DEDUCTIVE REASONING IN LAW

Hypothetical Syllogism
A syllogism that has a hypothetical proposition as one of its premise.

Kinds of Hypothetical Syllogism:

• Conditional Syllogism (“If…, then…”)
• Disjunctive Syllogism (“Either…, or…”)
• Conjunctive Syllogism (“Not both…, and…”)
•

Relationship of an Antecedent and its consequent Note:

1 .An antecedent is false when only one premise is false, as well as when both premises are false.

2. Where the sequence is invalid, there is, strictly speaking, no sequence, antecedent, or consequent at
all. (When the sequence is invalid, the apparent premises and conclusion are not related to one another.)

Relationship of an Antecedent to its Consequent

1. If the antecedent is true and sequence valid, the consequent is true. (A particularized
statement of the principle of contradiction.)

2. If the antecedent is true and sequence invalid, the consequent is doubtful.

Every lawyer is a human;
But no criminal is a lawyer;
Therefore, no criminal is a human

3. If the antecedent is false and sequence valid, the consequent is doubtful.

Every lawyer is dishonest;

But every criminal is a lawyer;
Therefore, every criminal is dishonest.

4. If the antecedent is false and sequence invalid, the consequent is doubtful.

Every criminals are crooked people;

But crooked people is honest;
Therefore, honest people is a crooked people.
Relationship of a Consequent to its Antecedent

1. If the consequent is false and the sequence valid, the antecedent is false. (Only truth can flow
from truth, every antecedent from which a false statement can flow must itself be false.)

2. If the consequent is false and the sequence invalid, the antecedent is doubtful. (When the
sequence is invalid, anything can come after anything, since the consequent and the antecedent
are not related to one another at all.)

Every cat is a dog;

But no cat is a terrier;
Therefore, no terrier is a dog.

3. If the consequent is true and sequence valid, the antecedent is doubtful.

Squares have three sides;

But triangles are squares;
Therefore, triangles have three sides.

4. If the consequent is true and the sequence invalid, the antecedent is doubtful. (If the
antecedent of a true consequent is doubtful even when the sequence is valid, it is also doubtful
when the sequence is invalid.)

The Basic Laws which serve as basis of Valid Inference

1. If the antecedent is true and the sequence valid, the consequent is true.

2. If the consequent is false and the sequence valid, the antecedent is false.
CONDITIONAL SYLLOGISM is one whose major premise is a conditional proposition.
2 Types of Conditional Syllogism:

• Mixed Conditional (the minor premise is a categorical proposition)

• Purely Conditional (both of whose premises are conditional propositions)

Conditional Propositions is a compound proposition of which one member (the “then” clause) asserts
something as true on the condition that the other member (the “if” clause) is true.
“If it is raining, the roof is wet.”
The “if” clause or its equivalent is called the antecedent.
The “then” clause or its equivalent is called the consequent

Rules of the Mixed Conditional Syllogism:

1. If the antecedent is true and the sequence valid, the consequent is true. Procedure
2. If the consequent is false and the sequence valid, the antecedent is false.
Procedure:

1. Posit the antecedent in the minor premise and posit the consequent in the conclusion.
2. Sublate the consequent in the minor premise and sublate the antecedent in the conclusion
Example of Valid Form of Conditional Syllogism

Major Premise
“If your have acute appendicitis, you are very sick.”

Minor Premise Posit the Antecedent

“But you have acute appendicitis.”

Conclusion Posit the Consequent:

“Therefore you are very sick.”

Minor Premise Sublate the Consequent

“But you are not sick.”

Conclusion Sublate the Antecedent

“Therefore you do not have acute appendicitis”

Example of an Invalid Form Conditional Syllogism:

Major Premise
“If you have acute appendicitis, you are very sick.”
Minor Premise
Posit the Consequent
“But you are very sick.”

Conclusion
Posit the Antecedent
“Therefore you have acute appendicitis.”
Minor Premise
Sublate the Antecedent
“But you do not have acute appendicitis.”
Conclusion
Sublate the Consequent
“Therefore you are not very sick.”

Purely Conditional Syllogism

The Purely Conditional Syllogism, which has conditional propositions for both its premises, has exactly
the same forms and the same rules as the mixed conditional syllogism except that the condition
expressed in the minor premise must be retained in the conclusion.

If A is a B, then C is a D;
But if X is a Y, then A is a B;
Therefore, if X is a Y, then C is a D.

Exercise: Indicate the form, or procedure, illustrated by each of the following, and state whether the
example is valid or invalid.

If the lawyer is not skillful, then his/her client will end up in prison;
But the lawyer is skillful;
Therefore his/her client will not end up in prison.

DISJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM

A Disjunctive Syllogism is one whose major premise is a disjunctive proposition, whose minor
premise sublates (or posits) one or more members of the major premise, and whose conclusion
posits (or sublates) the other member or members.
Presents various alternatives and asserts that an indeterminate one of them is true. It consists
of two or more members joined by the conjunctions “either … or…”. It is sometimes called an
alternative proposition.

2 Kinds of Disjunctive Syllogism:

1. Strict Disjunctive (only one member is true and the others are false. If all the members except
one are false, the remaining member must be true; and if one is true, the remaining members
must be false).

2. Broad Disjunctive (at least one member is true but more than one may be true).

Rules for Disjunctive Syllogism:

1. If the minor premise posits one or more members of the major premise, the conclusion must sublate
each of the other members.
It is either Death or Reclusion Perpetua;
But it is Death;
Therefore it is not Reclusion Perpetua.
It is either Death or Reclusion Perpetua;
But it is Reclusion Perpetua;
Therefore it is Reclusion Perpetua.
2. If the minor premise sublates one or more of the members of the major premise, the conclusion
posits the remaining members, one of which must be true. If more than one member remains, the
conclusion must be a disjunctive in the strict sense.
It is either legal or illegal;
 But it is Illegal;
Therefore it is Illegal
It is either legal or illegal;
But it is Legal;
Therefore it is Legal.

Broad Disjunctive
In a Broad Disjunctive Syllogism, the major premise is a disjunctive proposition in a broad or improper
sense. There is only one valid procedure: to sublate one (or more – but not all) of the members in the
minor and posit the remaining member (or members) in the conclusion.
It is either A, or B, or C, or D – at least one of them;
But it is either A nor B;
Therefore it is either C or D – at least one of them.
Exercise: If possible, complete the following syllogism.

He is either not speaking or lying;

But he is not speaking;
Therefore he is …..

CONJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
A Conjunctive Syllogism is one whose major premise is a conjunctive proposition, whose minor premise
posits one or more members of the major premise, and whose conclusion sublates the other member of
the major premise.

One that denies the simultaneous possibility of two alternatives.

“A thing cannot both be and not be in the same respect”
Rules for Conjunctive Syllogism:
1. Posit one member in the major premise and sublate the other in the conclusion.
He cannot be in Manila and Cebu at the same time;
But he is now in Manila;
Therefore he cannot now be in Cebu.

ENTHYMEME
It is a special type of syllogism in which one of the premises or conclusion is omitted.
It is not a distinct form of syllogism, but an incomplete statement of any of the forms of syllogism
previously discussed.
Three Orders of Enthymemes

1st Order: The Major Premise is omitted

2nd Order: The Minor Premise is omitted
3rd Order: The Conclusion is omitted
Major Premise: All lawyers are of good moral character.
Minor Premise: X is a lawyer
Conclusion: Therefore, X is of good moral character.
Minor: X is a lawyer,
Conclusion: Therefore, he is of good moral character.

Conclusion: X is of good moral character,

Minor: because he is a lawyer.
Major Premise: All lawyers are of good moral character.
Minor Premise: X is a lawyer.
Conclusion: Therefore, X is of good moral character.

Major: All lawyers are of good moral character,

Conclusion: for this reason, X is of good moral character.

Conclusion: X is of good moral character,

Major: since all lawyers are of good moral character.
Major Premise: All lawyers are of good moral character.
Minor Premise: X is a lawyer.
Conclusion: Therefore, X is of good moral character.

Minor: X is a lawyer,
Major: and lawyers are of good moral character.
POLYSYLLOGISM
As the name suggest (poly is the Greek work for “many”), it is a series of syllogism connected together in
which the conclusion of the preceding syllogism becomes the Major Premise of the following syllogism.
Also known as chain argument

Example

Murder is a crime against persons.

A crime against persons is a felony.
A felony is an offense.
An offense is punishable.
Therefore, Murder is punishable.

SORITES
A polysyllogism consisting of a series of simple syllogism whose conclusion, except for the last, are
omitted. It is either categorical or conditional.

CLASSIFICATION OF SORITES

Categorical
Consist of a series of simple categorical syllogisms of the first figure whose conclusions, except for the
last, are omitted. It links or separates the subject and predicate of the conclusion through intermediacy
of many middle terms.
Conditional
One whose premise contains a series of conditional propositions, each of which (except the first) has its
antecedent the consequent of the preceding premise.

Two kinds of Categorical Sorites

Aristotelian Sorites
The predicate of each premise is the subject of the following premise, and the subject of the first
premise is the subject of the conclusion.
Goclenian Sorites
The same premises occur but their order is reversed.

EXAMPLE of ARISTOTELIAN SORITES

All lawyers are diligent readers;
All diligent readers are intelligent;
All intelligent people are critical thinkers;
All critical thinkers are highly analytical;
Therefore, all lawyers are highly analytical.
All A is B;
All B is C;
All C is D;
All D is E;
Therefore, All A is E.
EXAMPLE of GOCLENIAN SORITES
A mass of land is not an ocean.
An island is a mass of land.
A land surrounded water is an island.
An archipelago is a land surrounded by water.
Philippines is an archipelago.
Therefore, Philippines is not ocean.
All A is B;
All C is A;
All D is C;
All E is D;
Therefore, All E is B.
EXAMPLE of CONDITIONAL SORITES
If I pass the bar exam then I will become a lawyer.
If I become a lawyer then I can practice law.
If I can practice law then I can provide legal assistance to others.
If I can provide legal assistance then I can contribute to the society and fight injustice.
Therefore, If I pass the bar exam then I can contribute to the society and fight injustice.
If A then B;
If B then C;
If C then D;
If D then E;
Therefore, If A then E.