and then the
antecedent was sublated in the conclusion. This process makes the syllogism valid for if one has
no serious illness, he is naturally denied of having a terminal cancer nor having any other
sickness that may lead to the same consequence. But denying the antecedent first is not
warranted. Observe the next example.

If Mark has terminal cancer, then he is seriously sick.

But Mark has no terminal cancer.
Therefore, he is not seriously sick.

In the minor premise, the antecedent was denied first, and then the consequent was also
denied in the conclusion. With this, Mark has terminal cancer, but it does not necessarily mean
that he cannot be seriously sick, for he may have dengue or acute pneumonia that makes him
seriously sick. This is invalid.

Other Examples of Modus Tollens:

1. If greed is avoided, then people’s interest will be promoted.

But people’s interest is not promoted.
Therefore, greed was not avoided.

2. If there is no universal norm of morality, then there would be no peace.

But there is no peace.
Therefore, there is no universal norm of morality.

As a general rule, a conditional syllogism may be fallacious when:

1. There is no necessary connection between the antecedent and the consequent.

2. The consequent is affirmed first before the antecedent.

3. The antecedent is sublated first before the consequent.

Disjunctive Syllogism

1. Pure Disjunctive. It is a disjunctive syllogism whose propositions are all disjunctive.

2. Mixed Disjunctive. It is a disjunctive syllogism whose major premise is a disjunctive

proposition but its major premise and conclusion are categorical.

The Mixed Disjunctive Syllogism

The requirements of a disjunctive proposition also apply to the disjunctive syllogism

wherein the alternatives must be mutually exclusive. Only one alternative has to be accepted
while the other must be excluded. Otherwise if the alternatives are mutually inclusive or related,
it violates the very nature of disjunction, which to separate.

Valid Processes of Mixed Disjunctive Syllogism

1. Modus Ponendo tollens or the Positing – Negating Process

Rule: If one alternative of the disjunctive proposition is true and affirmed, then the
other/s are false and must be denied.

e.g.

Either the offender is innocent or guilty.

But, the offender is innocent.
Therefore, the offender is not guilty.

Planet Mars is either brown or green.

But Mars is green.
Therefore, it is not brown.

Either the soul of man is not material or corruptible.

But, the soul of man is not material.
Therefore, the soul of man is incorruptible.

In each of the above syllogisms, one part of the major premise was affirmed or posited
in the minor premise – any part maybe posited – then, the remaining part was denied or sublated
in the conclusion.

2. Modus Tollendo Ponens or the Excluding -Positing Process

Rule: The minor premise negates one of the alternatives and affirmed one in the
conclusion.

e..g.

The accused is either guilty or innocent.

But, the accused is not guilty.
Therefore, he is innocent.

Either man is not destructive or is creative.

But, man is creative.
Therefore, man is not destructive.

Part of the major premise was negated in the minor premise while the other was
affirmed in the conclusion – any part maybe negated.

Conjunctive Syllogism
A conjunctive syllogism is a hypothetical syllogism that contains at least one
conjunctive proposition. There are two kinds of conjunctive syllogism:

1. Pure Conjunctive. It is a conjunctive syllogism if all its propositions are conjunctive.

2. Mixed Conjunctive. It is a conjunctive syllogism with conjunctive major premise while but the
minor premise and the conclusion are both categorical.

Mixed Conjunctive Syllogism

The syllogism contains major premise which is a conjunctive proposition expressing that
its alternative exclude each other. The minor premise is a categorical proposition positing one of
the other alternatives. Consequently, the conclusion denies the remaining alternatives.

Rules: The conjunctive propositions have several alternatives that cannot be true at the
same time but simultaneously false. Thus, one alternative must be true in the minor premise and
posited, then the other/s are false and must be denied in the conclusion.

e.g.

You cannot be noisy and silent at the same time.

But, you are silent.
Therefore, you are not noisy.

Nobody can be a Catholic and an atheist at the same time.

But he is a Catholic.
Therefore, he is not an atheist.

If one alternative is denied in the minor premise, then the other may be true or false,
although the conclusion is doubtful. Thus, the process is invalid.

e.g.

Nobody can be a murderer and compassionate at the same time.

But he is not a murderer.
Therefore, he is compassionate – Not necessarily. One may be a rapist, drug lord or gun
runner.

Thus, one can safely say that there is actually only one rule here: to posit one part in the
minor premise and deny the other in the conclusion.
EXERCISES 21

State whether the following syllogisms are VALID or INVALID. If the syllogism is invalid,
state why.

1. If Filipinos have a strong sense of morality, then, they would not use artificial contraceptives.
But Filipinos have a strong sense of morality.
Therefore, they would not use artificial contraceptives.

2. Either the patient is dead or alive.

But the patient is not dead.
Therefore, he is alive.

3. He either violated the law or he was arrested unjustly.

But he violated the law.
Therefore, he was not arrested unjustly.

4. Nobody can be in Manila and Baguio at the same time.

But you are not in Baguio.
Therefore, you are in Manila.

5. You cannot be married and be single too.

But you are married.
Therefore, you are not single.

6. The order in the world owes its origin either to mare chance or to an intelligent designer.
But it cannot be due to mere chance.
Therefore, it must be due to an intelligent designer.

7. If man can evaluate his performance, then man is capable of progress.

But man can evaluate his performance.
Therefore, man is capable of progress.

8. One cannot be a sincere Marxist, a devout Catholic and a good Moslem simultaneously.
But this man is a devout Catholic.
Therefore, he is neither a sincere Marxist nor a good Moslem.

9. If you are merciful, then you give alms.

But you give alms.
Therefore, you are merciful.

10. If the patient has terminal cancer, he is seriously sick.

But the patient has no terminal cancer.
Therefore, the patient is not seriously sick.
EXERCISES 22

A. Classify the Following Hypothetical Syllogisms ( Conditional , Disjunctive and

Conjunctive. )

1. This foreigner is either a Nazi or a Jew;

Since he is not a Nazi , he must be Jew.
2. If this chemical is harmful , then is not safe;
But it is not safe;
Therefore , it is undoubtedly harmful.
3. A person cannot be an Asian and a Negro at the same time;
He is not an Asian;
Therefore, he must be a Negro.
4. If sex is not morally bad, it is allowed;
It is not morally bad;
Therefore , it is allowed.
5. The orders were: If the criminal shows himself at dawn, you are to shoot
him ;
There was no shooting;
Consequently, the criminal did show himself.
6. You cannot be an atheist and Christian at the same time;
You are not atheist;
Therefore, it is clear that you are a true Christian.
7. If hawking ’s theory agrees with the known scientific facts , it is valid
a theory;
Since it does not agree with the known scientific facts, it is not a valid
theory.
8. If hawking ’s theory agrees with the known scientific facts or it is not
A valid theory;
It agrees with scientific facts;
Therefore, it is a valid theory.
9. “Either John is operated , or he will die “ said Dr. Alvarez;
He died;
Therefore , he was not operated.
10. It is either poor visibility , fatigue or the weather on the part of drivers which
Causes traffic accident ‘s ;
It is the weather ;
Therefore, it is neither poor visibility nor fatigue.
11. If Alfred ‘s body temperature is rising , he has a fever;
It is rising;
So he has a fever.
12. His pen is blue , black , green or red;
But his pen is neither black nor green;
Therefore , his pen is either blue or red.
13. If he has bone cancer, he is seriously ill;
But he has bone cancer;
Therefore, he is seriously ill.
14. Either the explanation given is clear , or ambiguous
But, the explanation given is clear;
Therefore, the explanation given is not ambiguous.
15. Your bag is either red or blue;
But, your bag is red;
Therefore, your bag is not blue.
16. The explanation of the creation universe is either scientific, or biblical.
But, explanation of the creation of the universe is biblical;
Therefore, the explanation of the creation of the universe is not scientific.
17. Either evolution is scientific truth, or a scientific fraud;
But, evolution is not a scientific fraud;
Therefore, evolution is a scientific truth,
18. You cannot be watching TV at sleeping at the same time;
But you are watching TV;
Therefore, you are not sleeping.
19. Either you are drinking or you are praying;
But you are drinking;
Therefore, you are not praying.
20. If next month is October, then this month is September.
But, next month is not September;
Therefore, this month is not September.
21. Either Alfred ran away or got git by truck.
Alfred did not run away;
Therefore, Alfred got hit by truck.
22. If you pass the bar exam , you will be a lawyer.
But, you pass the bar exam;
Therefore, you are a lawyer.
23. God cannot be merciful and unforgiving.
But god is merciful;
Therefore, God is not unforgiving.
24. If tyranny is false system, it is dangerous.
It is a false system;
Therefore, tyranny is dangerous.
25. The murder was committed in Mexico;
But he was in Germany at the time;
Therefore, the accused did not commit the murder.
B. Instruction: Construct valid (a) mixed conditional and (b) pure conditional syllogisms
out of the following propositions.

1. If Andrew studies well, then he will graduate this year.

a.
.
b.
.
2. If Sara will be repentant, she will be forgiven.
a.
.
b.

3. If Poe campaigns hard, then she will win this Presidential election.
a.
.
b.

4. If Dan really loves you , he will die for you.

a.
.
b.

5. If Mark drinks his medicines, he will get better.

a.
.
b.

C. Instruction: Construct a valid (a) Modus Ponens and (b) Modus Tollens conditional
syllogisms.

1. If people have peace, they are happy;

a.
.
b.

2. If a person is healthy, he is not sick;

a.
.
b.

3. If Plato wrote the Republic, then he is an excellent philosopher.

a.
.
b.
4. If the Mayor embezzled the government project budget, then the mayor is guilty of felony.
a.
.
b.

5. If I win this case, I will not pay you.

a.
.
b.

D .Instruction: Construct valid (a) pure disjunctive (b) mixed disjunctive syllogisms out of
the following propositions.

1. She prefers her steak cooked either rare , medium-rare, or well-done.

a.
.
b.

2. He is either a Christian, an atheist or an agnostic.

a.
.
b.

3. His car is either a Ferrari, a Porsche or a Mustang.

a.
.
b.

4. Ana loves tulips , carnation or roses.

a.
.
b.

5. David will either go to a concert, a book fair or just stay home.

a.
.
b.
E. Identify the following disjunctive syllogisms if it is Ponendo tollens or Tollendo Ponens.

1. Max is either brave or coward;

a.
.
b.

2. The girl is either smart or beautiful;

a.
.
b.

3. The candidate is either a Democrat or a Republician.

a.
.
b.

4. Either the world is made up of atom or dust.

a.
.
b.

5. They are neither motivated by conscience nor by justice.

a.
.
b.

Instruction: Construct valid conjunctive syllogisms out of the following propositions.

1. A bachelor cannot be both married and single.

.
2. He cannot be a liberal, a conservative, and an indifferent person at the same time.

.
3. Aristotle cannot be both mortal and immortal.

.
4. You cannot be a Christian and Muslim.

.
5. You cannot love and hate at the same time.

.
6. Man cannot be both existent and non-existent.
.
7. Mother ‘s orchid cannot be blooming and dying at the same time.

.
8. He cannot be inside and outside of the country.

.
9. Nobody can be in London and New York at the same time.

.
10. Gerry cannot be innocent and guilty of one and the same charge , at the same time.

.
CHAPTER 10
INDUCTION

General Notion

The passage from less universal, or particular, to more universal is called the inductive
ascent. This is a process by which our mind proceeds from a more sufficient number of instances
or universal truth to more particular or lesser number of instances or more particular truth. The
conclusion of induction is always uncertain or doubtful.

Types of Induction

There are different kinds of induction: (1) Factual Dependence; 2) Explanation; 3)

Generalization, Inductive Analogy; 4) and Eliminative Induction.

1. Factual Dependence does not warrant the conclusion for it is always incorrect.

Americans speak English.

But Ana speaks English.
Therefore, Ana is an American. (does not follow if someone speaks English to is
considered an American .)

Basketball players are tall

Romeo is a basketball player.
Ergo , Romeo is Tall.

Filipinos are hospitable

John is hospitable
Ergo , John is a Filipino.

2. Explanation: a simple clarification that does not entail logical conclusion and sometimes no
conclusion is given. It is always incorrect.

Many of our farmers are worried of their harvest due to climate change.( No conclusion)

3. Generalization: it is a claim that what is true of the particular entails the truth of the universal.
This is always uncertain.

Fajardo who is a basketball player is tall

Therefore, Romeo Alapag and Tenorio who are basketball player are tall.

Sarah is a fine actress and singer.

Therefore, her brothers and sisters are also good actresses/actors and singers.
( Does not follow that if one is a singer , everybody is also a singer ).
However, generalization may provide certain conclusion. Below are rules that serve as guides in
making correct generalization.

a. All possible identical and similar characteristics of the subject known shall be
exhausted.
In “all Filipinos are hospitable” would have a higher degree of acceptance if the
sampling would be made in all the regions in the Philippines and could even support by historical
account about it.

b. All possible non-identical and dissimilar characteristics of the subject must be

known.

“Pedro is not an Ilocano but he is a good spender.”

It is not one’s regional background but how one would value the fruits of one’s labor that really
matters.

c. The relevance or connection between terms is important. For instance, one book in
Logic may not be enough; instead other books of other authors can give equivalent content.

d. It is not true all the time that the more number of situations observed, the higher
the probability of the conclusion. Even few situations can give us a higher probability.

4. Inductive Analogy. A comparison of at least two objects is that one or more qualities are
similar.

His memory is as sharp as a razor.

Therefore, he could be a good lawyer.

5. Eliminative Induction. A process of looking from one possibility to another until the very
last to be able conclude the probable cause.

May car fails to start. The mechanic will proceed by looking at the battery, but it is fully
charged. Then he will look at the gasoline tank, but it is full. Then he will examine the tube from
the gasoline tank to the machine, etc. until he eliminates all the causes of failure. He then starts
with the probable cause (Alba et al., 1998).

Evaluating Inductive Arguments

Inductive arguments may either be strong or weak. A strong inductive argument is one
in which the premises give sufficient ground or proof for the probability of the conclusion, that is
to say, if the premises are assumed true then the conclusion is probably true. While, a weak
inductive argument is one in which the premises, even if assumed true, does not give rise to the
probability of the truth of the conclusion. The following examples will illustrate these points.

1. Strong Inductive Argument

There are one hundred tomatoes contained in this box.
Seventy-five of these were found to be ripe.
It is possible, therefore, that all of them are ripe.

2. Weak Inductive Argument

There are one hundred tomatoes contained in this box.
Three were found to be ripe.
Therefore, it is possible that all of them are ripe.
EXERCISES 23

TEST I : Identify the given arguments if it is STRONG or WEAK inductive arguments.

1. In a basketball team, there are twelve players. Eighty percent of all the players
Are tall . Therefore, it is possible that all players are tall
.
2. Mario was born on the month of December and was musically talented.
Joseph was born on December and was musically talented.
Hanna was also born on December and was musically talented.
Ergo, all people who were born on the month of December were musically
Inclined and talented.

3. Pedro is a Filipino.
Pedro is a hardworking man.
Ergo , probably all hardworking men are Filipino.

4. Marco is a Muslim.
Marco do not eat pig meat.
Ergo , it is possible that all muslim’s do not eat pigmeat.

5. John and Maria are hospitable

John and Maria are Filipinos
Ergo , probably , all Filipinos are hospitable.

TEST II:
INDUCTION:
Identify what types of INDUCTION ( Factual Dependence, Explanation, Generalization
and Eliminative ) are the given arguments belong.

1. I am a teacher, then I am professional

I am not a teacher
Ergo, I am not Professional.

2. Maria felt dizzy and not feeling well.

She checked her blood pressure
. She checked some of her vital organs, like the heart etc but if was all
normal.
. She also checked her eyes but it was normal. Etc .

3. Sarah is Intelligent
Sarah studies at CVSU .
Ergo, all that studies in CVSU are intellectuals.
4. Many of the students studying at CVSU are good in Humanities
Subject.
5. Anna is a good dancer
Anna is a Filipino
Ergo , Filipinos are good dancers.
CHAPTER 11
INFORMAL FALLACIES

Any violation of logical laws is a fallacy. It is an illogical, misleading and deceptive

argument. An argument can be right in only one way, but the number of ways of its becoming
wrong is endless. A bad argument often involves more than one fallacy and hence will be
exposed to criticism on more than one score.

The study of fallacies, according to Vincent Smith, has only a negative value, but the
value is nevertheless propositioned. Whenever the mind analyses an error, it can learn something
of the truth, and a mind that makes a mistake, will, when it is pointed out, be less likely to
commit a similar pitfall again.

The classification of fallacies is arbitrary. Some classifications sometimes overlap

because the same fallacies can pass under various headings, depending on an author’s own point
of view or basis of classification.

Fallacies may be either formal or informal. Formal or logical fallacies are errors that
arise from the violations of the rules if definition, division, conversion, obversion, and the rules
of the categorical and hypothetical syllogisms. Informal or material fallacies are those that arise
from the confusion in the connotation or denotation of terms used; from a wrong assumption of
facts; or from ignoring the issue. In other words, formal fallacies are fallacies committed when
one uses a form of deductive reasoning such that it is possible for the premises to be true and the
conclusion to be false, and hence, it is committed through the use of an invalid deduction. An
informal fallacy is a fallacy that tends to lead to incorrect judgments but in which the error is not
to the form of argument (Alba et al., 1998).

The type of informal fallacy is called fallacy of Relevance while the second is called
fallacy of ambiguity. Fallacies of relevance, usually, are compelling for psychological reasons,
while fallacies of ambiguity mislead because of the confusion in language.

Fallacies of Relevance

1. Appeal to Force

It arises when the real issue at hand is ignored and this is an appeal to the physical or
moral pressure rather than reason.

e.g. You better think twice! Vote for my candidate or lose your job.

This appeal is similar to the appeal to advantage. This takes place when appeal is made
to a person or a group of persons to adopt a belief, a policy, or a course of action which the
person or persons involved would not do unless the advantage preferred is given.

“All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.” (Mt. 4:9)
2. Argumentum Ad Hominem

When the real issue itself is being evaded and the personality of the personality of the
opponent is being discussed instead of the question under discussion.

“How can my opponent be relied upon? He is an ex-convict!”

Another term for this fallacy, politically, is an appeal to personality, where one attacks
the person of an advocate of an issue, instead of the issues he raises or the program he supports.
It is also an appeal to circumstances instead of his arguments.

“I being an FEU student predict that the basketball team of Letran will win the evening’s
match.”

3. Appeal to Pity (Argumentum Ad Misericordiam)

When the issue is being evaded by using one’s emotions to get compassion or pity than
focusing on the real issue.

A suitor to a girl: Please marry me. It you won’t, my heart will break. Life for me will be
meaningless without you. I will surely die of grief.

4. Appeal to Misplaced Authority (Argumentum Ad Autoritatem)

When, instead of showing the intrinsic merits of the issue at hand, the argument appeals
to the unfounded authority of some prominent persons to support the contention.

“Religion is just a means to an end according to my spiritual adviser .”

This fallacy is closely related to the argument to the customs and traditions
(Argumentum Ad Verecundiam). This fallacy is committed when arguers appeal to the sanctity
of customs and traditions to justify their proposition. This argument may be regarded as a case of
blind authoritarianism.

“I believed in mangkukulam because tradition has always attested to the existence of

such people.

5. Appeal to the People (Argumentum Ad Populum)

When the issue is being befogged or evaded by appealing to the passions and prejudices,
likes and dislikes, whims and caprice of a group of people.

“I appeal to our Filipino values as peace lovers and compassionate. Let be mercy and
compassion live among us. Let us forget what happened in the past. Let us allow former
President Ferdinand Marcos to be buried in his own province.”
6. Appeal to Money (Argumentum Ad Crumenam)

When instead of reasoning out to an argument, they use money to terminate the issue at
hand like bribing when one is apprehended due to traffic violation.

7. Appeal to Ignorance (Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam)

When the truth or falsity of a particular proposition is ignored and is simply asserted that
it is true or false because it cannot be proven otherwise.

“You cannot disprove that “angels” exist. Ergo, their existence is true. “Angels” actually
exist.

8. Fallacy of Accident

This fallacy arises when what is accidental is confused with what is essential.

A college student keeps on laughing regardless of the place, occasions and the people
whom the student with believing that laugher is the best medicine.

9. Fallacy of the False Cause

This fallacy arises when arguers assign an effect to a false cause. This fallacy is called
the fallacy of “post hoc, ergo propter hoc” (after this therefore, because of this.) Superstitions are
based on this fallacy.

“Number 13 is very unlucky day and a diabolic number.”

10. Fallacy of Hasty Generalization

This consists in arguing that what is true of a few members of a class must also be true
of all members of that class.

Marcos, an Ilocano was a bright man. Ergo, all Ilocanos are bright individuals.

11. Fallacy of Begging the Question (Petitio Principii)

This fallacy is the assumption of the truth of the proposition or that of a premise which
is yet to be proved.

“Gender equality is a good political process, because it ensures empowerment of all

gender preferences.”

This is a fallacy or erroneous for it simply assumes the truth of an unproved premise
without giving any strong evidence to support it.
“All religious people are honest. Priest is a religious person, ergo, all priest are honest.”

Another name used for this fallacy is circulus in probando or fallacy of arguing in a
circle. Two unproved propositions, each to establish the validity of the other are being used.

“Murder should be punished for it is morally wrong. We maintain that it is morally wrong
because it is punishable.”

12. Fallacy of Ignoring the Question (Ignoration Elenchi) or Fallacy of Irrelevant Conclusion

The real question is set aside or ignored and is attempted to prove something which has
no bearing at all to the issue at hand. One example is passage from the bible about a man who
cannot walk whom Christ had asked.

“Do you want to be healed? And the sick man answered.” Sir, I have no one to put me
into the pool when the water is disturbed; so while I am still on my way, another steps down
before me.”
The man did not directly answer the question, instead answered Jesus of his problem in
getting into the healing water.

13. Special Pleading

It consists of “pleading” only as the evidence in favor of or against a case and in
suppressing evidence contrary to it. This fallacy most often appears in any kind of propaganda,
whether political or commercial. Candidates running for public office publish only surveys
favorable to them but not the results which rate them negatively.

14. Black or White

This is committed when one assumes that there are only two contrary alternatives
available, ignoring the possibility of other alternative/s between the contraries.

“Human beings are either good or bad.”

Fallacies of Ambiguity

In a good argument, words and sentences should have clear, unambiguous meanings and
should retain those meanings throughout the argument. If their meanings change, an argument
becomes invalid. Such an argument, however, could still have an apparently valid form. This is
especially true if the change in meaning is so slight that the change is difficult to detect. Hence,
these fallacies are due to lack of preciseness in the words, phrases, or sentences used to express
thoughts.

1. Fallacy of Equivocation
This fallacy consists in using the same term with different meanings. It is usually a
deductive inferential fallacy arising from the faulty assignment of meanings to terms. Timbreza
classified this into three kinds:

a. Fallacy of Ambiguous Middle: When the middle term is used with two different meanings.

All stars are astronomical bodies.

But Vilma and Nora are stars.
Therefore, they are astronomical bodies.

b. Fallacy of Ambiguous Minor: When the minor term uses two different meanings.

No man is made of paper.

All pages are men.
Ergo, all pages are made of papers.

c. Fallacy of Ambiguous Major: Major term expresses two different meanings.

No courageous creatures fly.

Eagles are courageous creatures.
Ergo, no eagles fly.

2. Fallacy of Amphiboly or Amphibology

This fallacy arises from the ambiguous use not of a single word but of a phrase or a
complete sentence.
“The dog of a lady with a long tail.”

3. Fallacy of Accent or Prosody

This fallacy arises from a false accent or form a false emphasis in speech. There is more
or less intentional distortion or twisting of the senses of words or statements whose meanings are
otherwise unambiguous in their respective contexts.

“Love your enemy. But alcohol is man’s enemy. Ergo, it’s all right to love alcohol.”

4. Fallacy of Composition

When what should be taken individually is taken collectively. The term is first used in
its distributive sense and then in its collective sense.

“Mr. Marcos is a billionaire.

But, Mr. Marcos is a Filipino.
Ergo, Filipinos are billionaires.”

5. Fallacy of Division
When what should be taken collectively is taken individually. A term is first used in its
collective sense and then in its distributive sense.

“All marines are navies.

But, Admiral Legaspi is a marine.
Ergo, Admiral Legaspi is a navy.”
EXERCISES 24
( Alba et, al., 1998)

I. Identify the fallacy of relevance committed in the following cases:

__________ 1. If you cannot prove I am the incompetent, then I am not incompetent.

__________ 2. Mrs. Marcos is a very successful woman because she was born under the Taurus
sign.
__________ 3. An advertisement: “San Miguel Beer, Philippines’ No. 1, requested in more
Asian countries than any other beer.”
__________ 4. How can Mrs. Gomez be a good teacher when she graduated from an unknown
provincial school? Besides, she came from a very poor family and her parents were unschooled.
__________ 5. Our beloved First Lady says that smoking is bad for the heart.
__________ 6. A father to his children. Your friends are bad influence to you. If you do not stop
going out with them, I shall cut your allowance.
__________ 7. Obviously, homosexuality is on the rise.
__________ 8. My boil came after I spat on the ground without saying “Excuse me,” to the
spirits. Therefore, it must have offended them and so caused the boil.
__________ 9. Follow workers, let us unite for a common cause! Let us not allow the capitalists
to oppress us.
__________ 10. Abortion is evil. Doesn’t your heart bleed for those innocent helpless babies?

II. Identify the fallacy of ambiguity committed in the following cases.

__________ 1. Since an elephant is an animal, a small elephant is a small animal.

__________ 2. Keith wants to watch her friends perform in the worst way.
__________ 3. It’s posted against the glass: “Don’t lean on the glass.” Ergo, it’s alright to break
the glass.
__________ 4. Alaska is a good team. Therefore, Santos, a player of the said team, is a good
player.
__________ 5. Vegetables are nutritious, but anybody comatose is considered a vegetable. Ergo,
anybody comatose is nutritious.
__________ 6. Professor Vertuzo employs Socratic Method instead of INTEL, and the use of the
latter is one of the bases for the accreditation of the College of Human Science. Ergo, Human
Sciences failure in the accreditation is all imputable to Professor Vertuzo.
__________ 7. Ricardo told his father that he must go to the library.
__________ 8. Eat Bulaga, a show in GMA-7, is the best noontime show. Therefore, GMA-7 is
the best TV Station.
__________ 9. USA is a rich country. Therefore, there are no poor people there.
__________ 10. An advertisement is written boldly “MINOR ARE ADMITTED FREE.” Below
those bold letters are subtly written “with one paying adult.”
EXERCISES 25

Instruction: Identify the informal fallacies committed in the cases.

1. You said your back is aching? I would suggest you take this medicine
Because I once had a back pain and a colleague of mine gave me this
Medicine. In a matter of minutes, my back pain is gone. You, know that friend
of mine is really intelligent. He is a physics professor.
2. Democratic countries are more progressive than non-democratic countries;
Therefore, there is an element in democracy that stimulates progress.
3. If murder of one man is one mortal sin, the murder of 100,000 men is 100,000
mortals sins.
4. “ You say I am not handsome? Look who’s talking! “
5. Rational beings are women But, men are not women
Therefore, men are not rational.
6. Infinite means without limit;
Therefore, inhabitable means not habitable.
7. churchmen condemned scientific origins of the universe therefore, the church is
Opposed to science.
8. Only beautiful women wear Louis Vuitton.
9.Every ruler helps us to draw a straight line.
President Aquino is a ruler
Therefore, president Aquino helps us to draw a straight line.
10. there will be no promotion in this department, otherwise everyone will be
Fired
11. why believe the statement of nancy? She is ugly and uneducated.
12. Drake could not be given a failing grade, because he is a taxi driver and an
Illiterate.
13. There is no truth in the statement of Nancy? She is ugly and uneducated.
14. We cannot imprison the accused because he is divorced, an immigrant and has
10 kids to support.
15. Pardon impossible criminal to have death penalty.
16. The students in the Cavite State University are from different provinces
Joshua is a student of Cavite State University.
Therefore, Joshua is from different provinces.
17. God exists because He is the creator of the universe
God is the creator of the universe because he exists.
18. Peter could not have killed his neighbour, because he is a humanitarian.
19. Love is blind,
But God is love
Therefore, God is blind.
20. Everything in this room weighs about 800 kilos,
Chris is in this room;
Therefore Chris weighs about 800kilos.
21. Advil is good for headaches, because the commercial model says so
22. You say you ate what you bought;
But you bought a raw fish
Therefore you must have eaten the raw fish.
23. Lost: An umbrella by a man with fractured nose.
24. I have seen you in this street once; therefore you live here.
25. You have to study your lesson because you have to study your lesson.
26. Either you use are certified Kapuso or Kpatid.
27. I have been to the homes of 10 Filipinos and they were hospitable. I can,
Therefore say that all Filipinos are hospitable people.
28. All in this room are sleeping
But Maria is in this room
Therefore she is sleeping.
29. Only intelligent people wear eyeglasses.
30. Roane met a car accident because it is Friday , the 13th of the month.
31. Jerome cannot be good professor because he is fat.
32. Some criminals are innocent
Therefore , All criminals are innocent.
33. This pasta smells good , therefore it is delicious.
34. The clouds look gloomy, therefore it will rain.
35. During the first soccer competition , every time James would wear his blue.
soccer shoes , the team is always defeated. Hence , his teammate s forbid him
to wear the blue soccer shoes in their games to prevent defeats and obtain the
championship trophy.
36. Man is monosyllabic
Allen is a man
Therefore , he is monosyllabic.
37. Poker is a form of gambling
Gambling corrupts morals.
Therefore , poker should be forbidden by law and the players are criminals.
38. The man is a drug addict. Look how thin he is.
39. Hitler wasn’t such a bad fellow. Therefore , Nazi’s can’t be so bad.
40. Every ruler helps us to draw a straight line.
President Aquino is a ruler.
Therefore , President Aquino help us to draw a straight line.
41. Drake could not be given a failing grade, because he is poor.
42. There is no truth in the statement of Aaron , because he is a taxi driver
and an illiterate.
43. Pardon impossible criminal to have death penalty.
44. The students in the Cavite State University are from different provinces
Joshua is a student of Cavite State University.
Therefore , Joshua is from different provinces.
45. Either you’re a Christian or an atheist.

INSTRUCTIONS: Below are the excerpts of different political speeches. Analyze and identity
the fallacies committed. Underline the phrases / sentences that are fallacious and write the fallacy
above the phrase or sentence that you underlined.

SALAMAT , KAIBIGAN
Senator Bong Revilla
http://www.rappler.com/nation/60072-revilla-privilege-speech

Mr. President, muli po akong tumatayo sa harapan n gating mga kababayan upang
minsan pa (posibleng sa huling pagkakataon ) ay mailalahad ko ang aking damdamin na hindi
para humudyat ng pagkakawatak-watak , bagkus , ay magpaubaya at magbukas ng bagong
kabanata sa ating kasaysayan.

Mr. President nasabi ko na nga po dati , malinis po ang aking konsensya, Ngayon na
naisampa na ang kaso laban sa amin , hayaan nyo nap o kaming harapin ito sa husgado. Ipaubaya
nap o natin ito sa korte at doon ko na po ipagtatanggol ang aking sarili.

Ang atensyon na itinuon sa amin ituon na natin sa mas mahahalagang bagay na

magbibigay kaginhawahan sa ating mga kababayan. Napakarami pong hinaharap ng problema n
gating bayan na mas nangangailanganng tama at mabilisang solusyon. Isipin nap o natin ang
bayan.

An gating mga mamamayan – ang kanilang mga pangunahing mga pangangailangan.

Tama na ang batuahan. Tama na ang siraan.

Panguluhan mo ang bansa sa kaunlaran at progreso para huwag masayang ang 6 na taon
na pinagkatiwala sa iyo. Napakasaklap na mahusgahan ka ng kasaysayan bilang isang tinimbang
ngunit nagkulang. You still have 2 remaining years. Hindi tama at hindi maganda na maaalala ka
at ang iyong administrasyon sa pagpapakulong lamang ng mga hindi mo kaalyado. Jailing your
oppositors should not be the only achievement and legacy you will be leaving behind.

Tama napo ang awayan, tigilan na ang pulitika ng paghihiwalay. Tama na ang
pagbebengga. Ang magkakaibang kulay ng ating bandila ay dapat sumagisag ng pagkaka-isa at
hindi pagkaka-iba.
Adhikain ko po na sana mula ngaun, wala ng dilaw , wala ng orange , wala ng berde ,
wala ng asul , wala nang pula. Iisa lang ang dugong nananalaytay sa ating mga ugat , at yan ang
dugong Pilipino. Isang Dugo , isang diwa –gamitin natin ito tayo lubusang magkaisa , umunlad
at lumigaya , para sa bansa.
Napakahirap pong bumuo ng pangalan , pero sa isang iglap , ay durog na ito. Mr.
President , paano po kung pagkatapos ng lahat ng ito ay mapatunayang walang sala at inosente
ang isang taong nawasak na? Paano po? May pag-asa pa kayang malinis at maibangon niya ang
kanyang pangalan at dignidad? Regardless Mr, President, handa akong mapiit at magsakripisyo
dahil alam kong sa tamang panahon ay lalabas at mangingibabaw pa rin ang katotohanan.

Naniniwala pa rin ako na ang korte ay hindi papaya na mangingibabaw ang kawalan ng
katarungan. Nariyan kayo , aking mga kababayan, na sisiguruhing hindi mananaig ang
kasinungalingan. Nandito pa rin ako, sa kabila ng lahat, para ipagpatuloy ang pakikibaka at
kasama ng mga minamahal kong mga kababayan sa lahat ng pagkakataon, sa labas man o loob
ng piitan. Mr. President, before I end , I also have a list. Mas matindi ito sa lahat ng iba pang
listahan. Para sa ikabubuti ng bansa,hayaan niyong ibahagi ko ito sa inyo. Wala akong itatago.

First on my list , is God. Unang-una at higit sa lahat, nagpapasalat ako sa diyos na alam
kong hindi nya ako bibigyan ng pagsubok na hindi ko malalampasan. Lord salamat po sa
pagkakataon na higit ko kaytong nakilala. Thank you for walking with me during of these time
of trial. Tulad ng lagi , alam ko pong hindi nyo ako pababayaan. Alam kong hindi mo
pababayaan ang bayan.

Pangalawa sa aking listahan ay ang aking ama at pamilya na patuloy nagbibigay sa akin
ng laks at tibay. Daddy I love You , babangon tayo. To my wife and kids, we shall over come!
Be strong. Ipagpatuloy ninyo at higit pang pag-ibayuhin ang pagtulomg sa kapwa. Mama ,
salamat sa pagmamahal.
Mga Anak , salamat.

PANGATLO , MY COLLEAGUES:

1. Senator Lapid – kaibigan lito , ikaw ang Leon Guerrero ng masamng Pilipino. Bida ka talaga
ng masa;
2. Senator Jinggoy Estrada – kosa , hanggang ditto ba naman magkasama tayo? Pinagtatawana
tayo siguro ni Daboy ngaun, Kidding aside, hindi ito ang katapusan natin pare. God is just
preparing us for something better;
3. Senator Enrile – I can only wish I live a full life like yours. One of the greatest leaders of this
country. Your brilliance , your experienced , brought a culture of excellence not only to this
institution but to every institution you have led. You are undoubtedly the ultimate statesman.

Maraming salamat po s halos 20 milyong bumoto sa akin na hindi tumigil magtiwala ,

sumoporta at nagmahal sa akin. Maraming salamat sa inyong lahat! Hindi po ako magsasawa na
sabihin at kilalanin na kayo ang dahilan kung bakit mayroong isang Bong Revilla. Kayo ang
dahilan kung bakit patuloy akong lumalaban at lalaban. Kayo ang nagpapatibay lakas at
inspirasyon sa patuloy kong pakikibaka para sa katotohanan.

Makulong man ako , hiondi nila makukulong ang aking pangarap at pagmamahal sa
bayan... May kahilingan po sana akop sa inyo. Sa ating pansamantalang paghihiwalay , mayroon
akong isang orihinal na awit na naglalaman ng aking saloobin. Gusto kong pakinggan ninyo, at
sana ay maibigan niyo ito. Para sa iyo ito , kaibigan.
SALAMAT KAIBIGAN

Salamat mga kaibigan

Kayo ang aking tanging sandigan
Pagmamahal nyo ang nagbibigay kalakasan
Habang kayo ay nariyan
Lagi lamang tatandaan
Ikaw ako.... Ako Ikaw....
Magkaibigan......