CONSTRUCTI

NG
Learning how to make your own arguments is one of the
most important lessons in Logic as you become a critical
thinker. It demands that one clearly and objectively think
about the foundations of one’s argument while taking into
account the necessary and sufficient connections between
premises and conclusion, avoiding fallacies, and the clarity
in which one’s arguments are delivered.
•In a world full of illogical and contradictory reasoning,
the person who is truthful, knowledgeable, and critical
can stand out as a model against the shallowness of the
viralism so prevalent in our modern society today.
•It is important to be able to construct arguments
correctly because truth is the absolute and
supreme value that can be discovered through
reasoning.
 WORDS

•Words have tremendous persuasive power, or what we

have called their rhetorical force or emotive
meaning—their power to express and elicit images,
feelings, and emotional associations.
•Rhetorical force may be psychologically effective, but
by itself it establishes nothing. If we allow our attitudes
and beliefs to be affected by sheer rhetoric, we fall
short as critical thinkers.
• As critical thinkers, we must be able to distinguish the
argument (if any) contained in what someone says or
writes from the rhetoric; we must be able to distinguish
the logical force of a set of remarks from their
psychological force.
 EUPHEMISMS A N D
DYSPHEMISMS
• Euphemism—a neutral or positive expression
instead of one that carries negative associations.
• “pre-owned” instead of “used cars.”
• “freedom fighters” instead of “rebels” or “guerillas.”
DYSPHEMISM

• Dysphemism is the opposite of a euphemism.

Dysphemisms are used to produce a negative effect
on a listener’s or reader’s attitude toward something
or to tone down the positive associations it may
have.
• “terrorist” instead of “freedom fighter.”
 STEPS IN MAKING A N ARGUMENT

1. Formulate your conclusion or thesis.

2. Formulate your premises that will support the conclusion.
3. Identify what kind of argument you are going to make. Is it a deduction [general
to particular] or an induction [particular to general]?
4. Check the connection whether your conclusion really follows from your premises.
Determine soundness [for deduction] or cogency [for induction].
5. Contradict your argument to check if it stands criticism.
6. Conclude your argument by again summarizing what your main evidence was
and how it proved your conclusion. Do not repeat the thesis exactly; try to
rephrase it in another way.
 EXAMPLE 1

1. Identify the Conclusion: “We should have martial law in the whole of
Mindanao.”
2. Support/Evidence for the Conclusion:
Premise 1: Every time there is a rebellion, the government can declare martial law.
Premise 2: There has been a rebellion in Marawi (necessary and sufficient
condition for the declaration).

3. The argument is deductive proceeding from general principle to

particular conclusion-application.
4. Check if the conclusion really follows from the
premises. Premise 1: Every time there is a rebellion,
the government can declare martial law.
Premise 2: There has been a rebellion in Marawi (necessary
and sufficient condition for the declaration).
Conclusion:We should have martial law in the whole of
Mindanao.
5. Criticize your own argument.
 EXAMPLE 2

1. Conclusion: Using animals for circus entertainments is bad

and harmful for them.
2. Premise 1:Taking animals out of their natural habitat is bad
and harmful for them.
Premise 2: But using animals means taking them out of
their natural habitats.
3. Evaluate the argument. Determine soundness or
cogency.
 EXAMPLE – CONSTRUCTING
ARGUMENTS
Conclusio EXA PLE
Butete should
n: resign.
Major M 3Resign; a person who should
term: resign
Minor Butet
term: • e
Middle . A government official who does not perform his
term: job well
Standard Categorical
Syllogism
Major Any government official who does not perform his job well should resign.
premise (Any government official who does not perform his job well is a person who
Minor should resign.)
But Butete is a government official who does not perform
premise his job well.
Conclusio Therefore, Butete should resign. (Or: Butete is a person who
n should resign.)
Standard Hypothetical
Syllogism
Condition If Butete is a government official who does not perform his job well, then he
al should resign. But Butete is a government official who does not perform his
Therefore,
job well. Butete should
resign.
DEDUCTION A N D
INDUCTION
This stuff is not easy to learn the night
before an exam. But if you apply
yourself regularly, it really isn’t all that
hard.
T H E D I A M O N D OF LO G I C
EXAMPLE

• A simple example will illustrate this process. As you go

outside you notice that there are dark heavy clouds in the
sky, that the air is slightly cooler than it was, and that
there is the certain smell of wet earth in it.You casually say
that it is going to rain and act to accommodate it by
taking an umbrella with you. If you made the same
observations in Pacol when the air was cooler you would
say that it's going to rain, because you had seen it all
happen before, and you know that patterns repeat
 INDUCTION AND
DEDUCTION
•In logic, moving from observations to
conclusions is called induction. Moving from
conclusions to predictions that, given this or
that set of circumstances or events the
following will happen and then verifying that
prediction is called deduction.
CATEGORICAL
LOGIC
 C AT EG O R I C A L LO G I C

• The first technique we’ll discuss is categorical logic.

Categorical logic is logic based on the relations of inclusion
and exclusion among classes of things (or “categories”) as
stated in categorical claims [or PROPOSITIONS]. Its methods
date back to the time of Aristotle, and it was the principal
form that logic took among most knowledgeable people for
more than two thousand years.
 CATEGORIES

• Categories refers to
classes of things into
which reality can be
analyzed.They are useful
for making our reasoning
exact since they allow
definitions that make clear
to us the things or objects
we are trying to
understand.
K I N D S OF P R OP O SI TI O N S
SUBJECT A N D PREDICATE TERMS

• What we put in the blanks are what we call terms [or simply
words] or simply the CATEGORY
• The term that we put in the first part of the sentence is
called the SUBJECT term and the term that we put after
the LINKING VERB is called the PREDICATE term.

SUBJECT-COPULA-
• The standard form the
proposition is:
PREDICATE
(S c P) structure
 VENN DIAGRAMS

•A proposition (Universal Affirmative): All S

are P.

S P
•E Proposition (Universal Negative): No
S are P.

S P
•I Proposition (Particular Affirmative): Some S
are P.
S P

X
• O Proposition (Particular Negative): Some S
are not P.

S P

X
 O R D I N A RY STATE M E N T C AT E G O R I C A L I N T E R P R E TAT I O N

Some dogs bark. At least one member of the class of dogs is a

member of the class of animals that bark.

All spiders have eight legs. All members of the class of spiders are
members of the class of things having eight
legs.

No bankers favor the No members of the class of bankers are

withholding of interest on members of the class of person favoring
savings accounts. withholding interest on savings account.
Or: [All members of the class of bankers
are NOT
members of the class of person favoring
withholding interest on savings account.]
REMINDERS O N THE CATEGORICAL
PROPOSITION
1. Claims about single individuals should be treated as A-claims
or E-claims.
2. Terms without nouns - The subject and predicate terms of a
categorical proposition must contain either a noun or noun
substitute that serves to denote the class indicated by the
term. Nouns and noun substitutes denote classes, while
adjectives connote attributes. If a term consists of only an
adjective, a noun or noun substitute should be introduced to
make the term genuinely denotative.
REMINDERS O N THE CATEGORICAL
PROPOSITION
3. Adverbs and pronouns - when a statement contains a spatial adverb such
as where, wherever, anywhere, everywhere, or nowhere, or a temporal adverb
such as when, whenever, anytime, always, or never, it may be translated in
terms of places or times, respectively. a statement containing pronouns
such as who, whoever, anyone, what, whatever, or anything may be
translated in terms of persons or things, respectively.

He is always clean All times are times he is clean shaven.

shaven.

Whoever works hard All persons who work hard are persons who will
will succeed. succeed.
REMINDERS O N THE CATEGORICAL
PROPOSITION
4. Unexpressed quantifiers - many statements in ordinary usage
have quantifiers that are implied but not expressed. In
introducing the quantifiers one must be guided by the most
probable meaning of the statement.

Emeralds are green All emeralds are green gems.

gems.

Children live next Some children live next door.

door.
REMINDERS O N THE CATEGORICAL
PROPOSITION
5. nonstandard quantifiers - sometimes the quantity
of a statement is indicated by a word or words
other than the three quantifiers that are allowed.

A few soldiers are heroes. Some soldiers are heroes.

Anyone who votes is a All voters are citizens

citizen.
REMINDERS O N THE CATEGORICAL
PROPOSITION
6. conditional statements - when the antecedent and
consequent of a conditional statement talk about the
same thing, the statement can usually be translated into
categorical form.
If it is a mouse, then it is a All mice are mammals.
mammal.

If an animal has four legs, then it No four-legged animals are birds.

is not a bird.
REMINDERS O N THE CATEGORICAL
PROPOSITION
• exclusive propositions - propositions that involve
the words only, none but, none except, and no… except
are exclusive propositions.

Only saints will enjoy All persons who will enjoy the
the beatific beaitific vision are
vision saints.
REMINDERS O N THE CATEGORICAL
PROPOSITION
• exceptive propositions - propositions of the form All except
S are P and All but S are P are exceptive propositions. They
must be translated not as single categorical propositions
but as pairs of conjoined categorical propositions. Statements
that include the phrase none except, on the other hand, are
exclusive and not exceptive propositions.
All except students are No students are invited
invited persons + All non-students
are invited persons.
SEATWORK

•Answer Exercise 8.1 of Moore and

Parker
 SQUARE OF OPPOSITIONS

Opposition of Propositions refers to the

difference between two propositions which
have the same subject term and predicate
as regards to their quantity or quality or
both.
 Superalter Superalter
n n

Subalternati Subalternati
on on

Subalter Subalter
n n
A. C O N T R A D I C T O RY

• Difference of two propositions as to quantity and

quality such that one is necessarily the negation of
the other. Both cannot be true but both cannot be
false.
• Rule: If one is Atrue, thevother is O
false and vice-
versa
E s
v I
s
B. C O N T R A RY

• Difference as to quality of two universal

propositions.
Both cannot be true but both can be false.
• Rule: If one is true, the other is false; if one
is false the other is doubtful.
A vs E
C. S U B C O N T R A RY

• Difference of two particular propositions as to

quality.
Both can be true but both cannot be false.
• Rule: If one is false the other is true; if one is
true the other is doubtful.
I vs O
D. SUBALTERNATE

• Difference as to quantity of two propositions having the

same quality, between a universal proposition (superaltern)
and its corresponding particular (subaltern).
• Rules: If the superaltern is true, the subaltern is also
true but not vice-versa. [subaltern true =
superaltern DOUBTFUL]
• If the subaltern is false, the superaltern is also false
but not vice- versa.
A [superaltern
v false
I = subaltern
DOUBTFUL]
E s O
v
 SUMMARY
A being true E isTABLE
false I is true O is false

E being true A is false I is false O is true

I being true E is false A is doubtful O is doubtful

O being true A is false E is doubtful I is doubtful

A being false O is true E is doubtful I is doubtful

E being false I is true A is doubtful O is doubtful

I being false A is false E is true O is true

O being false A is true E is false I is true

• Most boyfriends are
faithful.
•All girls are kirs.
THE
C AT E G O R I C
AL
SYLLOGISM
•A syllogism is a deductive argument
consisting of two premises and one
conclusion. It is called a
categorical syllogism if all the propositions are
categorical propositions.
 STR UC TUR E OF T H E SYLLOGISM

• The propositions must contain a total of three terms.

A synonym introduced into one of the propositions
does not add another term into the syllogism.
• All philanthropists are wealthy persons.
• No wealthy persons are selfish.
• Therefore, no philanthropists are selfish.
•Each of the terms must be used in the same
sense throughout the syllogism. If a term is
used in different senses it would not count as
one term and so there will result more than
three terms.
RELATIONSHIP OF TERMS WITHIN A CATEGORICAL
SYLLOGISM
• The propositions need not be in their standard form; however,
analysis is greatly simplified if the propositions are in
standard form.
• The three terms of the categorical syllogism are the major term,
the minor term, and the middle term. The major term is the
predicate of the conclusion. The minor term is the subject of
the conclusion. And the middle term is that which provides the
linkage between the two premises. It is thus found in both
premises but never in the conclusion. A premise is
designated as major or minor depending on the term it carries.
•Major term: the term that occurs as the
predicate
term of the syllogism’s conclusion
•Minor term: the term that occurs as the
subject
term of the syllogism’s conclusion
•Middle term: the term that occurs in
both of the premises but not at all in
 RULES OF T H E
SYLLOGISM
• Rule 1:There must be three terms and only three – the major term,
the minor term, and the middle term. If there are only two terms
the relationship between these two cannot be established. And if there
were more than three terms this would violate the structure of the
categorical syllogism.
• Animals are living beings.
• Plants are heavenly bodies.
• Therefore...
•Rule 2: Each term must occur twice in the
syllogism: the major must occur in the
conclusion and in one premise, the minor in
the conclusion and in one premise; the
middle in both premises but not in the
conclusion.There must therefore be a
total of three propositions in the
syllogism.
• Rule 3: The middle term must be distributed at least
once.
If the middle term is particular in both premises it
might stand for a different portion of its extension in
each occurrence and thus be equivalent to two
terms.
All sharks are
fish. All salmon
 SUPPOSITION

• The meaning of “distributed” refers to the

UNIVERSAL quantity of a particular term as it is
exactly used in the syllogism.“Undistributed” means
the PARTICULAR quantity of a term in the syllogism.
• The exact meaning of a term in the syllogism is what
we call as the SUPPOSITION.
T W O RULES ABOUT THE SUPPOSITION OF
TERMS

1. The predicate of an affirmative proposition is

always PARTICULAR; EXCEPT when the
predicate refers to a singular individual or is the
very definition of the subject.
2. The predicate of a negative proposition is
always UNIVERSAL.
•Rule 4: The major and minor terms
may not be universal in the conclusion
unless they are universal in the
premises. If a term is
distributed in the conclusion then
it must be distributed first in the
premise.
 FALLACY OF THE ILLICIT MAJOR
TERM

•There is an illicit major term if the major

term is universal in the conclusion but
particular in the premise:
All horses are
animals All dogs
are not horses
 FALLACY OF THE ILLICIT MINOR
TERM

•There is an illicit minor term if the minor

term is universal in the conclusion but
particular in the premise:
All tigers are
mammals. All
mammals are
• Rule 5: If both premises are affirmative, the
conclusion must be affirmative. The reason for
this rule is that affirmative premises either unite the
minor and major terms, or else do not bring them into
relationship with each other at all.
All sins are
detestable. All
pretenses are a
•There is a need to be cautious about
apparently affirmative or negative
propositions:
Animals differ from
angels. Man is an
animal.
Therefore, man is not
•Rule 6: If one premise is affirmative and
the other negative, the conclusion must
be negative.
All crows are birds.
All wolves are not crows.
Therefore, all wolves are
•Some premises are apparently affirmatives but
actually negative and therefore yield a valid
conclusion:
Dogs are not
cats. Greyhounds
are dogs.
Therefore,
•Rule 7: If both premises are negative –
and not equivalently affirmative – there
can be no conclusion.
Reptiles are not
mammals Dogs are
not reptiles.
Therefore…
•Rule 8: If both premises are
particular there can be no
conclusion.
 SUMMARY GUIDE TO THE FORMAL
FALLACIES
Rule Violated Name of the
Fallacy
Rule 1: There must be three terms and only three – the
major term, the minor term, and the middle term.
Fallacy of Equivocation or the Fallacy of Four
terms
Rule 2: Each term must occur twice in the syllogism: the Fallacy of Misplaced Middle
major must occur in the conclusion and in one premise, the Term
minor in the conclusion and in one premise; the middle in
both premises but not in the conclusion.
Rule 3:The middle term must be distributed (i.e., must have Fallacy of Undistributed Middle
universal supposition) at least once. Term
Rule 4: The major and minor terms may not be Fallacy of Illicit Minor
universal in the conclusion unless they are universal in Term Fallacy of Illicit
the premises. Major
Rule 5: If both premises are affirmative, the conclusion FallacyTerm
of Negative Conclusion drawn from
must be affirmative. Two Affirmative Premises
Rule 6: If one premise is affirmative and the other Fallacy of not following the weaker
negative, the conclusion must be negative. side
Rule 7: If both premises are negative – and not equivalently Fallacy of Negative
affirmative – there can be no conclusion. Premises
Rule 8: If both premises are particular, there can be no Fallacy of Particular