ProfessorDouglasW.

Portmore

ALITTLEBITOFLOGIC

DEFINITIONS

Anargumentisasetoftwoormorestatements,whereonepurportstofollowfrom
theothers.Theonethatsupposedlyfollowsfromtheothersiscalledtheconclusion,
andthestatementsthatpurporttoprovidesupportfortheconclusionarecalled
premises.

Astatementisasentencethathasatruthvalue,thatis,asentencethatiseithertrue
orfalse.Asentenceisastatementifandonlyifithasatruthvalue.So,forinstance,
Alldogshavefourlegsisastatement,whileWhattimeisit?isnot.

Apropositionisatruthorafalsehoodthatcanoftenbeexpressedbyanumberof
different,butlogicallyequivalent,statements.Twostatementsexpressthesame
propositionifandonlyiftheyhaveexactlythesamemeaning.Forinstance,John
SmithismarriedandJohnSmithhasaspousebothexpressthesameproposition.
ButJohnSmithismarriedandJohnSmithhasawifedonotnecessarilyexpress
thesameproposition,sinceJohnSmithcouldbemarriedtoaman.

Avalidargumentisonewherethetruthofthepremisesentails(i.e.,necessitatesor
guarantees)thetruthoftheconclusion.Anargumentisvalidifandonlyif,inno
possibleworld,areitspremisesalltrueanditsconclusionfalse.Argumentsthatare
notvalidareinvalid.(Notethatonlyarguments,andnotstatementsorpropositions,
canbeproperlycalledvalidorinvalid.Bycontrast,onlystatementsand
propositions,notarguments,canbeproperlycalledtrueorfalse.)

Anargumentissoundifandonlyifbothofthefollowingaretrue:(1)itisvalid,and
(2)allofitspremisesaretrue.Argumentsthatarenotsoundareunsound.

Adeductiveargumentisoneinwhichthetruthofitspremisespurportstoestablish
thatitsconclusioniscertainlytrue.

Aninductiveargumentisoneinwhichthetruthofitspremisespurportsto
establishthatitsconclusionisprobablytrue.

Aninductiveargumentisstrongifandonlyifthetruthofitspremisesmakesits
conclusionmorelikelytruethanfalse.Themoreprobableitmakesthetruthofits
conclusion,thestrongertheinductiveargumentis.Inductiveargumentsthatarenot
strongareweak.

Aninductiveargumentiscogentifandonlyifbothofthefollowingistrue:(1)itis
strong,and(2)allofitspremisesaretrue.

Page1of6

ProfessorDouglasW.Portmore

AwellcraftedversionofanargumentstatedinordinaryEnglishisonethathas
beenrestatedsoastomakeitslogicalfeaturesexplicitbyemployinguniform
language(e.g.,usingthesamestatementconsistentlytorefertothesame
proposition),excludingexcessverbiage,andmakingeachstepoftheargument
explicitbynumberingthepremisesandconclusions.
Aclassreferstoasetofthings,suchasthesetofthingsthatarehumansorthesetof
thingsthatarepoliticians,oreventhesetofthingsthatareGeorgeW.Bush.
Atermisawordoraphrasethatreferstosomeclass(e.g.,humans,politicians,
GeorgeW.Bush,etc.).
Anargumentformisapatternofreasoningthatanumberofdifferentarguments
canshare.Theformofanargumentisobtainedbytakingawellcraftedversionofit
anduniformlyreplacingadistinctcapitalletterforeachdistinctstatement(orterm)
throughouttheentireargument,makingthelogicalconnections(whichare
expressedbywordssuchasif,or,all,and,not,some,andonlyif)between
thesestatements(orterms)perspicuouswherenecessary.
Anargumentthatresultsfromuniformlyreplacingthecapitallettersinanargument
formwithstatements(orterms)iscalledasubstitutioninstanceofthatform.
Acounterexampletoanargumentisasubstitutioninstanceofitsformwherethe
premisesarealltrueandtheconclusionisfalse.Sincethevalidityandinvalidityisa
matterofformandsinceonlyaninvalidargumentcanhavetruepremisesanda
falseconclusion,acounterexampletoanargumentprovesboththatitanditsform
areinvalid.

SOMEFAMOUSARGUMENTFORMS

LetPandQstandforpropositionsinpropositionalarguments.AndletS,M,P
standfortermsincategoricalarguments.

SomeCommonValidArgumentForms:

ModusPonens
P1:IfP,thenQ.
P2:P.
C:Therefore,Q.

ModusTollens

Page2of6

ProfessorDouglasW.Portmore

P1:IfP,thenQ.
P2:~Q.(Let~QstandforitisnotthecasethatQ.)
C:Therefore,~P.

DisjunctiveSyllogism
P1:EitherPorQ.
P2:~P.
C:Therefore,Q.

HypotheticalSyllogism
P1:IfP,thenQ.
P2:IfQ,thenR.
C:Therefore,ifP,thenR.
ConstructiveDilemma
P1:IfP,thenR.
P2:IfQ,thenR.
P3:PorQ
C:Therefore,R.
CategoricalSyllogismAAA4
P1:AllSareM.
P2:AllMareP.
C:AllSareP.

CategoricalSyllogismOAO3
P1:SomeMarenotP.
P2:AllSareM.
C:SomeSarenotP.

SomeCommonInvalidArgumentForms:

AffirmingtheConsequent
P1:IfP,thenQ.
P2:Q.
C:Therefore,P.

DenyingtheAntecedent
P1:IfP,thenQ.
P2:~P.
C:Therefore,~Q.

Page3of6

ProfessorDouglasW.Portmore

CategoricalSyllogismAAA3
P1:AllMareP.
P2:AllMareS.
C:AllSareP.
CategoricalSyllogismIOO1
P1:SomeMareP.
P2:SomeSarenotM.
C:SomeSarenotP.

THEPROCEDUREFORCONSTRUCTINGACOUNTEREXAMPLETOANARGUMENT

1. Writeoutawellcraftedversionoftheargument.
2. Identifytheformoftheargument.Lookforrepeatedreferencestothesameclass(or
tothesameproposition)andthenrewritetheargumentuniformlysubstitutinga
distinctcapitalletterforeachdistinctclass(orproposition).Inakeytoyour
abbreviations,indicatewhichcapitallettersstandforwhichclasses(orpropositions).
3. FindEnglishterms(orstatements)that,ifsubstitutedforthecapitallettersinthe
conclusionoftheargumentform,produceawellknownfalsehood.Substitutethese
Englishterms(orstatements)fortherelevantcapitallettersuniformlythroughout
theargumentform.
4. FindadditionalEnglishterms(orstatements)that,ifsubstituteduniformlyforthe
remainingcapitallettersintheargumentform,producepremisesthatarewellknown
truths.

ImportantNote:Ifyouhavetroublecomingupwithasubstitutioninstancewhose
premisesarewellknowntruthsandwhoseconclusionisawellknownfalsehood,then
comeupwithasubstitutioninstancewhosepremisesaretrueandwhoseconclusionis
falseinsomepossibleworldandthendescribethatpossibleworldsoastomakeclear
how,inthatworld,thepremiseswouldbetrueandtheconclusionwouldbefalse.

EXAMPLE1

IfGodexists,thenlifehasmeaning.ButthereisnoGod.Therefore,lifeismeaningless.

Step1:

1.IfGodexists,thenlifehasmeaning.

2.ItisnotthecasethatGodexists.
So, 3.Itisnotthecasethatlifehasmeaning.

Step2:

Page4of6

ProfessorDouglasW.Portmore
G:Godexists.
L:Lifehasmeaning.

1.IfG,thenL.

2.ItisnotthecasethatG.
So, 3.ItisnotthecasethatL.

Step3:

1.IfG,thenAlGoreisaU.S.citizen.

2.ItisnotthecasethatG.
So, 3.ItisnotthecasethatAlGoreisaU.S.citizen.

[False]

Step4:

1.IfAlGoreisthePresidentoftheU.S.,thenAlGoreisaU.S.citizen.[True]

2.ItisnotthecasethatAlGoreisthePresidentoftheU.S.

[True]
So, 3.ItisnotthecasethatAlGoreisaU.S.citizen.

[False]

ThustheargumentgiveninExample1isinvalid.

EXAMPLE2

Somecatholicpriestsarebachelors.Allbachelorsaresingle.FredFeldmanismarried.
SoFredFeldmanisntacatholicpriest.

Step1:

1.Somecatholicpriestsarebachelors.

2.Allbachelorsaresingle.

3.FredFeldmanisnotsingle.
So, 4.FredFeldmanisnotacatholicpriest.

Step2:
C:catholicpriests
B:bachelors
S:peoplewhoaresingle
F:peoplewhoareidenticaltoFredFeldman

1.SomeCareB.

2.AllBareS.

3.FisnotS.
So, 4.FisnotC.

Step3:

1.SomeanimalsareB.

Page5of6

ProfessorDouglasW.Portmore

2.AllBareS.

3.FidoisnotS.
So, 4.Fidoisnotananimal.
[False]ImaginethepossibleworldwhereFidoisa
dog.

Step4:

1.Someanimalsarelizards. [True]

2.Alllizardsarereptiles.
[True]

3.Fidoisnotareptile.

[True]
So, 4.Fidoisnotananimal.
[False]

Step5:
OnepossibleworldisoneinwhichFidoisadogandeverythingelseisasitisinthe
actualworld.Inthatpossibleworld,thepremiseswouldbetrueandtheconclusion
wouldbefalse.

Thus,theargumentgiveninExample2isinvalid.

SOMECOMMONTYPESOFINDUCTIVEARGUMENTS

EmpiricalGeneralization
P1:NpercentofobservedShavepropertyx.
C:Therefore,NpercentofallShavepropertyx.

ArgumentbyAnalogy
P1:SandPsharepropertiesa,b,c.
P2:Shasthefurtherpropertyz.
C:Therefore,Palsohasthefurtherpropertyz.

ArgumentfromBestExplanation
P1:P.
P2:OnepossibleexplanationforPisQ.
P3:NootherpossibleexplanationprovidesasgoodanexplanationforPasQdoes.
C:Therefore,Q.

Page6of6