Philo 1 Summary Lecture on Categorical Syllogism

A categorical syllogism is an argument form that is made up of three [3] propositions (two [2] premises
—a major premise and a minor premise—and one [1] conclusion), and within these propositions are
three terms, namely , major term (P), minor term (S), and middle term (symbolized respectively P, S, and
M)—the major premise is the predicate term of the conclusion; the minor premise is the subject term of
the conclusion; the middle term is the term found in both premises but not in the conclusion.

In a real-life argumentation categorical syllogisms are usually not presented in standard form (for
example, Men are mortal. Aristotle is a man. Therefore, he is mortal); but in studying that syllogism in an
academic setting it has to be presented as such.

A categorical syllogism presented in standard form has all its propositions in such a form, and the major
premise comes first, followed by the minor premise, and then the conclusions comes last.

The standard form of a proposition is thus:

Quantifier + Subject Term + Copula + Predicate Term

There are only three (3) standard quantifiers: All, Some, No

What is called “copula” in logic is in elementary grammar called “linking verb.” So, the standard copula is
the word is (or are, as the case may be).

There are three [3] types of categorical propositions:

A - Universal Affirmative (quantifier All)

E – Universal Negative (quantifier No)

I –Particular affirmative (quantifier Some)

O – Particular negative (quantifier Some and the negation not attached to the predicate term)

Thus are examples of standard form categorical proposition:

All cats are mammals.

No boy is a well-behaved animal.

Some dogs are cute pets.

Some girls are not good friends.

Thus is an example of a standard form categorical syllogism:

All cats are mammals.

 No birds are cats.
Therefore, no birds are mammals.

The first proposition is the major premise, since it contains the major term (P), which is mammals. The
second is the minor premise since it contains the minor term (S), which is birds.

A categorical syllogism would have any one of the following figures:

1. M –P
S–M
:S–P

2. P – M
S–M
: S –P

3. M – P
M–S
: S –P

4. P – M
M–S
:S–P

(Please take note that the standard symbol for the conclusion indicator is a triple dot arranged in a
triangle formation, but, unfortunately, I cannot find that symbol in my old laptop, so I substituted the
colon for it.)

In the case of the above example of a categorical syllogism, the first proposition is type A, the second
type E, and the conclusion type E also. And its figure is 1. Hence its form is AEE – 1.

The next question is: Is this example of a syllogism valid or not?

Keep in mind that when evaluating an argument for its validity we are concerned only with the form, not
the content. A number of forms are valid, most are not.

To know whether or not a syllogism is valid we need to know the rules. There are six rules that govern
the game of categorical syllogism. A violation of any of these rules will lead to a fallacy, defined as a
flaw in the argument. (The rules and the corresponding fallacies are given in the textbook.)

There is one concept that needs clarification here—that of distribution. The second rule says: “The
middle term must be distributed in at least one premise.” A term is said to be “distributed” if it refer to
all members of the class it names. It would be easier to spot if there is a distributed term by watching
out for the following “distribution indicators”:

All – indicates distribution of the subject term

No – indicates distribution of both the subject and predicate terms
 not – this word is always attached to the predicate term and it indicates distribution of that
term.