Arguments Language Fallacies Propositions Syllogisms Translation Symbolic Home

 

      philosophy.lander.edu      

Homepage
> Logic > Categorical Propositions > Further Immediate Inferences   
     
   
    Philosophy 103: Introduction to Logic  
Further Immediate Inferences

Abstract: The Square of

Opposition is reviewed, and three additional inferences are explained
and illustrated:
conversion, obversion, and contraposition.

I. The relations of the Traditional Square of Opposition may be

  conveniently defined as
follows.

A. Contradictories (holds between the A and O;

and
Quizzes
separately between the E and I): The statements cannot both
Tests be true and
cannot both be false. In other words, these
FAQ respective statements have opposite truth
values.
Links B. Contraries (hold between the A and E):
The statements
cannot both be true, otherwise the truth value cannot be
Search
determined.
Readings
C. Subcontraries (holds between the I and O):
The statements
Archives
cannot both be false, otherwise the truth value cannot be
Syllabus determined.

D. Subalternation (holds between the A and I;

and separately
 
between the I and O): In reference to the Square, truth goes
down and falsity goes up, otherwise the resultant truth value
cannot be determined. The
superaltern implies the subaltern.
More precisely,

If the superaltern is true, then the subaltern is true.

If the superaltern is false, then the subaltern is
undetermined.

If the subaltern is true, then the superaltern is undetermined.

If the subaltern is false, then the superaltern is false.
II. Mnemonic Device for remembering the Square of
Opposition.

A. If you picture God at the top of the Square of Opposition

and the Devil at the bottom of the Square and remember the
phrase "cannot both be
..." for contraries and subcontraries, the
following mnemonic device might be
helpful. For clarity, refer
to a copy of the Square of Opposition.
B. The big "X" across the center of the Square
represents
contradictories with opposite truth values--This should be very
straightforward
to remember.
 C. Since "God" (or "truth") is at the
top of the diagram,
contraries "cannot both be ... (you plug in) true."

D. Since "the Devil"(or "falsity") is at

the bottom of the
diagram, subcontraries "cannot both be ...(you plug in) false.
E. With subalternation, "God" can send
"truth" down, but we
wouldn't know what it would mean for "God" to
send "falsity"
down (hence, this would be undetermined).

But, "the
Devil" can send "falsity" up (since this is what Devils
are good at), and
we would not know what it would mean for
"the Devil" to send "truth"
up, so that would be undetermined
in truth value.
III. "Bouncing Around the Square of Opposition."

A. Suppose we know that a given O proposition of the

form
"Some S is not P" is false. How many ways could we
determine
the truth value of the corresponding I proposition
("Some S is P")?

B. There are, of
course, an indefinite
number of ways
(assuming one can
oscillate between two
propositions).
Consider the following
four routes:

C. Notice that we could set an itinerary of our journey

along
the selected four routes. The "reason," given below, is, so to
speak, our
"inference ticket" for travel.

Route
1: O to I
Statement Reason Truth Value

1. Some S is not P. given false

2. Some S is P. subcontrariety true

Route
2: O to E to I
Statement Reason Truth Value

1. Some S is not P. given false

2. No S is P. subalternation false

3. Some S is P. contradictory true

Route
3: O to A to E to I

Statement Reason Truth Value

 1. Some S is not P. given false

2. All S is P. contradictory true

3. No S is P. contrariety false

4. Some S is P. contradictory true

One would think that if our logic were consistent, all

possible routes from the false O to the I would result in a
false truth
value for the I. But consider the following
case--Route 4.

Route
4: O to E to A to I

Statement Reason Truth Value

1. Some S is not P. given false

2. No S is P. subalternation false
3. All S is P. contrariety undetermined

4. Some S is P. subalternation undetermined

The final undetermined truth value for the I proposition

indicates part of the nature of immediate inferences. The
logical relations involve
deduction but not reflection. Some
premisses contain different "logical force"
than others.
Examine for yourself how this is so. When you change
quantity or quality,
there is a change in logical import.

III. Further Immediate Inferences: these logical

relations are
not part of the Square of Opposition. They involve changes to the
subject and predicate classes. (The logical relations on the Square
of Opposition always
keep the same subject and predicate terms)

A. Conversion: interchanging the subject and

predicate terms
of a categorical proposition (it is valid, or preserves the truth
value)
for the E and I propositions only)

1. Notice that the truth value is preserved for those

statements with symmetrical distribution status: the E and I.

2. If an A or O proposition is converted, an
undetermined
truth value results.

3. The complete table for conversion is as

follows. Note
especially that we are not reversing the subject and
predicate positions.
Only the terms in the subject and
predicate are interchanged. For this reason, it
might be
helpful to invent actual classes for S and P when you first
study
the relations.
If "All S is P" is
given true, then "All P is S" is undetermined.
 If "All S is P" is
given false, then "All P is S" is undetermined.

If "No S is P" is
given true, then "No P is S" is true.

If "No S is P" is
given false, then "No P is S" is false.

If "Some S is P"
is given true, then "Some P is S" is true.

If "Some S is P"
is given false, then "Some P is S is false.

If "Some S is not P"

is given true, then "Some P is not S" is
undetermined.

If "Some S is not P"

is given false, then "Some P is not S" is
undetermined.

4. Another way to remember that

only
the E and I statements preserve
the truth value in conversion is to
note that flipping the E and I Venn
Diagrams over results in the same
logical geography being displayed.
I.e., their diagrams are symmetrical
respectively.

B. Obversion: changing the quality and replacing the

predicate
term with its complementary class (valid, or preserves truth
value for all
propositions--the A, E, I, and O).

1. The complementary class is the class of everything

not
in the original class. E.g., the complementary class of
"lightbulbs" is
"non-lightbulbs." Usually, one just tacks on
"non-" to obtain a
complementary class. But note that the
complementary class of "light bulbs" is
not "nonlight
bulbs."

2. Often, in English, certain prefixes indicate

complementary classes.

For example, "un-," "in-," "de-,"

"im-," "dis-" and others are
sometimes so used. However, English being
what it is,
relying on the prefixes is risky. Consider "ravel" and
"unravel" or "flammable" and "inflammable" or
"imflammable."  For this reason, it is usually safer to use the
prefix
"non-" in a kind of logical pseudo-English.

3. Often common sense requires thinking what the true

complement of a class is to be. The complementary class of
"objects to be
admired" cannot be "non-objects to be
admired." Sometimes, only the context
of the argument
yields a clue as to the complementary class. Be careful not
to empty your
classes--there are fundamental philosophical
implications here.

4. The complete table for obversion is as

follows.
If "All S is P" is
given true, then "No S is non-P" is true.
 If "All S is P" is
given false, then "No S is non-P" is false.

If "No S is P" is
given true, then "All S in non-P" is true.

If "No S is P" is
given false, then "All S is non-P" is false.

If "Some S is P" is
given true, then "Some S is not non-P" is true.

If "Some S is P" is
given false, then "Some S is not non-P" is false.

If "Some S is not P" is

given true, then "Some S is non-P" is true.

If "Some S is not P" is

given false, then "Some S is non-P" is false.

C. Contraposition: replacing the subject term by the

complement of its predicate term and replace the predicate
term by the complement of its
subject term (valid, or preserves
truth value only for the A and O propositions).

1. Notice that contraposition is the same thing as

successive
obversion, conversion, and obversion of a proposition. In
effect,
contraposition does these operations in one step.
Compare the following two inferences.

Statement Reason Truth Value

1. All S are P. given true

2. All non-P is non- contraposition true

S.

Statement Reason Truth Value

1. All S are P. given true

2. No S are non-P. obversion true

3. No non-P is S. conversion true

4. All non-P is non- obversion true

S.

2. It might be
helpful to
visualize this
picture of the
general
operation of
contraposition.
3. Again for contraposition, as for obversion, one has to be
careful about describing the class complement for
exactness.

4. The table for all the contrapositives is

as follows.
If "All S is P" is
given true, then "All non-P is non-S" is true.
 If "All S is P" is
given false, then "All non-P is non-S" is false.

If "No S is P" is given

true, then "No non-P is non-S" is undetermined.

If "No S is P" is
given false, then "No non-P is non-S" is undetermined.

If "Some S is P"
is given true, then "Some non-P is non-S" is
undetermined.

If "Some S is P"
is given false, then "Some non-P is non-S" is
undetermined.

If "Some S is not P"

is given true, then "Some non-P is not non-S" is true.

If "Some S is not P"

is given false, then "Some non-P is not non-S" is
false.

IV. To understand thoroughly these logical relations, work

problems, problems, and more problems. These logical relations
are important in everyday
life as the use of ordinary language
makes inferences even more difficult.  
For practical
everyday examples, see these inference
examples.  For
standard-form examples,
practice with the quiz on Further
Immediate Inferences.

Note: Apply the general rules when making immediate

inferences. Memorizing tables is of little help for
understanding the logical relations
involved.

 
  
  
  

Send corrections or suggestions to webmaster@philosophy.lander.edu

Read the disclaimer
concerning this page.
11.22.04
      © 2004  Licensed under GFDL

Arguments |
Language | Fallacies 
| Propositions  | Syllogisms 
| Translation  | Symbolic
.