1

LOGIC, PHILOSOPHY AND HUMAN EXISTENCE

GST 112

COURSE OUTLINE, SYNOPSIS LECTURE NOTE: NOT FOR SALE

SECTION 0NE - OVERVIEW OF NATURE OF PHILOSOPHY

Definition of Philosophy Fr. Sylvester Enomah (DSUST, OZORO)

Etymology of Philosophy: Etymologically, philosophy is derived from two Greek words philo, philein
(love, to love) and Sophia (wisdom), which literally means love of wisdom (www.google.com). According
to Nyong (1996), “The word philosophy has been derived from two Greek terms, (philein = to love;
Sophia = wisdom), which means ‘the love of wisdom’. Etymologically, it is the love of wisdom and a
philosopher is a person who loves or desires wisdom”.

Layman’s Definition of Philosophy: Although people regard philosophy as remote from normal life and
beyond comprehension, the word philosophy is also used by ordinary man in the street to mean one of
the many things in human life and it appears frequently in their conversations. From the Layman’s
perspective, philosophy can be defined: a. As a Belief System b. As a World View c. As a Way of Life d.
As Words of Wisdom.

Professional Definition of Philosophy

Professionally, philosophers from ancient to contemporary periods have defined philosophy in various
ways. Plato: the philosopher as a man whose passion is to seek the truth, a man whose heart is fixed on
reality. Aristotle: knowledge of truth. Epicurus: an activity which secures the happy life by means of
discussion and argument. William James: philosophy is in the full sense is only man thinking, thinking
about generalities rather than particulars. John Dewey: thinking which has become conscious of itself.
Wittgenstein: logical clarification of thought. Martin Heidegger: the correspondence to the being of
being. Jacque Maritain: the science which by the natural light of reason studies the first causes or
highest principles of all things…in other words the science of all things in their first causes insofar as
these belong to the natural order. Alfred J. Ayer: disagrees with Jacque Maritain and says that
“philosophy is not a search for first principles. The function of philosophy is wholly critical…Philosophy is
an activity of analysis”. Bertrand Russell asks: Is there any knowledge in the world which is so certain
that no reasonable man could doubt it? Joseph Omoregbe: This question, which at first sight might not
seem difficult, is really one of the most difficult that can be asked. When we have realized the obstacles
in the way of a straight forward and confident answer, we shall be well launched on the study of
philosophy – for philosophy is merely the attempt to answer such ultimate questions, not carelessly and
dogmatically as we do in ordinary life and even in the sciences, but critically, after exploring all that
makes such questions puzzling, and after realizing all the vagueness and confusion that underlie our
ordinary ideas. Joseph Omoregbe: (1) Philosophy is a rational search for answers to questions that arise
in the mind when we reflect on human experience. (2) Philosophy is a rational search for answers to
basic questions about the ultimate meaning of reality as a whole and of life in particular. Enomah
Sylvester: cultivates the mind and advance solutions by seeking clarifications through questioning in
order to arrive at the truth that will lead to taking reasonable decisions for the good of the society.
 2

Process of Philosophizing

Philosophy is a reflective activity that begins with wonder that accompanies man’s experiential contact
with himself or the world around him. Wonder gives rise to some fundamental questions in search for
answers. The third step is taken when man begins to reflect on these fundamental questions in search
for answers. At this stage the man in question is philosophizing (Cfr. Joseph Omoregbe, Knowing
Philosophy, 1990).

Structure of Philosophy

There four major branches of philosophy, namely, metaphysics, epistemology, logic, and axiology.

Metaphysics: From the Greek words “ta meta physica” literally meaning, ‘things beyond the physical
realm’ or abstract realities - things beyond the senses. Metaphysics studies the essences and existence
of realities. Metaphysics is divided into two, namely Ontology: the study of being as being or existence
and Cosmology is the study of the universe.

Epistemology: Epistemology studies the nature and extent of human knowledge. It teaches us the ways
of knowing reality or the sources of knowledge which include a. Revealed Knowledge b. Intuitive
Knowledge c. Rational Knowledge. d. Empirical Knowledge e. Authoritative Knowledge.

Axiology: Axiology is the study of values in human conduct and artifacts. There are two subdivisions of
axiology, which are ethics and aesthetics. Aesthetics: also called the “philosophy of art” deals with the
principles of beauty and harmony as in the creative arts, including music. Ethics: is concerned with the
problem of correct principles of human conduct or behavior whose primary concepts include right,
wrong, obligation and duty”.

Logic: Logic is the science reason. It is a science which uses reason in the process of acquisition of
knowledge. Logic is a branch of philosophy whose central function is the distinction between correct
and incorrect reasoning. The central function of logic is the distinction between correct and incorrect
reasoning. Thus generally, the subject-matter of logic has been summed up to be the laws of thought,
rules of right reasoning, the principles of valid argumentation; truths (true propositions based solely on
the meaning of the terms they contain, etc. (Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol. 9). In the same vein, Copi
(1978) sees logic as the study of the methods principle used to distinguish good or correct reason from
bad or incorrect reasoning. There are two types logic, namely, deductive and inductive logic. In
deductive logic, the argument proceeds from universals to particular e.g.

All men are mortal (Major Premise)

John is a man (Minor Premise)
Therefore, john is mortal (Conclusion)

While in inductive logic, the argument moves from particular to general e.g.

Mark is an intelligent student and he is discipline

Cynthia is an intelligent student and she is discipline
Therefore, all intelligent students are discipline
 3

Methods of Philosophy

A method is a path taken to reach some objective point (Vaschalde 1913). Philosophical method
therefore refers to the alleyway or pathway taken to know and understand reality, the subject matters
of philosophy. The technical term for methods of philosophy is ‘formal objects of philosophy.

Metaphysical Method: The metaphysical approach is aimed at understanding the underlying character
of the world, soul, God or ultimate reality, the main business of metaphysical entities (Cr. Nyong1996).
The metaphysical method is essentially abstraction which entails knowing realities that are beyond
tangible or corporeal realities with aid of the mind. Metaphysical abstraction is philosophical method
that enables one to know the ultimate causes or reason of reality.

Valuational Method: A reality can be understood by knowing the values it possesses. Understanding the
value or purpose of reality is a clue to its appreciation and utility.

Speculative Method: Speculation is a systematic way of thinking about everything that exits. This is the
broadest mode of philosophy because it comprises all of reality, the nature of reality. It searches for
wholeness in relation to knowledge, experience, and truth.

Analytic Method: The analytical or linguistic analysis approach to philosophy is the clarification of basic
concepts aimed at providing solid foundation to sciences. It is an anti-metaphysical approach. This mode
of philosophy focuses on words and their meanings; it is concerned with clear thinking and precise
expression. The purpose is to tackle misconceptions and errors embellished in fallacies. It examines
what we mean by words and concepts we used in our language (Enomah, 2016).

The Historical/Phenomenological/Thematic Method: This method entails the consideration of various

themes handled in philosophy. For instance, what philosopher said about change, evil, suicide,
euthanasia, God, power, etc. This approach offers us the opportunity of benefiting from the wisdom of
the past (Ekarika 1986). In this approach, the ideas, views or opinions of the personalities or
philosophers that are involved in the discussion of the philosophical themes down the history of
philosophy are also studied, criticized, and applied.

Prescriptive Method: This method seeks to establish standards for assessing values for judging conducts
and appraising arts. Its primary concepts include good and bad, right and wrong, ought and ought not,
beautiful and ugly, etc. Prescription lays down norms, guidelines and criteria with which to access the
worth (values) of human conduct and human artifacts – what man produces.

Existential Methods: Existential method focuses on the individual; it the philosophy on the individual
concrete existential reality as opposed to whole. Here philosophy must capture the authentic concerns
of concrete existing individual; it must be an inquiry into man’s concrete existence; it gives importance
to individual existence, and this implies that we should not be taken as members of the whole universe,
but we should be treated individually.

Discourse Method: This enterprise has become a philosophical method in which philosophers asked
questions with the motive to clarify issues to avoid misunderstandings (Enomah 2016).
 4

Scope of Philosophy

Scope here refers to the subject matter, horizon, or the area of coverage of a discipline. The technical
term for scope of philosophy is the material object of philosophy. The scope of philosophy is the totality
of reality. Reality refers to whatever creates impact on the life of human beings. In other words the
scope or material object of philosophy is everything that exists, be it corporeal or incorporeal. These
include God (his existence and attributes), man (his nature – origin, composition, purpose, life, death,
life after death), universe (origin, composition and purpose).

Relevance of Philosophy

Philosophy is relevant to the student in various ways

It helps us to learn wisdom and understanding
It gives us a perspective of the past, present, and helps us to be able to project to the future.
It cultivates the mind making it to constructively criticize statements and arguments to ascertain their
respective truth, validity, and soundness.
It helps us to detect errors in presentations to avoid become victims of fraud and deception
It enables us to be critical, to have a philosophical mind and a critical approach to issues and
understanding.
It helps us to have check and balance between reason and emotions
It enables us to carry out a critical investigation of the content, logic, and methods of our assumptions
The nature of man is to be rational, and since men up the society, people with philosophical mind will be
able to order the society well.
It makes us behave well, well principled and to have dominion over our actions.
It helps to arrive at the ultimate truth or reason of reality (GOD).

Pre-Golden Age of Western Philosophy

Western Philosophy began in Greece about 600 B.C. and it emanated from Greek religion and
mythology. Philosophers before the golden of philosophy tackled the problem of the nature of the
cosmos, universe – the basic stuff the universe was made of. These earlier philosophers adopted
deductive method of reasoning where they began with general principles, trying to explain particular
cases in terms of these general principles. For THALES, the founder of philosophy since he was the first
to put his philosophy in writing (water), for ANAXIMANDER, an evolutionist, a scientist, and a pupil of
Thales (a neutral, infinite, eternal, indeterminate element), for ANAXIMENES (air), for PYTHAGORAS,
scientist, mathematician who formed a philosophic-religious community dedicated to the study
mathematics and philosophy, (all things are numbers, number constitutes the nature of all things,
number ten contains all other numbers, hence believed that there are ten planets, earth not flat but
spherical, fire is the center of the universe, any distance – no matter how short, is made up of infinite
number of points, nobody can move from one side of a stadium to another; nobody can traverse a
stadium or indeed any distance whatsoever since to do so would imply traversing an infinite number of
points, everything in the universe is made up units, reality is not one but many i.e. reality is many and
the same time infinite), HERACLITUS (500 B.C.), from Ephesus, (change is the nature of all things,
everything in a state flux, you cannot step twice into the same water, nothing is permanent in this
world, clash of opposites, reality is basically one in many forms, the basic reality ‘the One’ is Fire’ which
he identifies as God, Logos, Reason), PARMENIDES from Elea, Southern Italy, then Greek colony (change
is an illusion of the senses, no motion, reality is and does not change, reason leads to truth but the way
of opinion is that of the senses), ZENO ((490 B.C.), a disciple of Parmenides , from Elea defended his
 5

master, Parmenides against the ridicule of the Pythagoreans with imageries (race between tortoise and
Achiles, flying arrow), EMPEDOCLES (440 B.C.), a scientist, religious, from Akragas, south coast of Sicily,
trying to prove he was god jumped into a volcanic crater and died, reconciled the theories of Heraclitus
and Parmenides (all things are made up of four eternal indestructible elements – earth, air, fire, water;
principle of unification is love, principle of division is hate), ANAXAGORAS (500 B.C.), from Asia Minor
(everything is a combination of the particles of all things where one particular kind of particle always
predominates in everything, only one force Nous-Mind operates in the universe, DEMOCRITUS (460
B.C.), (taught the atomist theory, there are infinite and indivisible units called atoms, the smallest and
ultimate constitutive elements of all things, they are indivisible and imperceptible, two kinds of
perception – perception of the senses which is unreliable and perception of the understanding which
are reliable), the SOPHISTS (5TH Century), members include Protagoras, 481 B.C., Gorgias (483-375 BC),
Hippias, and Thrasymachus, they deviated their attention from cosmological speculations to man in the
society employing inductive method where they began with particular cases which they had observed
and drew general conclusions from them, itinerant teachers, taught not only philosophy but also
grammar and rhetoric, and charged no money for their teaching (instructed youths and all those who
aspired to participate in the democratic government of Athens, they were critical, questioned the
foundations of traditional beliefs, traditional way of life and customs, questioned the foundation of
traditional religion and morality, cast doubts on the real existence of the gods, doubted the possibility of
knowing anything with certainty, denied the existence of objective and universal truths, relativism is a
characteristic feature of the sophists for they were relativists who denied the possibility of man attaining
absolute and universal truths, Truth for them is relative, depending on the point of view of the
individual) (Cfr. Joseph Omoregbe, Knowing Philosophy, 1990).

The Golden Age of Philosophy of Greek Philosophy

Golden Age of Philosophy took place in Athens in 5 th Century B.C. whose philosophers’ works informed
thousands of years of thought, becoming central to thought in the Roman World, Middle Age, and then
resurfacing in the Renaissance and later. The philosophers that belong to the Golden Age of Philosophy
include Socrates, Plato and Aristotle.

Socrates: Lived between 469 and 399 B.C. Initially, he was a soldier who exhibited extraordinary power
of self-discipline and indifferent to discomfort as he was apathetic to cold, thirst, heat, hunger, life or
death. He was a moralist who lived by his moral principles. He regarded philosophizing as his vocation, a
divine mission from God; he claimed to be guided by an interior voice, a divine voice or an oracle
(diamonion). Philosophy, for him was not just an academic exercise, but a way of live based on
knowledge. For him, knowledge enables one to live good life; knowledge is a means to moral life.
Socrates left no writings. In fact he wrote nothing. It was Plato who wrote about his life and teaching.
Socrates’ method of teaching was “dialectic” – method of seeking or acquiring knowledge through
questions and answers also known as inductive reasoning, beginning with particular cases and ending
with universal knowledge as a conclusion. He believed in the acquisition of objective and universal by
man, thereby opposing relativism and skepticism. He equated knowledge with virtue, hence for him,
knowledge is virtue, ignorance is the cause of evil, wickedness is due to ignorance, virtue and good
actions proceed from knowledge while evil is a s a result of ignorance. The goal of life is happiness, and
the only path that leads to it is virtue. Socrates insisted on self-knowledge and wisdom by self-
evaluation, hence he would tell the people of Athens ‘know yourself’. He believed the immortality of the
soul. Socrates was brought to trial, accused of atheism and corrupting the youths, found guilty,
condemned to death and was executed by drinking poison after an month in prison.
 6

Plato: Lived between 427 and 347 B.C. He was born of a wealthy family in Athens became a student of
Socrates at the age of twenty. His initial ambition to be a politician, but he was disappointed by the cruel
manner his master was treated by the politicians in Athens. This made him abandon his intention for
politics and decided to be a philosopher to educate the Athenians in philosophy, who in his conviction
are suffering from ignorance. To achieve this, he founded the famous academy, considered as the first
European University. He believed that in the infallibly of objective and universal knowledge, thereby, like
his master (Socrates) rejecting the sophists’ relativism and sceptism. Epistemology/Metaphysic: For
him, true knowledge is the knowledge of the universals obtained through reason, but the knowledge of
the objects of sense perception obtained through the sensory faculties are not true knowledge since
such knowledge is susceptible to changes as in the view of Heraclitus that everything is in a state of flux.
Plato postulated the existence of two worlds – the world of forms and the world of the particulars. The
world of forms which he calls the ideal world contains the essences of things and true knowledge
consists in knowing them. The essences of things such justice, beauty, honesty, and goodness are
immutable, universal, and perfect and they constitute the true nature of particular things in the physical
world we perceive with our senses. The varying degrees of any essence in this world are only a
calibration of the particular essences. The world of the particulars consists of things that are perceptible
to the senses and they are characteristically mutable, imperfect, and fallible. The essences of things he
called ‘Forms’ or Ideas’ known on only through dialectical reasoning. The soul is immortal, immaterial or
spiritual. Its union with the body is accidental. It can exist after its separation from the body at death.
Ethics: Happiness is man’s ultimate goal and the only road that leads to is virtues. Politics: In his book
titled, Republic, Plato proposes the ideal state in which citizens are divided into three classes, namely,
the guardian (the rulers who are to be philosophers), the auxiliaries (soldiers, to defend the state), and
the artisans – the common people- (to supply material and economic needs of the state) (Cfr. Joseph
Omoregbe, Knowing Philosophy, 1990).

Aristotle

Born in Stageira and lived between 384-322 B.C. He derived his interest in biology from his father who
was a physician. At seventeen years he went to study in Athens and there he joined Plato’s Academy
and became a student of Plato. After the death of Plato, he left the academy when he was twenty one
years and started to develop his own philosophy. He later founded his own institution, the Lyceum,
where he taught and carried out scientific reach. In addition to philosophy, his students studied the
natural and physical sciences. While Plato was interested in mathematics in addition to philosophy,
Aristotle was interested in the empirical sciences besides philosophy.

Logic: Aristotle’s logic developed what is known as “formal logic” also called “traditional logic” because
it is mainly concerned with the “forms” of reasoning process. His logic deals with the art of correct
thinking or reasoning about reality and making judgment about the relation of things with each other.
Aristotle talked about categories which are ways in which we think about things and how they relate to
each other. For him, there are ten categories, namely, substance, quantity, quality, relation, place, time,
position, state, action, and passion. Substance which is the first category denotes any entity which exists
on its own, any individual or person; the other nine categories are ways we speak about the substance.
Predicables, which are the ways in which predicates relate to subjects, he also classified into five,
namely, genus, species, difference, property, and accident. Genus is a comprehensive concept
comprising several species. E.g. In “A cat is an animal”, the predicate “animal” is genus in relation to the
subject “cat”. Genus, species, difference –the distinguishing factor; Property is the quality that is
essential to the nature of a being; accident – the quality that is not essential to the nature of a being.
 7

Syllogism was most vital aspect of Aristotle’s logic. It is an argument by which a conclusion is drawn from
two statements, a major premise and a minor premise. E.g.

Every university student is educate (major premise)

Ben is university student (minor premise)
Ben is educated (conclusion)

Metaphysics: Aristotle agrees with Plato that the essences exist and that knowing them constitutes true
knowledge, but disagrees with that the essences exist separately from the physical things of which they
are essences. For him, the forms exist in the sensible things. From the physical and tangible things, the
forms are known through abstraction or intellectual reflection. According to Aristotle, there are two
ways of knowing reality, namely, sense-perception and intellectual reflection (philosophical knowledge).
In sense-perception (common to all men) we know individual things or events as they appear to us,
while intellectual knowledge (philosophical knowledge) we know the underlying and ultimate causes of
things. Aristotle postulates four causes of things, the material cause (of a statue – wood, clay, marble),
the formal cause (shape or pattern), the efficient cause (the agent), and the final cause (purpose, end).
Aristotle also discussed matter and form, potency and act, accident and substance, and the unmoved
mover.

Psychology/Epistemology: The principle of life in living organisms is the soul. Whatever has life has a
soul that animates it. The body is matter while the soul is the form. The power of the souls differs
according to level of beings they animate. Unlike Plato, for him, the union of the soul and is not
accidental (like a prisoner in prison) but that they one inseparable substance, none can exist without the
other which implies that the soul is not immortal, meaning that the soul (form) and body (matter) perish
together at death. He identifies twofold nature of human intellect – active intellect and passive
intellect. For him, the active intellect is “pure act” without potency, everlasting, immortal, while the
passive intellect perishes. His idea of active intellect seems to contradict his belief on the mortality of
the soul and also controversial to his interpreters and commentators. Does the active intellect mean
God? All knowledge is acquired through senses-perception or sensation. He rejects Plato’s theory of
innate knowledge. The process of acquiring abstract knowledge of the essences begins with sensation
(perceives things) followed by common sense (synthesizes the images phantasmata, particular images
of particular objects), the intellect begins to work on the phantasmata illuminating them and extracting
from them all particular characteristics such as size, height, colour, and accidents, after which the active
intellect presses them on the passive intellect which in turn is transformed into them, thereby having
abstract ideas or concepts.

Ethics: for Aristotle, the ultimate end of all human actions is happiness. It is sought for its own sake, not
a means to another end. The purpose of morality is happiness. It is the standard of morality known as
eudemonism. Virtue, for him is the only path to happiness. Two types of virtues, namely, intellectual and
moral virtues. Scientific virtues include: scientific knowledge, art, practical wisdom, intuitive reason,
theoretical wisdom, sound deliberation, understanding and judgment. Moral virtues are: justice,
temperance, generosity, courage, prudence, etc. He taught the doctrine of golden mean ‘virtue is a
mean between two extremes’.

Politics: According to Aristotle, man ‘is by nature a political animal’. This implies that man is by nature to
live in society due its importance – to speak, develop, provides for his needs, security, happiness, not
necessarily a politician. Family is fundamental society established according to laws of nature to provide
 8

daily needs. Society provides needs beyond those within the confines of the nuclear family. A good
government is one that aims at the interest of the entire society. For him, monarchy, aristocracy, and
polity are three good kinds of government. For him, the best and ideal kind of government is monarchy
if the king is an excellent man who surpasses all his citizens in virtue and wisdom (Cfr. Joseph Omoregbe,
Knowing Philosophy, 1990).

SECTION TWO

AN OVERVIEW OF LOGIC

Definition

Logic is a branch of philosophy. It is derived from the Greek word logos or reason and refers to the study
of the principles of right reasoning. As a science, Logic is geared toward the attainment of truth by
directing our mental operations so that they proceed with order and consistency. It therefore helps to
reason correctly. As an art, logic lays down rules and principles which the mind must follow in order to
secure truth and avoid error, and in order to do this, we must know, posses, and make use of all
requisite means for carrying out these processes (Ekarika, 1986).

Laws of Thought

Logic follows the same universal principles of thinking to ensure we do not affirm and deny the same
proposition simultaneously which will be fallacy of contradiction.

The Law of Identity: This law states that ‘if a proposition is true, then it is true’ or ‘everything is what it
is’ P=P or P is P e.g. “A cat is a cat” and not something else.

The Law Of Contradiction: This law states that ‘a statement cannot be both true and false at the same
time’ that is, S cannot be both P and no P e.g. ‘A goat cannot be goat and not a goat at the same time’.

The Law of Excluded Middle: It states that ‘A proposition is either true or not true at the same time’,
that is, S must be either P or not P e.g. ‘Either john is in the School or he is in the Church’.

Without the laws of thought we cannot speak or think or reason correctly, logically, and realistically.

Propositions, Premises, Inference, and Arguments in Logic

Logic consists of propositions and arguments.

Propositions

Propositions are also referred to as statements. A proposition is a medium through which a judgment is
expressed. A proposition is made up of three elements, namely, the subject, the predicate and the
copula. The subject term is that about which a judgment is being made while the predicate term is that
which is affirmed or denied about the subject term. The copula is the term or word which expresses the
agreement or disagreement between the subject and the predicate.
 9

Example: Man is an animal

Subject Copula Predicate

A proposition is a statement which can be said to be true or false. All propositions are sentences, but not
all sentences are propositions. Question marks, commands, and exclamatory statements are not
propositions.

Example: Keep off the grass!

This is a chair
The sun is round
All Nigerians are Africans
What is your name?

The third and fourth sentences in this example are propositions because they contain identical ideas.

Premise: A premise is a proposition in an argument and a proposition is a premise in an argument. The

premises of an argument are those statements which provide grounds for the conclusion. Since
premises are propositions and statements, they can be true or false, depending on their correspondence
to reality or state of affairs.

Inference: An inference is a process by which reasons are adduced in support of a proposition, belief or
assertion. It is a process in which one proposition is arrived at and affirmed on the basis of one or more
propositions, which were accepted as starting point of the process (Oroka And Isiramen, 1993).
Inference also expresses judgment.

Conclusion: Conclusion is also a proposition in an argument, since a proposition can also be a conclusion
in an argument. The conclusion of an argument is that proposition that is affirmed on the basis of other
propositions. A conclusion also expresses judgment.

True and False Propositions

Only propositions can be true or false.

True proposition: A true proposition is one that corresponds to reality or state of affairs.

Example: Birds fly

False Proposition: A false proposition is one that does not correspond to reality or state of affairs.

Example: Dogs have wings

Factual and Logical Truth (Relation of Propositions)

There is obvious relationship of agreement and disagreement in a proposition to a given state of affairs.
This agreement and disagreement arise from the fact that they are being expressions of judgment. This
judgment can be either factual or logical, leading to factual or logical truth.
 10

Factual Truth: Factual truth requires perception of something which is the case, and which should
necessarily be expressed in words. Factual truths are derived from empirical way of knowing and
therefore are spatial and temporal (time) in many cases.

Example: John has a low hair cut

Factual truth relates proposition to state of affairs. In factual truth, the relationship between the two
ideas is contingent. Hence, factual truths are called synthetic propositions. The relationship is
contingent or changeable if it involves accidental attributes. Their confirmation requires empirical
evidence

Logical Truth: In logical truth, the relationship between the two ideas is necessary, that, it belongs to
the essence of the thing which the proposition is about.

Examples: Man is a rational animal

All marred men are men
All bachelors are unmarried men

Logical truths are analytic because they refer to relations internal to the statement (Cf Orona Oroka,
2000).

Types of Propositions

The various types of propositions include: categorical proposition, hypothetical proposition, conditional,
disjunctive proposition, and bi-conditional proposition.

Categorical Propositions: A categorical proposition is one that makes direct assertion of the agreement
and disagreement between the subject and the subject predicate. Single categorical proposition is just a
short single statement e.g. man is mortal. Multiple categorical propositions are those that involve two or
more statements e.g. John and James are students.

Examples: All men are mortal

The grass is wet
Mary is alive

Hypothetical/Conditional Propositions: A hypothetical proposition is a conditional statement that

expresses the relation in which the truth of one proposition necessarily flows from another i.e. it
expresses the dependence of affirmation or denial on another affirmation or denial. Hypothetical
statement is called “if...then” proposition. The half of the conditional proposition or the first proposition
which contains the “if” is called the antecedent. The second one which contains the “then” is called the
consequent. The truth of the consequent is dependent upon the truth of the antecedent.

Examples: If “The Seminary is in Bodija then “Catholic Priests are well trained”
If “God does not exist the world cannot exist”
 11

Disjunctive/Alternative Propositions: A disjunctive or an alternative statement is expressed in “either…

or” form. This type implies that the two disjuncts cannot be true together or false together. Example:
Either john is a man or a woman. In this case, “John is a man” is the correct or true one. In a disjunctive
proposition where the two disjuncts are true such a disjunctive proposition is valid. For instance, “Either
Jane is a girl or a female”.

Examples: Either I am in my Office at 10. O0 am on Thursdays or I am teaching in the Lecture Hall

Either Okoro good is stubborn or Ejiro is evil

The Structure of Argument

An argument is a group of propositions or statements one of which is claimed to follow from the others,
which are regarded as grounds for the truth of that one. Every argument has a structure in the analysis
of which the terms ‘premise and conclusion” are usually employed. The conclusion and premises must
be well structured so that one can be identified as following from another.

Example: All Men are mortal (premise)

∴ Socrates is mortal (conclusion)

Socrates is a man (premise)

Types of Arguments

There are two types of arguments, namely, deductive and inductive arguments.

Deductive arguments: In deduction, the argument proceeds from the universals to particulars.

Example: All men are mortal (major premise - Universal)

∴ James is mortal (conclusion)

James is a man (minor premise - Particular)

Deductive arguments are ontologically and fundamentally analytic. This is due to the fact that the
conclusion must of necessity be drawn from, or based on the premise, that is, the contents; the ideas
contained in the conclusion must have been existing in the premises.

Validity, Invalidity, Sound and Unsound Arguments

Only arguments can be valid, invalid, sound and unsound

Valid and Invalid Arguments: It is only deductive argument that can be valid or invalid. In deductive
arguments, the claim that the conclusion makes which follows necessarily from the premises may be
found to be correct or incorrect, i.e. the conclusion may be true or false. When the claim i.e. the
conclusion is true, then the argument is valid, and when the claim i.e. the conclusion is incorrect or false,
the argument is invalid. In general, an argument is valid if it is not possible for the premises to be true
and conclusion false.
 12

Validity= Form but not Content

All men are mortal All Ghanaians are Europeans

∴ All Nigerians are mortal ∴ All Nigerians are Europeans

All Nigerians are men All Nigerians are Ghanaians

All M is P

∴ All S is P
All S is M

Examples of Invalid Arguments

S is P All men are mortal

∴S ∴ John is a man
P John is mortal

All humans eat

∴ Becky is human
Becky eats

For validity of a deductive argument all we need is the form of the argument. Hence, there are problems
connected with validity of deductive arguments, namely, negligence of the reliability of the premises
which the claims or conclusions are drawn, and no factual consideration is employed when giving the
propositions that make up major premises from which reasoning proceed (Oroka and Isiramen, 1993).
The validity of any argument does not necessarily mean that its premises should be true. The validity
depends on the logical form of the argument.

Sound and Unsound Arguments

For an argument to be sound it must meet two conditions, namely, the argument must be valid and the
premises must be true, and that if any argument does not meet any one of the conditions, the argument
is said to be unsound (Oroka and Isiramen, 1993). This implies that argument may be valid but not
sound, but an argument cannot be sound and not valid.

Example: All Deltans are Africans

∴ All Nigerians are Deltans

All Nigerians are Africans

Sound and Unsound Arguments

Premises true At least one false premise
Valid Sound Unsound
Inlaid Unsound Unsound
Soundness of Argument = validity + truth
Inductive Arguments

In inductive argument, the conclusion follows from the premises only with a certain degree of
probability. An inductive argument is that which proceeds from particular to general or universal
 13

conclusion. Inductive argument is concerned with the actual state of affairs, and not the form of
argumentation, i.e. the soundness of it has to be asserted by appeal to experience and not by resort to
the form.

Examples: In the past husbands and wives quarreled

∴ Husbands and wives will always quarrel

Husbands and wives have been seen quarrel

There had been day and night

∴ There will always be day and night

There is still day night

Types of Induction

There are two kinds of induction, namely, complete and incomplete induction.

Complete induction: For complete induction, all the cases for investigation are tested or examined
without exception or deprivation of any case. If all cases for study for examined, the summary is
presented thus:

X1X2X3X4X5S6X7X8X9X10 - - - - - -Xn have the quality Y

X1X2X3X4X5S6X7X8X9X10- - - - - - Xn are all the Xs there are.
Therefore, all Xs have the quality Y

Incomplete Induction: In incomplete induction also known as imperfect induction, few of all the subjects
of investigation are tested and the outcome is generalized or applied to all the members of the group.
This may be due to the overwhelming numbers of the cases, cost of study or limitation of time. The
schematic form of incomplete induction is represented thus:

X1X2X3X4X5S6X7X8X9X10 - - - - - -Xn have the qualities of Y

Therefore, all Xs have the quality of Y

Criteria for Accepting the Soundness in Induction

- Number of instances: the more the instances, the more the value of the conclusion
- Absence of contrary instances
- Variability
- Independent confirmation of deduction from general laws

Syllogism

The word syllogism is derived from the Greek words “syn” meaning together and “logizesthal” meaning
to reason or to reckon. It was defined by Aristotle to mean discourse in which certain things being
posited, something else than what is posited necessarily follows merely from them. Syllogism is also
defined as the expression of a reasoning process or argument in which from two judgments that contain
a concept, and one at least of which is a universal, a third judgment, distinct from either of the former
necessarily follows (Ekarika, 1986). For Cohen and Nagel (1966), categorical syllogism is said to be in
 14

standard form when its premises and conclusion are all standard form categorical propositions (A, E, I or
O).

Categorical and Hypothetical Syllogism

Categorical Syllogism: In a common language, a categorical syllogism is an argument containing three

categorical propositions – two premises and a conclusion having in all three, and only three terms, in
which from the relation of major and minor terms to middle term, there follows logically a conclusion.
The categorical syllogism contains:

(a) A major premise consisting of a categorical proposition containing two terms, namely, the major
and the middle term.
(b) A minor premise consisting of a categorical proposition containing two terms, namely, minor term
and middle term.
(c) A conclusion consisting of a categorical proposition containing two terms, namely, the minor and
major term.

Example: All men are mortal

∴ Socrates is mortal
Socrates is a man

Syllogistic Rules and Syllogistic Fallacies

Axioms of Structure

(i) A standard form of categorical syllogism must have exactly three terms and each of them must be
used in the same sense throughout the argument.
(ii) A syllogism must have three and only three propositions (Ekarika, 1986).

Example: All angels are non-material beings S1 = P

∴ Some wives are non-material beings Q = P

Some wives are angels Q = S2

The term “angel” is not used in the same sense in the first and second propositions. The fallacy
committed here is Quaternio Terminorum. For (Ekarika, 1986), the middle term has two senses i.e. two
terms, here there are four terms in this syllogism. For him, the middle term is ambiguous, hence, there
are in practice four propositions in the syllogism. He terms this fallacy the fallacy of four
terms/propositions.

Axioms of Quantity

(iii) In any valid form of categorical syllogism, the middle term must be distributed in at least in one of
the premises.
(iv) No term may be distributed in the conclusion, which is not distributed in the premises (Cohen and
Nagel, 1986).

Example: (a) Some dogs are trained Ms = P

Some dogs are hunters Ms = S
 15

∴ Hunters are trained ∴ Ss =P

(b) All dogs are mammals P = M

∴ All cats are dogs ∴S = P

All cats are mammals P = M

Not only cats are mammals – in the same sense as dogs which are mammals. There are host of others
which are mammals, hence “mammals” is not distributed. This argument commits the fallacy of
undistributed middle term, since for (Ekarika, 1986), M in the first example (dogs) that are hunters may
or may not be identify with those that are trained. He calls this fallacy also the fallacy of undistributed
middle.
(v) In a valid standard form categorical syllogism, if either term is distributed in the conclusions, then it
should be distributed in the premises.

Example: All dogs are mammals P =M

∴ No cats are mammals ∴ S = P

No cats are dogs S = M

The term “mammals” is distributed in the conclusion, while it is not distributed in the in the first
premises. If the major term is distributed in the conclusion and not in the premises, it commits the
fallacy of illicit major while if it is minor, it is illicit minor.

(vi) No standard form categorical syllogism is valid which has two negative premises or it is not possible
for standard form categorical syllogism to have two negative premises. In other words, this rule can be
stated that one at least of the premises must be affirmative, or if both premises are negative, there no
conclusion.

S> M
Some Deltans are not Ibos P > M
Example: Some men are not Ibos

∴ Some men are Deltans ∴ S> P

The problem here is that we cannot infer anything from two negatives, but true
premises. The reason being that it is impossible to be hundred percent sure that S
and P are identical with the a third M since we have both Deltans Ibos and the
Eastern Ibos. This syllogism commits the fallacy of exclusive premises. It is also
known as the fallacy of double negatives.

(vii) If either premises of valid standard form categorical syllogism is negative, the
conclusion must be negative, i.e. a negative premise necessitates a negative
conclusion and vice versa (Ekarika, 1986).

Example: No men are angels

∴ No dogs are angels

No men are dogs

The conclusion “no dogs are angels” is false. This is also a fallacy of double negatives or fallacy of
drawing affirmative conclusion from negative premises (this is quite clear in rule of the axiom of quality).
 16

(a) No valid standard form categorical syllogism with a particular can have universal premises. (Ekarika,
1986) termed these rules corollaries and they include:
(b) From two particular premises nothing can be inferred.

Example: Some men are not Urhobos P > M

∴ All/some men are not Engineers ∴ S > P

Some Urhobos are Engineers M=S

Here the problem is that of undistributed middle because the premises are
particular which are not distributed as one can see in the rule which states that the
middle term must be distributed at least once in the premises.
(c) If the one premise is particular the conclusion must be particular.

Example: Some herbivores are goats M = P

All herbivores are not mosquitoes M > S
∴ No mosquitoes are herbivores ∴ S > P

Here we can see that the conclusion has fault. The reason being that the example
of the minor term is not distributed in the premises. Hence, it should also remain
not distributed in the conclusion.
(d) From a particular major and negative minor nothing can be inferred.

Example: Some goats are stupid P=M

All stupid animals are not cats M=S
∴ Some cats are not goats ∴S>P

From this argument nothing can be inferred because the major premise being
particular and affirmative does not distribute any of its terms. From this we can
see that the major premise which is not distributed cannot remain distributed in
the conclusion since it is negative. Cohen and Nagel (1966) postulate that the position of
middle term determines the figure of the syllogism and on this basis of the distinction there are four
possible figures. For them, letting letter S, P, M, denote the minor term, major term and middle term,
respectively, we may symbolize the four figures as follows:

(1) M - P (2) P - M

∴S - P ∴S - P
S - M S - M

(3) M - P (4) P - M

∴S - P ∴S - P
M - S M - S

Source Ekarika (1986)

Hypothetical Syllogism
 17

Hypothetical syllogism is one that contains antecedent and consequent propositions. Hypothetical
syllogisms are also referred to as conditional syllogism. Hypothetical or conditional syllogism is a
syllogism that contains two components. The truth of the consequent depends on the truth of the
antecedent. The first component following the “if” is the “antecedent”, and the one following the
“then” is the “consequent”. There are two types of hypothetical syllogisms, viz: mixed and pure
syllogisms.

Pure Hypothetical Syllogism: Copi and Cohen (1998) defined pure hypothetical syllogism as a syllogism
that contains conditional propositions exclusively.

Example: If X then Y

∴ If X then Z
If Y then Z

If there is economic depression, then there is inflation

∴ If there is economic depression, then prizes of goods will rise

If there is inflation, then prizes of goods will rise

Mixed Hypothetical Syllogism: For Cohen and Nagel (1996), mixed hypothetical syllogism are syllogisms
that contain three positions – the first or major premise is a hypothetical proposition; the second
premise or minor premise is a categorical proposition and the conclusion is also a categorical
proposition. There are two valid forms of the mixed hypothetical syllogism, namely, Modus Ponens and
Modus Tollens.

Modus Ponens

From the joint assertion of a conditional statement and its antecedent, we can validly infer its
consequent. The argument that results from this process is called Modus Ponens.

Example: If there is fire, then, there is oxygen

With the presence of fire, one can validly infer that there is will be oxygen. This means that fire is
sufficient for the existence of oxygen.

If there is fire, then there is oxygen

∴ There is oxygen
There is fire

If X then Y

∴ Y
X

It will be wrong to say that when there is oxygen there is fire. This is because oxygen is not a sufficient
condition for fire.

If there is fire, then there is oxygen

∴ There is fire (Invalid, wrong) Fallacy of affirming the consequent

There is oxygen
 18

If X then Y

∴X
Y
(Invalid, wrong) Fallacy of affirming the consequent

therefore C is D. if we employ the symbols, the argument takes the form P ⊃ Q; P; ∴ Q

According to Cohen and Nagel (1996), the schematic form of the argument is if A is B, then C is D; A is B;

Valid Invalid

If P Then Q If P Then Q

∴Q ∴P
P Q

If P ⊃ Q If P ⊃ Q

∴Q ∴P
P Q

Modus Tollens

From the joint assertion of a conditional statement and the negation of its consequent we can validly
infer the negation of its antecedent. The argument that results from this is called Modus Tollens. The
categorical premise (2) denies the consequent of the conditional (1) and the conclusion denies its
antecedent (Nyong, 1996).

Example: If there is fire, then there is oxygen

∴ There is no fire
There is no oxygen

P⊃Y
~Y
If X then Y

∴ Not X ∴~P
Not Y OR

This means that if there is fire, then, there is oxygen, there is no oxygen, therefore, there is no fire.

Sufficient and Necessary Conditional Statements

(i) Conditional Statements: These can be used to express necessary and sufficient relationships. When
you say that a condition is sufficient for something what you are saying is that the existence of the
condition is of itself enough to bring that thing or situation about.

Example: If it rains the ground will be wet

If you say that something (A) is sufficient for another thing (B) then what you are saying is that the
existence of (A) is by itself enough to bring (B) about.
 19

(ii) Necessary Condition: A necessary condition for a situation is that condition which is needed to be
fulfilled before that situation or thing is obtained.

Example: Combustion material is necessary for combustion. But it is not sufficient, for other things have
to be added to make the condition sufficient. If you say that condition (B) is necessary for situation (A)
what we mean is that without (B) there can no (A). If A then B; B has been included before A exists. To
say that oxygen is a necessary condition for combustion means that if there is combustion there is
oxygen because it is already included in the combustion. A sufficient condition for something is not
necessary condition for it. The necessary condition is normally the consequent; the sufficient condition is
the antecedent.

Example: C is necessary condition for D

If D then C

∴ D only if C
If not C then not D

Bi-Conditional (Equivalence)

“U” is sufficient and necessary condition for “T” means that “T” if and only if “U”. This means “U” is both
sufficient and necessary condition for “T”. This is Bi-conditional statement because it is a conjunction of
two conditional statements. Bi-conditional statement, therefore, is a conjunction of two conditional
statements. The Bi-conditional statement is stated in the form of “if and only if” relationship. Example:
“He will be acquitted if and only if he has a good layer”.

Propositional Calculus

Logical Constants of the Logical Connectives

The following are symbols or the calculus of propositions referred to as truth functional connectives
which have been accepted and used in symbolic logic or mathematical logic.

Negation “not” “∽” “tilde”

Conjunction “and” “∙” “dot”
Disjunction “either – or” “v” “vie”
Implication or conjunction “if … then” “⊃” “horse shoe”
Bi-conditional “if and only if” “≡“ “triple bar”

Source: Cohen and Nagel (1996)

The symbols for the truth functional connectives can be explained as follows:

“John is not reading” (P is ∽ q)

(i) Negation “not” symbolized “∽” called or tilde. For example, the negation of “John is reading (P is q) is
 20

(ii) Conduction “and” (symbolized “∙” called the “dot”). For example, John is reading and Mary is
sleeping (p ∙ q). These are two simple statements joined together by “and” which is the conjunction
word or connective. The whole example is a conjunction.
(iii) Disjunction “either … or” symbolized “V” called the “Vie” e.g. “Either John is eating or resting” P v q).

the ground is wet” (P ⊃ q).

Implication or conditional “if … then” symbolized “⊃” called the “horse shoe” e.g. “if it is raining then

(iv) Bi-conditional symbolized “-“called the “triple bar” combines two conditional statements, referred
as bi-conditional e.g. “the ground is wet if and only if it is raining” (P≡q).

Truth – Functions

Here we shall discuss or examine the truth – function or the value of the symbols for the truth-
functional connectives we have discussed.

(i) Conjunction: Conjunctive propositions or statements express judgments in which two alternatives
cannot be true simultaneously. The conjunction “and” is symbolized “ ∙” (dot) joins two simple
statements together by “and” which is the conjunction – word or connective. For example a conjunction
of “John is reading”, “Mary is sleeping” is “John is reading and Mary is sleeping”. Symbolically, the
conjunction of the two statements “P and q” is P . q”.

In any two propositions or statements having the conjunction “and” there possibly four sets of truth-
values. These can be demonstrated as follows:

(a) If p and q are true, then P. q is true, if both conjuncts are true then the conjunction (P. q) is true.
(b) If p is true, and q is false, then P. q is false, i.e. if the first conjunct is true and the second conjunct is
false, then the conjunction (P. q) is false.
(c) If p is false and q is true, then P. q is false, i.e. if the first conjunct is false and the second conjunct is
true, then the conjunction P. q is false.
(d) If p is false, and q is false, then P. q is false, i.e. if the first conjunct is false and the second conjunct is
false, then the conjunction P. q is false.

The truth-values “true” and “false” for conjunction can be represented by the capital “T” and “Q”
respectively. The truth-values of a conjunction which Is determined by the truth values of its conjuncts
can be represented by means of a truth table which can be taken as defining the “.” Symbol since it
explains what truth values are assumed by the conjunction (P.q) in every possible case.

P Q P.Q
T T T
T F F
F T F
F F F

For Copi and Cohen (1998), the four possible cases, and the truth-value of the conjunction in each can
be displayed as follows:

Where P is true and q is true, P . q is true

Where P is true and q is false, P . q is false
 21

Where P is false and q is true, P . q is false

Where p is false and q is false, P . q is false.

(ii) Disjunction: Disjunctive or alternative syllogism is express in “either … or” form. This implies that two
disjuncts cannot be true together or false together. In a disjunctive propositions or syllogism where the
two disjuncts are true, such a disjunctive syllogism is said to be valid. In any proposition or statement
having the disjunctive “either … or”, the following are possibly the sets of truth-values.

(a) A disjunction is false only when both disjuncts are false.

(b) A disjunction is true, if one of the disjuncts is true
(b) A disjunctive syllogism is valid if the minor one of the disjuncts and the conclusion denies the other
Cohen and Nagel (1996).

Disjunction could either weak or strong. In other words, the disjunction “either … or” could be in weak
or strong form. When it is used in weak sense, it referred to as being in inclusive sense. When it is used
in the weak or inclusive sense, it does not rule out the truth-value of both disjuncts. In other words, this
is the sense in which only one or both disjuncts could be meant, e.g. brother and money. This inclusive
use of the disjunctive “either … or” is symbolized by “V”, hence, “either P or q” is P V q in the inclusive
truth-value.

On the other hand, when the disjunction “either … or” is used in the exclusive sense it rules out the
truth of both disjuncts. In other words, in the exclusive sense of disjunction we refer to the sense in
which only one is meant, e.g. tea or coffee. The exclusive use of “either … or” i.e. P or q is symbolized by
“Pvq. We can present two truth-tables for the disjunction “either … or” one for exclusive and the second
for inclusive.
Exclusive Inclusive

P Q P⌃ Q P Q PvQ
T T F T T T
T F T T F T
F T T F T T
F F F F F F

We can see that a disjunction is false only when both disjuncts are false, it true otherwise.

(iii) Conditional (Implication): Hypothetical propositions or syllogism expresses the dependence of one
affirmation or denial on another affirmation or denial. Conditional propositions or syllogism express the
relation in which the truth of one proposition necessarily flows from another. In any propositional
statement having the hypothetical or conditional “if…then” or hypothetical syllogism the hypothetical
connective “if…then”, the following are possibly the sets of truth-values.

(a) A hypothetical or conditional (P ⊃ q) is true when q is true and p is true, i.e. P ⊃ q is true when the

(b) A conditional (P ⊃ q) is true when q is true and p is false, i.e. P ⊃ q is true when the consequent is
consequent is true and the antecedent is true.

(c) A conditional (P ⊃ q) is false when p is true and the q is false i.e. a conditional is false when the
true and the antecedent is false.

antecedent is true and the consequent is false.

 22

(d) A conditional (P ⊃ q) is true when p and q are false i.e. a conditional (P ⊃ q) is true when the
antecedent and consequent are false.

P Q P⊃Q
T T T
F T T
T F F
F F T

We can see that a conditional or implication is false only when the antecedent is true and the
consequent is false, it is true in all other cases.

(iv) Bi-conditional or Equivalence: Bi-conditionals or implications are statements which can be divided

if he has a good layer” A≡L. The first conditional may be represented by “if p then q” (P ⊃ q), and the
into two different hypotheticals or conditional statements. For instance “He will be acquitted if and only

second conditional may be represented by “if q then p” (Q ⊃ p). Hence the original statement “if and

conditionals (if p then q) and (if q then p) (P ⊃ q . Q ⊃ p).

only if” may now be regarded as bi-conditional or equivalent to the conjunction of two hypotheticals or

In any statement having the bi-conditional or equivalent “if and only if”, the following are possibly the
sets of truth-values.

(a) the bi-conditional “≡” is true if P and q statements are both true.
(b) the bi-conditional “≡” is false if either statements p or q is false
(c) the equivalent “≡” is true when both statements P and q are false

P Q P≡Q
T T T
F T F
T F F
F F F

We can see that the Bi-conditional is true when the components are true and when the components are
false. It is false in all other cases.

(v) Negation: Referred to as the contradictory or contradiction or denial of a statement. It is the

opposite of affirmation. In English it is usually express as “not” or “no”, it can also be expressed with the
word “false”. It is usually the denial of the first proposition in a second proposition.

Example: Affirmation - Joy is studying

Negation - Joy is not studying

Negation “not” is symbolized “~” which is called the curl. If the statement or proposition is symbolized
“P” is “∽p”, i.e. “not P”. This symbol “∽” for “not” is a truth functional symbol, which also helps to
 23

determine whether the proposition is true or false. For any statement having the negation “not” the
following are possibly the sets of truth-values.

(a) The truth-value of the negation of a true statement is false.

(b) The truth-value of the negation “∽” of a false statement is true, i.e. the negation of “not p” is “∽∽p”
symbolically, the negation of “∽” is “∽ (∽p) or “∽∽p” which simply means “p”.
(c) The negation of any true statement is false
(c) The negation of any false statement is true.

P ∽P
T F
F T

We can see that when a statement is true its negation is false, when a statement is false, its negation is
true.

Quantification Theory

Since a proposition can be shown to be true or false, we assert that a proposition is true if it reflects the
state of affairs, i.e. If the proposition reflects the essence of existence. For instance, “The bird has two
eyes”. In our discourse on proposition we also mentioned that a proposition has certain characteristics,
namely, quality, and quantity, and we asserted that the quantity of a proposition expresses the number
of individuals to whom the judgment can be applied.

The proposition from a viewpoint of quantity is either universal or particular. A proposition is universal if
the subject is a universal term applied distributively to each and all the class, e.g. “All me are mortal”.
On the other hand a proposition is particular if the subject of the proposition is a universal term applied
or used partly or indeterminately e.g. “Some men are learned”.

The quantity of a proposition will tell us whether a proposition is particular or universal.

A - Universal Affirmative Proposition

E - Universal Negative Proposition
I - Particular Affirmative Proposition
O - Particular Negative Proposition

Example: A All men are learned

E No men are mortal
I Some men are mortal
O Some men are not mortal

The A,E,I and O propositions imply the existence or non-existence of something and they have been
classified as universal affirmative, universal negative, particular affirmative, and particular negative. Let
us examine this proposition.

“Birds have two legs”

 24

is symbolized “(∃x)”. This symbol “(∃x)” stands for the statement or assertion “There
This proposition asserts that there is in existence at least one thing which is a bird that has two legs. This

is something which is …” or “There exists something which …” The symbol “(∃x)” is

what is referred to as the existential quantifier. “(∃x)” is the existential quantifier.
This symbol “(∃x)” which represents the Existential Quantifier is telling us that the
statement or proposition in which it appears asserts the existence of something
which is symbolized as:

“(∃x)”Gx

This is symbolization for the statement or proposition “There is something which is

a bird that has two eyes” or “There exists birds that have two eyes”. This statement
or proposition an affirmative proposition or assertion. This proposition can be
stated in the negative term, or this statement can be negated and the symbol for
the negation or negated proposition is prefaced with the negative or with the
negation sign “∽” which becomes:

∽ (∃x)”Gx

The negated or negative statement now reads “It is not the case that …” or “It is
false that…” and this is the denial or negation of the entire proposition or
expression. Let us take some more examples of the following propositions using K
and J to represent the predicates.

(1) There are Priests

(2) There are Journalists

(∃x) Kx “There is something which is a priest”

(∃x) Jx “There is something which a journalist”

We can form new propositions from the two propositions

“Some priests are journalists”. In order to conjoin the two propositional functions
Kx and Jx we make use of the conjunction symbol “⋅”. Therefore, the newly
formulated propositional function (Kx ⋅ Jx) now comes after the symbol of the
existential quantifier

(∃x)(Kx ⋅ Jx)

This new proposition reads that there is something, which is both priest and a
Journalist. Let us take an example of a particular affirmative proposition and a
universal negative proposition.

(i) “Some birds are beautiful”

(∃x)(Kx ⋅ Jx)
 25

The new proposition will now reads that there is something which is both bird and
beautiful

(ii) “No birds are immortal”

∽ (∃x) (Kx ⋅ Jx)

The new proposition now reads that it is not the case that there is something which
is a bird and immortal. The symbol (∃x) stands for existential quantifier, i.e.
existence of a particular case. (x) is the symbol for universal quantifier and the
symbol “(x)” is stated as “for all x” or “everything is such that …”. For example, the
following propositions such as:

“All birds have eyes” has the form (x) Kx. This form (x) Kx means that whatever x
may be x has eyes, and as we have stated, the quantifier symbol “(∃x)” and “(x)”
can be found together or conjoined with other symbols as conjunctions and
implications or conditionals.

Singular and General Propositions

In a singular proposition, an individual thing is named, while in the general

proposition an individual thing is not named as such.

Singular proposition: e.g. John is sick Sj

General Propositions

Example:

Hx(x) (Sx⊃Hx). Here x is the universal quantifier. But the case below:
(i) All Priests are humble. This means given any x, if that x is a priest, Sx, then that x is humble, i.e.

(ii) There exists an x such that an x is a priest and that priest is humble (∃x) (Sx ⋅
Hx). (∃x) is the existential quantifier.

(iii) There exists an x such that x is a priest and that x is not humble.

(∃x)(Sx ⋅ ∽ Hx)

(iv) All priests are not humble means that given any x, if that x is a priest, i.e. Sx,
then that x is not humble, i.e. ∽ Hx.

(x) (Sx ⊃ ∽ Hx)

Singly General Propositional Functions

Let us first of all take an example:

 26

(x)(Mx ⊃ Sx)

Here we have one quantifier. But there are some cases which contain more than
one quantifier. This called multiple general propositions.

Example: “If all dogs are carnivorous, then some animals are carnivorous”. Here,
“all” and “some” show that the statement has two quantifiers and it is symbolized
as follows:

(x) (Dx ⊃ Cx) ⊃ (∃x) (Ax ⋅ Cx)

This is called “Multiple General Propositional Function”.

There are other complex cases.

Example: “If all dogs are carnivorous, then Rover (name of a dog) is carnivorous”

(x) (Dx ⊃ Cx) ⊃ Cr

In the above, the quantifier “(x)” does not govern “Cr”. So if you instantiate, you
may get (Dr ⊃ Cr) ⊃ Cr. Cr is called the free variable while Dr ⊃ Cr is called the
bounded variable. Supposing you meet an instantiation such as Fa ⋅ Gb; this
implies that they have different quantifiers. The generalization would be:

(x) (y) (Fx ⋅ Gy)

The quantifier (x) is governing Fx, while the quantifier (y) is governing Gy

From (x) (y) (Fx ⋅ Gy) ∴ Fa ⋅ Gb

Consider this relation (x) Fx ⋅ Gb

In the above, x from Fx is a bounded variable while b from Gb is a free variable.

But we can bound both with the following (x) (y) (Fx ⋅ Gy). Individual variables are
x and y. The multiple general propositional function has widened the scope of the
individual variables. In it individual variables now include u,v,w,x, y, and z; in
which case (u) Mu is same as (v) (Mu) is same as (w) (Mw), (x) (Mx), (y) (My) and
(z) (Mz).

It is also in line with (Mu ⊃ Su) or (z) (MZ⊃Sz). In existential level then,

(∃x) (Mu ⋅ Su)

SECTION THREE

AN OVERVIEW OF HUMAN EXISTENCE - EXISTENTIALISM

Definition
 27

Human Existence is also termed “Existentialism”. The term existentialism is

derived from the word
“existence”, but existence in this milieu is restricted to human existence, hence, it
is referred to as the philosophy of human existence, which does not simply means
‘being there’ rather to exist means to be personally involved in the drama of life as
an actor rather than as a passive spectator. In existentialism, existence means to
be personally committed to a freely chosen way of life; it means being conscious of
the problems of human life with all the choices open to man and freely opting for a
certain way of life while assuming full personal responsibility for it; it means to be
at the helm of one’s affairs, personally directing its main course; it means really
living one’s own life the way one freely chosen and assuming responsibility for it.
Existentialism is more interested in subjectivity rather than objectivity. Its
emphasis is on man and his concrete existence. In fact existentialism is reaction to
rationalism (Omoregbe, 1991).

Some Existentialist Themes

Some of the themes that existentialism reflects on include the following:

(i) Irrationalism
(ii) Man and the world – being-in-world
(iii) The others – being-with-others (authentic and unauthentic life)
(iv) Freedom, choice and responsibility
(v) Anguish- (difference between anguish and fear)
(vi) Commitment – altruism, love and risk
(vii) The facticity of human existence – limiting factors of human existence
(viii) Death – being-towards- death

Some Existentialist Philosophers

Existentialism started in Denmark in the 19th century with Soren Kierkegaard.

Major existentialist philosophers include Karl Jaspers (1883-1969), Martin
Heidegger (1889-1976), Gabriel Marcel (1889-1973), Jean-Pal Sarte (1905-1980),
Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908-1961), And Albert Camus (1913-1960) (Omoregbe,
1991).

References

Cohen and Nagel (1963): An Introduction to Logic. London: Routledge Paperback Ltd
Copi, I.M and Cohen, c (1998) Introduction to Logic Tenth Ed. New Jessy: Prentice – Hall, Inc. Simon and
Schuster/ a Viacom Company Upper Saddle River.
Ekarika J.P. (1986): Introduction to Philosophy: Preliminary Notions in Logic, Metaphysics and Theory of
Knowledge, Vol. One. Venice, Italy: Stampato Uniongrafica.
Enomah, S. (2002). Simplified Logic for University Students. Effurun: Shelfa International ltd
Nyong, David. (1996): Rudiments of Philosophy and. Logic. Lagos: Obaroh and Obginaka Publishers Ltd.
Oroka, O. and Isiramen, C.O. (1993). Invitation to Logic. Warri: Bonaventure publishers.
 28

Omoregbe, J.I. (1991). A Simplified Philosophy of Western Philosophy: Contemporary Philosophy, Vol.
Three. Lagos: Joja Educational Research and Publishers ltd.
Orona, o. (2000). Readings in General Studies: Introduction to Philosophy and Logic, vol. 2 Ed. Warri:
Foresight Research Publishers.