Chapter 3  All dolphins are mammals.

 All mammals have kidneys.

Deductive Reasoning in Law
DEDUCTIVE
Whether the correct rule of law is
applied in the given facts
Whether the Rules of Evidence is
Properly Applied in Establishing the
Facts
Try to Prove the truth of their
conclusion
The Premise Intend to Guarantee the
Conclusion
The Conclusions are established by the
Premises with Absolute Guarantee
The Conclusion could not possibly be
false
Tend to prove the truth of their
conclusion beyond any doubt
INDUCTIVE
To Determine the Facts of the Case
To Establish the Facts of the case thru
Causal Arguments, Probability,
Scientific Methods
Try to show that their conclusions are
plausible or likely, or probable to be true
given the premise (s)
Premise Intend to Provide Good (But
not Conclusive) evidence for the truth of
our Conclusion.
The Conclusions are Likely Probable
The Conclusions may turn out to be
false even though the premises are true
Tend to show that their conclusions are
plausible, or likely, or probable
 All numbers ending in 0 or 5 are divisible by 5. The number 35 ends with a 5,
so it must be divisible by 5.
 All birds have feathers. All robins are birds. Therefore, robins have feathers.
 It's dangerous to drive on icy streets. The streets are icy now, so it would be
dangerous to drive on the streets.
 All cats have a keen sense of smell. Fluffy is a cat, so Fluffy has a keen sense
of smell.
 Cacti are plants, and all plants perform photosynthesis. Therefore, cacti
perform photosynthesis.
 Red meat has iron in it, and beef is red meat. Therefore, beef has iron in it.
 Acute angles are less than 90 degrees. This angle is 40 degrees, so it must be
an acute angle.
 All noble gases are stable. Helium is a noble gas, so helium is stable.
 Elephants have cells in their bodies, and all cells have DNA. Therefore,
elephants have DNA.
 All horses have manes. The Arabian is a horse; therefore, Arabians have
manes.

All Reasoning or Arguments tend to provide support to their conclusion: INDUCTIVE REASONING:
a. Evidences The first lipstick I pulled from my bag is red. The second lipstick I pulled from my
b. Reasons bag is red. Therefore, all the lipsticks in my bag are red.
They Differ in the amount of Support they intend to provide My mother is Irish. She has blond hair. Therefore, everyone from Ireland has blond
Basic Difference (Bot not always true) hair.

Deductive Reasoning- General Premise to Particular Conclusions Most of our snowstorms come from the north. It's starting to snow. This snowstorm
must be coming from the north
Inductive Reasoning- Particular Premise to General Conclusions
Maximilian is a shelter dog. He is happy. All shelter dogs are happy.
Examples:
DEDUCTIVE REASONING
INDICATORS: Conclusion- acquittal or Condemnation
DEDUCTIVE NOT ALL SYLLOGISM ARE LOGICAL
Certainly Valid Deductive Arguments- is an argument in which the conclusion really does
follow necessarily from the premises.
Definitely
- If the premises are true, The Conclusion must be true
Absolutely
- The Truth of the Premises Guarantee the Truth of the Conclusion
Conclusively
Example of Valid Arguments:
It is logical to conclude that
Maximillian is a shelter dog. All shelter dogs are happy. Therefore, he
This logically implies that
is happy.
This entails that
Example of Invalid Arguments
It must be the case that
“If it is raining, then the streets are wet. The streets are wet. Therefore, it is raining.”
The Terms Valid or Invalid do not apply to Inductive Argument- since Inductive
INDUCTIVE Arguments do not claim that their conclusion follows from the premises with strict
Probably necessity

Likely
Chances are TYPES OF SYLLOGISMS

One Would Expect that 1. Categorical

-Composed of Categorical Statements alone
It is Plausible to suppose that -States a fact without conditions
It is reasonable to assume that -Simply Affirmed or Denied by the Predicate
-is a deductive argument consisting of three categorical statements that
together contain exactly three terms, each of which occurs in exactly two of
SYLLOGISMS the constituent statements
2. Hypothetical
-is a three-line argument-that is, an argument that is consist of exactly two premises -Includes both categorical and Hypothetical
and a conclusion. -Compound Statement which contains a proposed or tentative explanation
-Compound Statement-Two Clauses connected by conjunctions, adverbs, etc.
Major Premise should be the General Law
which expresses the relationship between the classes as well as our assent to it
Minor Premisethe act which does or does not conform to the Law
-Clauses are simple Statements or Statements that contain one subject and one c. Predicate of a negative statement is always Universal
predicate.

CATEGORICAL STAMENT: PARTS OF A CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM

Quality: The Quality of the Statement may be affirmative or negative.
-No, Not, None, and Never- The Statement is Negative
Quantity: The Quantity of a Statement is either Universal or Particular
Universal- when what is being affirmed or denied of the subject term is its
whole extension
Particular-When what is being affirmed or denied of the subject is just a part
of its extension
Minor Terms- The Subject of the Conclusion
Major Term- The Predicate of the Conclusion
Middle Term- The Term found in Both Premises and Serves to mediate
between the minor and the major terms.
Conclusion- The Statement the Premises Support
RULES FOR THE VALIDITY OF CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISMS

INDICATORS: 1. The Syllogism must not contain two negative premises

Universal -When the Premises are Both Negative, The Middle Term fails to serve its
function of mediating between the major and minor terms
All -Violation of This Rule Is Called the Fallacy of Exclusive Premises
Every
Each 2. There must be Three Pairs of univocal Terms
No -same meaning
None -used in the same way in each occurrence
-Equivocal Term- Term that has different meanings in its occurrences
Particular -Univocal Term- Same Meaning in Difference Occurrences
Some -Violation of this rule is called the Fallacy of Equivocation
Almost all -Equivocation usually occurs in the middle term
Most
Several 3. The Middle Term must be universal at least once.
Few -When the middle term is particular in Both Premises it might stand for a
Not all different portion of its extension in each occurrence and, thus, equivalent
Many to two terms, and therefore, fail to fulfill its function of uniting or
separating the minor and major terms
QUANTITY OF THE PREDICATE -Violation of this rule is called the Fallacy of Particular Middle
-Exception; Both Premises are quantified by “most” and the conclusion is
a. Predicate of an Affirmative Statement is Generally Particular quantified by “some”.
b. Statements where the subject and the predicate are identical, the predicate
is universal
 Since the Combined Extension of the Middle Term is more than a
Universal
4. If the term in the Conclusion is universal, The same Term in the premise
must also be universal
-Violation of this rule is called the fallacy of Illicit Minor- Minor Premise
-Violation of this rule is called the Fallacy of Illicit Major- Major Premise
-In a Deductive Argument the Conclusion should not go beyond what the
premise state
-The Conclusion must not be wider in extension than the premises
RULES FOR CONDITIONAL SYLLOGISMS
Valid forms of Conditional Syllogisms
1. Modus Ponens- When the Minor premise Affirms the Antecedent,
the Conclusion must affirm the Consequent
2. Modus Tollens- When the minor premise denies the consequent,
the conclusion must deny the antecedent
Invalid if the minor premise denies the antecedent
-Fallacy of Denying the Antecedent

HYPOTHETICAL SYLLOGISMS Minor Premise Affirms the Consequent

-Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent
Kinds of Hypothetical Syllogisms:
a. Conditional Syllogism Enthymemes
b. Disjunctive Syllogism an argument in which one premise is not explicitly stated.
c. Conjunctive Syllogism
Polysyllogisms
-is a series of syllogisms in which the conclusion of one syllogism
CONDITIONAL SYLLOGISMS
supplies a premise of the next syllogism
a. Major Premise is a Conditional Statement -more than one logical step is needed to reach the desired
b. Conditional Statement- Is a Compound statement which asserts that conclusion.
one member (the then clause) is true on condition that the other
member (the if clause) is true.
c. If Clause- Antecedent
d. Then Clause- Consequent
e. The Truth of the Consequent follows upon the fulfillment of the
condition stated in the antecedent
f. What matters is the relationship between them.

Symbols:
a. A- Antecedent
b. C- Consequent
c. `- for the negation of the statement
d. >- for the implies
e. – for therefore