26

z Exercises 1:
Test the validity of the syllogisms in our previous exercises.

Exercises 2:
Put each of the following syllogisms into standard form, and test its validity by
means of a Venn diagram.

1. Some reformers are not fanatics, so some idealists are not fanatics, since all
reformers are idealists.
2. Some philosophers are mathematicians; hence some scientists are not
philosophers, since no scientists are mathematicians.
3. Some mammals are not horses, for no horses are centaurs, and all centaurs
are mammals.
4. Some neurotics are parasites, but all criminals are parasites; it follows that
some neurotics are criminals.
5. All underwater craft are submarines; therefore some submarines are pleasure
vessels, since no pleasure vessels are underwater craft.
6. Some criminals were not pioneers, for all criminals are unsavory person, and
no pioneers were unsavory persons.

7. No musicians are astronauts; all musicians are baseball fans; consequently all
astronauts are baseball fans.

8. Some Christians are Methodists, for some Christians are not Protestants, and
some Protestants are not Methodists.

9. No people whose primary interest is in winning elections are true liberals, and
all active politicians are people whose primary interest is in winning elections,
which entails that no true liberals are active politicians.

10. No weaklings are labor leaders, because no weaklings are true liberals, and
all labor leaders are true liberals.

SYLLOGISTIC RULES AND SYLLOGISTIC FALLACIES

Another way of testing the validity of syllogism is by applying the syllogistic

rules.
Rule 1: A valid standard-form categorical syllogism must contain exactly three
terms, each of which is used in the same sense throughout the argument.
Example:
Power tends to corrupt….
Knowledge is power.
 27

Therefore knowledge tends to corrupt.

This syllogism violates rule 1 because the word “power” is used in two different
senses.
This commits the fallacy of equivocation.
Rule 2: In a valid standard-form categorical syllogism, the middle term must be
distributed in at least one premiss.
Example:
All Russians were revolutionists;
All Anarchists were revolutionists;
Therefore, all Anarchists were Russians.

Any syllogism that violates Rule 2 is said to commit the fallacy of the
undistributed middle.

Rule 3: In a valid standard-form categorical syllogism, if either term is distributed in

the conclusion, then it must be distributed in the premisses.
Example:
All dogs are mammals.
No cats are dogs.
Therefore no cats are mammals.

When a syllogism contains its major term undistributed in the major premiss
but distributed in the conclusion, the argument is said to commit the fallacy of illicit
major.
Another example:
All reactionaries are subversive elements.
All reactionaries are critics of the present administration.
Therefore all critics of the present administration are subversive
elements.

When a syllogism contains its minor term undistributed in its minor premiss but
distributed in the conclusion, the argument is said to commit the fallacy of illicit
minor.

Rule 4: No standard-form categorical syllogism having two negative premisses is

valid.
Example:
No astrologers are scientists.
Some scientists are not magicians.
Therefore, some magicians are not astrologers.

Violation of Rule 4 is a fallacy of exclusive premisses.

 28

Rule 5: If either premiss of a valid standard-form categorical syllogism is negative,

then the conclusion must be negative.
Example:
No poets are managers.
Some artists are poets.
Therefore some artists are managers.

Violation of Rule 5 is a fallacy of drawing an affirmative conclusion from a

negative premiss.

Rule 6: No valid standard-form categorical syllogism with a particular conclusion can

have two universal premisses.
Example:
All household pets are domestic animals.
No unicorns are domestic animals
Therefore some unicorns are not household pets.

Violation of Rule 6 is said to commit the existential fallacy.

Exercises 1
Name the fallacies committed, and the rules broken, by invalid syllogisms of
the following forms.

1. AAA – 2 2. EAA – 1
3. IAO – 3 4. OEO – 4
5. AAA – 3 6. IAI – 2
7. OAA – 3 8. EAO – 4
9. OAI – 3 10. IEO – 1
11. EAO – 3 12. AII – 2
13. EEE – 1 14. OAO – 2
15. IAA – 3

Exercises 2
Name the fallacies committed and the rules broken by any of the following
syllogisms that are invalid.

1. All textbooks are books intended for careful study.

Some reference books are books intended for careful study.
Therefore some reference books are textbooks.

2. All criminal actions are wicked deeds.

All prosecutions for murder are criminal actions.
Therefore all prosecutions for murder are wicked deeds.
 29

3. No tragic actors are idiots.

Some comedians are not idiots.
Therefore some comedians are not tragic actors.

4. Some parrots are not pests.

All parrots are pets.
Therefore no pets are pests.

5. All perpetual motion devices are 100 percent efficient machines.

All 100 percent efficient machines are machines with frictionless bearings.
Therefore some machines with frictionless bearings are perpetual motion
devices.
6. Some good actors are not powerful athletes.
All professional wrestlers are powerful athletes.
Therefore all professional wrestlers are good actors.

7. Some diamonds are precious stones.

Some carbon compounds are not diamonds.
Therefore some carbon compounds are not precious stones.

8. Some diamonds are not precious stones.

Some carbon compounds are diamonds.
Therefore some carbon compounds are not precious stones.

9. All people who are most hungry are people who eat most.
All people who eat least are people who are most hungry.
Therefore all people who eat least are people who eat most.

10. Some spaniels are not good hunters.

All spaniels are gentle dogs.
Therefore no gentle dogs are good hunters.

Exercises 3 ( assignment)
Answer the following questions by appealing to the six rules. (Make sure you
consider all possible cases.)

1. Can any standard-form categorical syllogism be valid that contains exactly

three terms, each of which is distributed in both of its occurrences?
2. In what mood or moods, if any, can a first figure standard-form categorical
syllogism with a particular conclusion be valid?
3. In what figure or figures, in any, can the premisses of a valid standard-form
categorical syllogism distribute both major and minor terms?
4. In what figure or figures, if any, can a valid standard-form categorical syllogism
have two particular premisses?
 30

5. In what figure or figures, if any, can a valid standard-form categorical syllogism

have only one term distributed, and that one only once?

ARGUMENTS IN ORDINARY LANGUAGE

Arguments in ordinary language may deviate from a standard-form categorical

syllogism in two forms:

1. The component propositions of the argument in ordinary language may

appear to involve more than three terms, although that appearance may prove
deceptive.
2. The component propositions of the syllogism in ordinary language may not all
be standard-form propositions.

A proper translation of the syllogism into standard from is possible, and the
techniques for such translation are dealt with below.

1.) ELIMINATING COMPLEMENTS.

Complement or complementary class refers to the collection of all things that
do not belong to the original class.

We can eliminate the complements by applying the following immediate inferences:

a.) conversion proceeds by simply interchanging the subject and predicate terms
of the proposition. (See the table for the process of conversion of
propositions.)
Convertend Converse
A: All S is P I: Some P is S (only by limitation)
E: No S is P E: No P is S
I: Some S is P I: Some P is S
O: Some S is not P conversion is not valid

b.) obversion proceeds by changing quality of the propositions and replace the
predicate term by its complement. (Below is the table of the process of
obversion.)

Obvertend Obverse
A: All S is P E: No S is non-P
E: No S is P A: All S is non-P
I: Some S is P O: Some S is not non-P
O: Some S is not P I: Some S is non-P

c.) contraposition – to form the contrapositive of a given proposition, we replace

its subject term by the complement of its predicate term and replace its
 31

predicate term by the complement of its subject term. It actually consists of

different processes of obversion, conversion, then obversion again. (Below is
the table of contraposition.)

Premiss Contrapositive
A: All S is P A: All non-P is non-S
E: No S is P O: Some non-P is not non-S (by
limitation)
I: Some S is P (contraposition is not valid)
O: Some S is not P O: Some non-P is not non-S

Let’s have the following examples of syllogisms with more than three terms:
Example 1:
All mammals are warm-blooded animals.
No lizards are warm-blooded animals.
Therefore all lizards are nonmammals.

The conclusion of this syllogism contains the complement class. We need to

eliminate the complement by using any of the processes which results logically
equivalent propositions. We can take the obversion.

So, All mammals are warm-blooded animals.

No lizards are warm-blooded animals.
Therefore no lizards are mammals (by obversion).

It is easier, then, to determine its Mood and Figure: AEE – 2, which is a valid
standard form

Example 2:
No nonresidents are citizens.
All noncitizens are nonvoters
Therefore all voters are residents.

Solution:
All citizens are residents. (by conversion and obversion)
All voters are citizens (by contraposition)
Therefore all voters are residents.

Mood and Figure: AAA – 1, a valid standard form.

Exercises 1:
 32

Translate the following syllogistic arguments into standard form, and test their
validity by using Venn Diagramming technique and the syllogistic rules.

1. Some preachers are persons of unfailing vigor. No preachers are

nonintellectuals. Therefore some intellectuals are persons of unfailing vigor.
2. Some metals are rare and costly substances, but no welder’s materials are
nonmetals; hence some welder’s materials are rare and costly substances.
3. Some Asian nations were non-belligerents, since all belligerents were allies
either of Germany or Britain, and some Asian nations were not allies of either
Germany or Britain.
4. Some nondrinkers are athletes, because no drinkers are persons in perfect
physical condition, and some people in perfect physical condition are not non-
athletes.
5. All worldly goods are changeable things, for no worldly goods are things
immaterial, and no material things are unchangeable things.
6. All mortals are imperfect beings, and no humans are immortals, whence it
follows that all perfect beings are nonhumans.
7. All things present are nonirritants; therefore no irritants are invisible objects,
because all visible objects are absent things.
8. All things flammable are unsafe things, so all things that are safe are non-
explosives, since all explosives are flammable things.

ARGUMENTS IN ORDINARY LANGUAGE

2.) TRANSLATE PROPOSITIONS INTO STANDARD FORM

Here are some steps of translation:

a.) Singular propositions

Example:
“Socrates is a philosopher.” Copi and Cohen insist that singular
proposition is translated into I and A propositions.

b.) Categorical propositions that have adjectives or adjectival phrases as

predicates, rather than substantives or class terms.
Example:
“Some flowers are beautiful.” to “Some flowers are beautiful things.”

c.) Categorical propositions whose main verbs are other than the standard-form
copula “to be”.
Example:
“All people seek recognition.” to “All people are seekers of
recognition.”
 33

d.) Statements in which the standard-form ingredients are all present but not
arranged in standard-form order.
Examples:
1. “Racehorses are all thoroughbreds.” to “All racehorses are
thoroughbreds”
2. “All is well that ends well.” to “All things that end well are things
that are well.”

e.) Categorical propositions whose quantities are indicated by words other than
the standard-form quantifiers “all,” “no,” and “some.”
Example:
1. “Every dog has its day.” to “All dogs are creatures that have
their days.”
2. “Any contribution will be appreciated.” to “All contributions are
things that are appreciated.”

f.) Exclusive propositions

Examples:
1. “Only citizens can vote” to “All those who can vote are citizens.”
2. “None but the brave deserve the fair.” to “All those who deserve
the fair are those who are brave.”

g.) Categorical propositions that contain no words at all to indicate quantity.

Examples:
1. “Dogs are carnivorous.” to “All dogs are carnivorous.”
2. “Children are present.” to “Some children are beings who are
present.”

h.) Propositions that do not resemble standard-form categorical propositions at

all, but can be translated into standard form.
Examples:
“Not all children believe in Santa Claus.” to “Some children are
believers of Santa Claus.”
“There are no pink elephants.” to “No elephants are pink things.”
 34

Exercises
Translate the following syllogism into standard form, using parameters where
necessary.

1. Where there’s smoke there’s fire, so there’s no fire in the basement, because
there’s no smoke there.
2. Not all is gold that glitters, for some base metals glitter, and gold is not a base
metal.
3. All that glitters is not gold, so gold is not the only precious metal, since only
precious metals glitter.
4. No one present is out of work. No members are absent. Therefore all
members are employed.
5. All practice is theory; all surgery is practice; ergo, all surgery is theory.
6. Not all who have jobs are temperate in their drinking. Only debtors drink to
excess. So not all the unemployed are in debt.
7. All syllogisms having two negative premisses are invalid. Some valid
syllogisms are sound. Therefore some unsound arguments are syllogisms
having two negative premisses.
8. All valid syllogisms distribute their middle terms in at least one premiss, so this
syllogism must be valid, for it distributes its middle term in at least one
premiss.
9. No sane witnesses incriminate themselves. But some witnesses incriminate
themselves, so some witnesses are insane.
10. All bridge players are people. All people drink. Therefore all bridge players
think.