## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

The process through which the mind proceeds from one or more propositions to formulate another proposition whose relationship is derived from the former.

INFERENCE

Technological Institute of the Philippines Humanities and Social Sciences Department

TOPIC OVERVIEW

INFERENCE

FORMS of Inference

KINDS of Inference

DEDUCTIVE

INDUCTIVE

IMMEDIATE

MEDIATE

Forms of Inference

TIP – QC HSSD

Deductive Reasoning Inductive Reasoning - a process for - a process for drawing drawing conclusions from conclusions from accepted accepted premises by premises by Back means of logical means of logical to OVERVIEW reasoning from reasoning from the universal the singular (general) to (specific) to singular (specific) universal Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres (general) 3

Deductive or Deduction

All men are mortal. But Socrates is a man, Ergo, Socrates is mortal.

back

TIP – QC HSSD

general specific

**A dogs are animals. But Bantay is a dog, Therefore, Bantay is an animal.
**

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres

4

Inductive or Induction

Socrates is mortal. But Socrates is a man, Thus, All men are mortal. Bantay is an animal. But Bantay is a dog, Ergo, A dog is an animal.

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres

TIP – QC HSSD

back

5

Kinds of Inference

Kinds of Inference

TIP – QC HSSD

overview

Immediate

Mediate

Log/Inf

Prep. By. SSAndres

6

Immediate Inference

TIP – QC HSSD

Is a process of reasoning through which the mind passes directly from one proposition to new proposition into reformulation of the very exact meaning or truth expressed by the kinds original proposition. of inference Is made up only of two (2) propositions

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres 7

Mediate Inference

TIP – QC HSSD

kinds of inference

Is the process of reasoning in which from one proposition, with the aid of another proposition (or a third term) called medium, the mind infers not only a new proposition, but also a new truth Mediate inference requires three propositions which is also called syllogism

Prep. By. SSAndres 8

Log/Inf

**Kinds of Immediate Inference
**

Eduction or Equivalence Opposition

TIP – QC HSSD

Conversion

Contradictories

Obversion

back to OVERVIEW

Contraries

Contraposition

Subcontraries

Inversion

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres

Subalterns

9

Eduction

TIP – QC HSSD

Is a kind of immediate inference where a new proposition is being formulated either by INTERCHANGING THE SUBJECT AND PREDICATE or BY THE USE OF OR REMOVAL OF NEGATIVES

**back to immediate inference
**

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres 10

Opposition

TIP – QC HSSD

Is a kind of immediate inference relationship between opposite propositions have towards one another A relationship between proposition when any of them have the same SUBJECT/PREDICATE TERMS but differ in either QUANTITY and QUALITY

back to immediate inference notes about opposition

Prep. By. SSAndres 11

Log/Inf

Conversion

TIP – QC HSSD

This refers to the formulation of a new proposition by way of interchanging the SUBJECT and the PREDICATE of the original proposition. However, the QUALITY of the proposition is retained No fish is mouse. fish. No mouse is

Log/Inf

S

P

Prep. By. SSAndres

S

P

12

**It has two components:
**

TIP – QC HSSD

Convertend – is the original proposition No fish is mouse.

Converse – the derived new proposition No mouse is fish.

**REMINDERS: The QUALITY of the proposition must be retained. Only E and I propositions can be converted.
**

Prep. By. SSAndres 13

Log/Inf

Conversion Examples

No men are mortals. (E) .: No mortals are men. (E) Some animals are dogs. (I) .: Some dogs are animals. (I)

TIP – QC HSSD

Log/Inf

Prep. By. SSAndres

14

**So, we cannot convert…
**

All dogs are animals. (A) .: All animals are dogs. (A) Some birds are not animals. (O) .: Some animals are not birds. (O)

TIP – QC HSSD

Log/Inf

Prep. By. SSAndres

15

**TWO KINDS OF CONVERSION
**

Conversion

TIP – QC HSSD

Simple Conversion

Partial Conversion

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres 16

1. SIMPLE CONVERSION

TIP – QC HSSD

**is a kind of conversion where the quantity of the convertend is retained in the converse.
**

convertend Quantity (Universal – Universal E – E Particular – Particular) I – I

converse

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres 17

Examples

TIP – QC HSSD

No men are mortals. (E) UNIVERSAL .: No mortals are men. (E) Su Some animals are dogs. (I) PARTICULAR .: Some dogs are animals. (I) Su

back to kinds of conversion

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres 18

2. PARTIAL CONVERSION

TIP – QC HSSD

Is a kind of conversion where the quantity of the convertend is reduced from universal to particular. This is applicable only to A and E proposition, since an A proposition becomes I and E becomes O

FROM

UNIVERSAL

TO PARTICULAR

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres 19

EXAMPLES

All computers are gadgets. (A) UNIVERSAL TO Su Pp PARTICULAR .: Some gadgets are computers. (I) Sp Pp

TIP – QC HSSD

**No men are mortal. (E) UNIVERSAL TO Su Pu PARTICULAR .: Some mortals are not men. (O) Sp Pu
**

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres 20

EXERCISES

1.

4.

7.

10.

No x is y. Simple: __________________________ Partial: __________________________ Some y are z. Simple: __________________________ Partial: __________________________ All w are x. Simple: __________________________ Partial: __________________________ Every whale is a mammal. Simple: __________________________ Partial: __________________________

Prep. By. SSAndres

TIP – QC HSSD

**back to immediate inference
**

Log/Inf 21

Obversion

TIP – QC HSSD

Is a kind of eduction where a new proposition is formulated by retaining the subject term and the quantity of the original proposition This is applicable to AEIO Propositions The original proposition is called the OBVERTEND and the new proposition OBVERSE

Prep. By. SSAndres 22

Log/Inf

Rules to follow:

•

TIP – QC HSSD

•

Retain the subject term and the quantity of the original proposition. SU SP Change the quality of the original proposition. Replace the predicate of the original proposition to its contradictory.

SU SP

+ -

+

•

Predicate

Contradictory

Log/Inf

Prep. By. SSAndres

23

OBVERTEND OBVERSE

n

TIP – QC HSSD

**All men are mortal. (A) n Su C+ Pp No men are mortal. (E) n Su Pu Some men are mortal. n (I) Sp Pp
**

Some men are not mortal. (O) Sp Pp

Log/Inf

n

n

**No men are non-mortal. (E) Su CPu All men are non-mortal. (A) Su Pp
**

Some men are not non-mortal. (O)

n

n

**Sp Pu Some men are non-mortal. (I) Sp Pp
**

24

Prep. By. SSAndres

Exercises

Every rocksinger is a youngster. __________________________________ 2. All architects are artists. __________________________________ 5. No engineer is a tricycle driver. __________________________________ 7. Some students are intelligent. __________________________________ 9. No priests are atheist. __________________________________

1.

back to immediate inference

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres

TIP – QC HSSD

25

CONTRAPOSITION

TIP – QC HSSD

Is a kind of eduction which results from a formulation of a new proposition whose subject term is contradictory of the predicate term in the original proposition It is likewise applicable to AEIO Propositions The original proposition is called the CONTRAPONEND and the new CONTRAPOSIT

Prep. By. SSAndres 26

Log/Inf

Kinds of Contraposition

Contraposition

TIP – QC HSSD

Partial Contraposition

Complete Contraposition

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres 27

**PARTIAL CONTRAPOSITION Rules to follow:
**

n

TIP – QC HSSD

n

n

n

Log/Inf

The subject of the contraposit is the contradictory of the of the predicate term of the contraponend. The quality of the contraponend is changed in the contraposit. The predicate term in the contraposit is the subject term in the contraponend The A is changed to E, while E to I and O to I

Prep. By. SSAndres

28

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES

1.

TIP – QC HSSD

5.

All whales are mammals. (A) Su C+ Pp CONTRAPOSIT .: No non-mammals are whales. (E) Su C- Pu CONTRAPONEND No fishes are dogs. (E) C- Pu CONTRAPOSIT Su . : Some non-dogs are non-fishes. (I) CONTRAPONEND Sp C+ Pp CONTRAPOSITSome students are not studious. (O) back to kinds of contraposition Sp CPu Log/Inf 29 .: Prep. By. SSAndres Some non-studious are students. CONTRAPONEND

**COMPLETE CONTRAPOSITION Rules to Follow:
**

TIP – QC HSSD

The subject term in the contraposit is the contradictory of the predicate term in the contraponend. The quality of the contraponend is not changed in the contraposit. The predicate term in the contraposit is the contradictory of the subject term in the contraponend. The A is changed to A, then E to O, and O to O

Prep. By. SSAndres 30

Log/Inf

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES

TIP – QC HSSD

CONTRAPONENDAll whales are mammals. (A) Su C+ Pp CONTRAPOSIT All non-mammals are non-whales. (A) .: Su C+ Pp CONTRAPONENDNo fishes are dogs. (E) Su C- Pu CONTRAPOSIT. : Some non-dogs are not non-fishes. (O) Sp CPu CONTRAPONEND Some students are not studious. (O) Sp CPu CONTRAPOSIT .: Some non-studious are not nonstudents. O Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres Sp CPu 31

**EXERCISES. (Give the Partial and Complete Contraposit)
**

Partial .: Complete .: Partial .: Complete .: Partial .: Complete .: Partial .: Complete .: Partial .: Complete .: All men are mortal. ______________________________ ______________________________ No A is B. ______________________________ ______________________________ Some C is D. ______________________________ ______________________________ Every E is F. ______________________________ ______________________________ Some pilots are soldiers. ______________________________ ______________________________

Prep. By. SSAndres

TIP – QC HSSD

**back to immediate inference
**

Log/Inf

32

INVERSION

TIP – QC HSSD

A kind of eduction whose subject and predicate terms are contradictories of the subject and predicate terms in the original proposition The INVERTEND undergoes various stages of eductions like OBVERSION, SIMPLE CONVERSION, CONTRAPOSITION, PARTIAL CONVERSION and finally, INVERSION. Only the A proposition is qualified of inversion

Prep. By. SSAndres 33

Log/Inf

ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE

Invertend Obverse Converse (S) Obverse Converse (P)

Log/Inf

TIP – QC HSSD

All terrorists are criminals. (A) to No terrorist are non-criminals. (E) to No non-criminals are terrorists. (E) to All non-criminals are non-terrorists. (A) to Some non-terrorist are non-criminals.(I)

to

Inverse

Some non-terrorist are not nonPrep. By. SSAndres

34

EXAMPLES

All rooms are clean. .: _______________________ Every student is enrolled. .: _______________________ No computer is infected. .: _______________________ Any dog is an animal. .: _______________________

back to immediate inference

Log/Inf Prep. By. SSAndres

TIP – QC HSSD

35

REQUIREMENT:

TIP – QC HSSD

Propositions must have similar SUBJECT or PREDICATE Their differences must either be in QUANTITY or QUALITY

02/12/09

//SSA

36

**EXAMPLE (without logical opposition)
**

All Filipinos are Asians. .: No Germans are Romans.

TIP – QC HSSD

* The propositions have nothing to oppose as they have no logical relationship.

02/12/09

//SSA

37

**EXAMPLE (without logical opposition)
**

All Filipinos are Asians. .: No Germans are Romans.

TIP – QC HSSD

* The propositions have nothing to oppose as they have no logical relationship.

02/12/09

//SSA

38

**EXAMPLE (with logical opposition)
**

All Filipinos are Asians. .: No Filipinos are Asians.

TIP – QC HSSD

* There is a logical relationship since they have the same subject and predicate term, and they have different quantity as well as quality.

back to immediate inference

02/12/09 //SSA 39

* The Square of Opposition

TIP – QC HSSD

**click here for larger view
**

02/12/09 //SSA 40

TIP – QC HSSD

**back to immediate inference
**

02/12/09 //SSA 41

CONTRADICTORIES

An opposition existing between a pair of propositions having the same subject and predicate but differ in both quantity and quality. A and O, E and I

TIP – QC HSSD

02/12/09

//SSA

42

Rules on Contradictories

1. 2.

If one is true, the other is false and vice versa. Contradictories cannot be simultaneously true or false at the same time.

• • • •

TIP – QC HSSD

**If A is true, O is false If E is true, I is false If I is true, E is false If O is true, A is false
**

back to immediate inference

02/12/09

//SSA

43

CONTRARIES

this is an opposition existing between a pair of universal propositions having the same subject and predicate but differ in quality A and E are contraries

TIP – QC HSSD

02/12/09

//SSA

44

Rules on Contrariety

1. 2.

**If one is true, the other is false. If one is false, the other is doubtful.
**

• • • •

TIP – QC HSSD

If A is true, E is false. If E is true, A is false. If A is false, E is doubtful. If E is false, A is doubtful.

**back to immediate inference
**

02/12/09 //SSA 45

SUBCONTRARIES

this is an opposition existing between a pair of particular propositions having the same subject and predicate terms but differing in quality I and O are subcontraries

TIP – QC HSSD

02/12/09

//SSA

46

Rules on Subcontrariety

1. 2.

• • • •

**If one is true, the other is doubtful. If one is false, the other is true.
**

If I is true, O is doubtful If O is true, I is doubtful If I is false, O is true If O is false, I is true

TIP – QC HSSD

**back to immediate inference
**

02/12/09 //SSA 47

SUBALTERNS

this is an opposition existing between a pair of propositions having the same subject and predicate terms but differ in quantity A and I (vice versa) and E and O (vice versa) A and E – subalternant I and O - subalternate

02/12/09 //SSA

TIP – QC HSSD

48

Rules on Subalternation

1. 2. 3. 4.

TIP – QC If the universal is true, the particular is true. HSSD If the universal is false, the particular is doubtful. If the particular is true, the universal is doubtful If the particular is false, the universal is false.

If A is true, I is true • If A is false, I is doubtful • If E is true, O is true • If E is false, O is doubtful • If I is true, A is doubtful • If I is false, A is false • 02/12/09If O is true, E is doubtful //SSA

•

49

EXERCISES

Supply the opposition of the following. Then, write (T) for true, (F) for false, and (?) for doubtful inside the parenthesis, assuming that all given are true. 3. No angels are mortals. Contradictory .: _________________________ ( ) Contrary .: _________________________ ( ) Subaltern .: _________________________ ( ) 7. No angels are men. Contradictory .: _________________________ ( ) Contrary .: _________________________ ( ) Subaltern .: _________________________ ( ) 11. Some birds are not black. Contradictory .: _________________________ ( ) Contrary .: _________________________ ( ) Subaltern .: _________________________ ( ) 15. All philosophers are deep thinkers. Contradictory .: _________________________ ( ) Contrary .: _________________________ ( ) Subaltern .: _________________________ ( ) 19. Some politicians are corrupt. Contradictory .: _________________________ ( ) Contrary .: _________________________ ( ) Subaltern .: _________________________ ( )

TIP – QC HSSD

02/12/09

//SSA

50

- Logical Opposition
- Kinds of Propositions
- Moods of the Categorical Syllogism
- Reasoning and Inference
- DISJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
- Logic Eduction
- Oppositional Inference Presentation
- OBVERSION
- Rules in Conversion, Obversion, Contraposition and Inversion
- Propositions and Syllogisms
- Syllogism
- Logic (Immediate Inference)
- The Simple Categorical Syllogism
- Hypothetical Propositions
- Opposition Proposition
- Disjunctive and Conjunctive
- The Categorical Syllogism
- LOGIC Course Code
- A Changeless Land Continuity and Change in Philippine Politics
- EUREC-Position Paper STPP
- Syllogistic Figures
- 2 4 4 Engineering Lettering Guidelines
- Assembly Language
- Rules Governing a Categorical Syllogism
- Bandaging
- Hypothetical Propositions
- eduction
- Types of Syllogism
- Expt. 1 CMB Lab Written-LATEST
- Modifiers of Human Acts

Skip carousel

- I. E. Doggett v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 275 F.2d 823, 4th Cir. (1960)
- United States v. Benitez-Longoria, 10th Cir. (1999)
- Suspension Data
- Kote Jishiashvili v. Attorney General of the United States, 402 F.3d 386, 3rd Cir. (2005)
- Elijah "Tootie Pie" Cosby, Jr. v. Tom Jones, Warden of the Walker County Correctional Institute, 682 F.2d 1373, 11th Cir. (1982)
- Felix Norbert Siewe v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General, 480 F.3d 160, 2d Cir. (2007)
- National Labor Relations Board v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph, 676 F.2d 499, 11th Cir. (1982)
- United States v. Jackson, 10th Cir. (2007)
- United States v. 152 Char-Nor Manor, 4th Cir. (1997)
- Trujillo v. PacifiCorp, 524 F.3d 1149, 10th Cir. (2008)
- In Re Level 3 Communications, Inc. Securities, 667 F.3d 1331, 10th Cir. (2012)
- United States v. William Jackson, 257 F.2d 41, 3rd Cir. (1958)
- Implementation and Validation of Supplier Selection Model for Shaper Machine Arm by Fuzzy Inference Decision Support System
- Goldhirsh Group, Inc. v. Lew Alpert and Alpert Productions, Inc., 107 F.3d 105, 2d Cir. (1997)
- United States v. Arras, 373 F.3d 1071, 10th Cir. (2004)
- Hostetler v. Green, 10th Cir. (2009)
- Port Norris Express Co., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America, 757 F.2d 58, 3rd Cir. (1985)
- National Labor Relations Board v. J. Mitchko, Inc., No. 13235, 284 F.2d 573, 3rd Cir. (1961)
- National Labor Relations Board v. Milk Drivers & Dairy Employees, Local 338, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, 531 F.2d 1162, 2d Cir. (1976)
- Ivory James Hill, Jr. v. Atlantic Navigation Company, a Corporation, Gulf Menhaden Company, Incorporated, a Corporation, M/v Promised Land, Her Tackle, Apparel, Etc., and the Fish Meal Company, a Corporation, 218 F.2d 654, 4th Cir. (1955)
- State v. Crom, Ariz. Ct. App. (2015)
- George R. Hubbard v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Lawrence A. Taylor v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 596 F.2d 623, 4th Cir. (1979)
- Network Fault Discovery and Correction to Construct Optimal Network
- C.A. La Seguridad, as Subrogee v. Delta Steamship Lines, 721 F.2d 322, 11th Cir. (1983)
- Christopher Brophy v. Jiangbo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 11th Cir. (2015)
- Frederick E. Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens, Incorporated National Football League Properties, Incorporated, 241 F.3d 350, 4th Cir. (2001)
- Barnes v. United States, 412 U.S. 837 (1973)
- United States v. Summers, 414 F.3d 1287, 10th Cir. (2005)
- Swabb v. ZAGG, Inc., 10th Cir. (2015)
- Ricky G. Stallings v. Robert J. Tansy, Warden, 28 F.3d 1018, 10th Cir. (1994)

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulRead Free for 30 Days

Cancel anytime.

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Close Dialog## This title now requires a credit

Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

Loading