PAGE 3 - INTRODUCTION
for philosophers' (Restal, 2003),
It is proper to start this course with a little background
about "Philosophy" since Logic is traditionally treated
under Philosophy.
Philosophy and Its Branches
Philosophy is a broad discipline in terms of its subject
matter. It studies everything under the heat of the sun.
Hence, it cannot be contained in a single definition.
However, for purposes of directing us to the branches of
philosophy, we shall define philosophy according to its
root words. Philosophy is derived from two Greek
words: "philos" or love and "sophia" or wisdom. Thus,
from its roots, "philosophy" is defined as "the love of
wisdom"
-Wisdom, for Socrates, is an attitude or a critical habit
(Barry 1983). It is more of an accumulated experience
beyond the theoretical variety (Socio: 2001) Philosophy
then, as a love of wisdom, is a passion not only for
theories but also for practice. In this light, the branches
of philosophy are grouped into two major divisions:
PAGE 4- LOGIC: A Textbook-Workbook for
College Students
1. Theoretical division aims at acquiring knowledge on
the subject matter being studied (eg. epistemology,
metaphysics, cosmology).
2. Practical division aim at applying knowledge about a
subject matter for practical purposes (eg logic, ethics
aesthetics)
Philosophy and Logic
Is Logic under Philosophy? Yes, Logic falls under
Philosophy but there is a difference on the nature of
studies between logic and other branches of philosophy.
Logic deals primarily with arguments while the other
branches deal with questions. In Ethics, for example,
the question whether man's action is morally right or
wrong is the utmost consideration.
Every question needs an answer. However, in arriving at
a clear, valid, and consistent answer, the use of valid
arguments and correct reasoning is a must. Honer (1998)
points out that "philosophical inquiry will always
demand intellectual skill and intensive knowledge of the
various logical procedures.
Just as questions and answers are interrelated with each
other, so with logic and the other branches of
philosophy. "Inasmuch as reasoning is at the heart of
philosophy, so logic has always been a central concern
Natural Logic and Scientific Logic
Bitte (1950) classes two kinds of logic: natural and
scientific. Natural logic refers to the 'git of reason."
endowed to man as a special faculty which enables him
to have a sense of what is logical or reasonable and what
is not This gift of reason was recognized by the greatest
of the Greek philosophers - Socrates, Anstoda, and Plato
- who declared that men is essentially rational by nature
by virtue of which he stands apart and above all
creatures. Scientific logic is a tool to help us sharpen our
reasoning ability is through this formal study of logic
that our native reason can be distinguished from those
'minds in the marketplace."
Natural logic is not enough. We should attempt
supplement with scientific logic so that we may learn to
think speak, and reason with logical consistency
PAGE 5 - The Definition of Logic
Every branch of learning focuses on an object for its
study. Examples: Astronomy studies planets, stars and
galaxies. Sociology studies social groups and their
patterns of behavior. In logic, the object is thinking,
specifically, correct thinking. Correct thinking involves
reasoning which should be consistent with certain rules
and principles for the progressive advancement of a
valid argument.
Logic is traditionally defined as the "science and art of
correct thinking. As a science, logic is viewed in three
aspects:
1. It needs a body of data (ie. terms & propositions)
2. It adheres to a certain procedure, system, or method
(.e. logical principles & rules) in drawing out
conclusions. 3. It aims at arriving at the validity of every
argument.
As an art, logic is viewed in relation to the Greek
"techne which means skills, ability, or craft. It, then,
involves learned and practiced skills that would direct
reason toward distinguishing good and correct
arguments from bad and erroneous arguments.
Logit as a Normative Science
Logic is also a "discipline." It requires a strict
compliance with the prescribed rules and principles on
correct argumentation and reasoning. It is in this sense
that logic is to be differentiated from other sciences
which deal with the process of thinking. Other sciences
merely describe (descriptive) the thinking process while
logic stipulates (prescriptive) how one is "ought" to think
properly.
Approaches in Logic
There are two major approaches in the study of logic,
namely: the informal logic and the formal logic.
Informal logic is an attempt to develop logical tools that
can analyze and assess the informal reasoning that
occurs in natural language contexts. Arguments
formulated under informal logic are characterized as
both rhetorical and dialectical. Rhetorical arguments
appear to be more sympathetic in attitude. The ethos or
charisma of the speaker plays a crucial role in
determining whether or not an argument is persuasive.
Dialectical arguments consider argumentation as a
form of dialogical exchange and resolution of disputes.
PAGE 6 LOGIC: A Textbook-Workbook for College
Students
Formal logic is divided into Traditional Aristotelian
Logic and Modern Symbolic Logic. In his book,
Traditional Logic, Martin Cothran (1998) outlines their
differences in these points:
Traditional Aristotelian
1. It deals with the study of deductive argument through
classical syllogism which emphasizes the relationship of
words.
2. It has both a formal branch (structure of the argument)
and the material branch (content of the argument)
Modern Symbolic
1. It deals with the study of deductive argument with
emphasis on the relationship between statements, not,
words (propositional logic).
2. It studies only the form of arguments and pretends to
be able to capture all what we mean in the statements in
a kind of formal symbolic system.
History of Logic
The person who is generally credited with the title Father
of Logic is the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle
(384-322 B.C.) Aristotle's predecessors had been
interested in the art of constructing persuasive arguments
and in techniques for refuting the arguments of others,
but it was Aristotle who first devised systematic criteria
for analyzing and evaluating arguments. His logic is
called syllogistic logic The fundamental elements in this
logic are the terms. Arguments are evaluated as good or
bad depending on how the terms are arranged in the
argument In addition to his development of syllogistic
logic, Aristotle catalogued a number of informal
fallacies.
After Aristotle's death, another Greek philosopher
Chrysippus (279-208 B.C.), one of the founders of the
Stoic school, developed a form of logic in which the
fundamental elements were whole propositions.
Chrysippus treated every proposition as either true or
false and developed rules for determining the truth or
falsity of compound propositions from the truth or falsity
of their components. In the course of doing so, he laid
the foundation for the truth functional interpretation of
logical connectives and introduced the notion of natural
deduction,
For thirteen hundred years after the death of Chrysippus,
relatively little creative work was done in logic. The
physician Galen (A.D. 129-c. 199) developed the theory
of the compound categorical syllogism, but mostly
philosophers confined themselves to writing
commentaries on the works of Aristotle and Chrysippus.
Boethius was one of them.
The first major logician of the Middle Ages was Peter
Abelard (1079-1142). Abelard reconstructed and refined
the Logic of Aristotle and Chrysippus as communicated
by Boethius. He likewise originated the theory of
universals that traced the universal character of general
terms to concepts in the mind rather than to "natures"
existing outside of the mind, as Aristotle had held. In
addition, Abelard distinguished the arguments that are
valid because of their form from those that are valid
because of their content, but held that the only formal
validity was the "perfect" or conclusive variety.
Eventually, the study of logic during the Middle Ages
blossomed and flourished through the works of
numerous philosophers. It attained its final expression in
the writing of the Oxford philosopher William of
Occam (c. 1285-1349) Occam devoted much of his
attention to modal logic, a kind of logic that involves
such notion as possibility, necessity, belief, and doubt.
He also conducted an exhaustive study of the forms of
valid and invalid syllogisms and contributed to the
development of a metalanguage. that is, a higher-level
language used to discuss linguistic entities such as
words, terms, propositions, and so on.
Toward the middle of the fifteenth century, a reaction set
in against the logic of the Middle Ages. Rhetoric largely
displaced logic as the primary focus of attention; the
logic of Chrysippus, which had already begun to lose its
unique identity in the Middle Ages, was ignored
altogether. The Logic of Aristotle was studied only in
highly simplistic presentations. A reawakening did not
occur until two hundred years later through the work of
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716).
Leibniz was a genius who attempted to develop a
symbolic language or "calculus" that could be used to
settle all forms of disputes whether they be in theology,
philosophy. or international relations. As a result of this
work, Leibniz is sometimes credited as the Father of
Symbolic Logic. Leibniz's efforts to symbolize logic
were carried into the nineteenth century by Bernard
Bolzano (1781- 1848).
By the mid nineteenth century, Logic commenced an
extremely rapid period of development that has
continued to this day. The work in symbolic logic was
done by a number of philosophers and mathematicians,
including Augustus DeMorgan (1806-1871). George
Boole (1815-1864), William Stanley Jevons (1835-
1882). and John Venn (1834-1923), some of whom are
popularly known today by the logical theorems and
techniques that bear their names. At the same time, a
revival in inductive logic was initiated by the British
philosopher John Stuart Mill (1806-1873). contribution
is the method of induction.
Toward the end of the nineteenth century, the
foundations of modern mathematical logic were laid
down by Gottlob Frege (1848- 1925). His Begriffschrift
sets forth the theory of quantification Frege's work was
continued into the twentieth century by Alfred North
Whitehead (1861-1947) and Bertrand Russell (1872-
1970). whose monumental Principia Mathematica
attempted to reduce the whole of pure mathematics to
logic.
During the twentieth century, much of the work in logic
focused on the formalization of logical systems and on
questions dealing with the completeness and consistency
of such systems. A now-famous theorem by Kurt Goedel
(1906-1978) states that in any formal system adequate
for number theory there exists an undecidable formula---
that is, a formula such that neither it nor its negation is
derivable from the axioms of the system. Other
developments include multivalued logic and the
formalization of modal logic. Most recently logic has
made a major contribution to technology by providing
the conceptual foundation for the electronic circuitry of
digital computers.
Informal Logic
The origins of informal logic are found in the call for
more relevant higher education that characterizes the
social and political movements of the nineteen sixties. In
logic this precipitated a more concerted attempt to apply
its methods to concrete examples of everyday reasoning.
The beginning of informal logic is the attempt to replace
the artificial examples that characterize earlier logic
books (e.g. early editions of Copi) with instances of
reasoning, argument and debate directly taken from
newspapers, television, and mass media.
Page 9.
In attempting to analyze such reasoning, informal
logicians were greatly influenced by a number of earlier
works that analyze ordinary language arguments.
Aristotle's treatment of fallacies and his theory of
rhetoric remain a frequent basis for discussion and
research. The two modern works which most anticipate
and influence informal logic are Hamblin's "Fallacies
and Toulmin's "The Uses of Argument. The latter is
especially notable for its emphasis on "the standards and
values of practical reasoning," as opposed to "the
abstract and formal criteria relied on in mathematical
logic and much twentieth century epistemology."
Informal logic proper began in North America in the
nineteen seventies. The most influential figures in its
development were Ralph H. Johnson and J. Anthony
Blair. Their Logical Self-Defense was one of the first
introductory texts to emphasize concrete examples of
informal reasoning and their Informal Logic Newsletter
quickly became a focus for discussion, news, and
research.
In keeping with emphasis on concrete examples of actual
reasoning, the development of informal logic has been
tied to pedagogical discussions of the ways in which
students can best be taught to reason well in the social,
political, and work related contexts. One prominent
feature of the evolution of informal logic is, therefore,
the publication of dozens (and probably hundreds) of
textbooks designed to teach students how to reason in
such contexts. In many cases, these texts (e.g.. by
Govier, Kahane and Ruggiero) are also of theoretical
interest, for they implicitly or explicitly advocate and
elaborate a particular theoretical approach.
The Material and Formal Objects of Logic
Every science has a material and a formal object. The
material object is the subject matter. For example,
geology has for its material object the earth. In logic,the
material object includes the three mental operations of
simple apprehension (terms), judgment (propositions),
and reasoning (arguments).
The formal object refers to the special viewpoint from
which the material object is studied by a particular
science. This distinguishes one branch of science from
another when both of them are dealing with the same
material object. So while geography also studies the
earth, it is a different science from geology, because it is
specifically concerned with the surface of the earth.
There would be many disciplines that study thinking and
reasoning but logic stands different from them as it
studies specifically the scientific and technical aspect of
correct reasoning and argumentation.
The Significance of Studying Logic
Exercising human mind for most of us is taxing and
painful. For this reason, Logic, as an exercise of the
human mind can be disliking. With the significant points
herein discussed, hopefully, this dislike will turn into an
interest and that we will find the study of logic a self-
fulfilling course.
1. As students, we should consider Logic as a basic
subject needed in the study of every other academic
subject. We use logic when we discuss essays in our
examinations, analyze historical information and social
data, perform interpretations of our researches, or engage
in some debates on some current issues. We already use
logic in every subject without knowing it. The question
is: Are we using enough logic?
2. As professionals, we use Logic particularly in
decision- making. No profession is devoid of the use of
reasoning. In analyzing the health status of their patients
and in administering medicines, doctors need logic.
Lawyers also employ the use of good reasoning in
defending their clients before any court-of-law.
Moreover, logic makes our works faster and our lives
even more convenient. We can decide as quickly as
possible when we discipline our minds to think logically.
3. As persons, we need to study logic in order to improve
our reasoning potentials; and that as much as possible we
can promote understanding and foster better
relationships among others in the society.
Summary of Main Points
1. Philosophy is defined according to its root words as
"the love of wisdom. Its two major divisions include
theoretical and practical under which logic is classified.
2. As it deals with argument, Logic may serve to support
in arriving at clear, correct, valid, and consistent answers
to questions
Chapter 1 Lesson 1
LANGUAGE
The two fields Language and Logic are often treated
separately, but they are nevertheless related with each
other as presented in the book of Copi & Cohen (1997)
and in this lesson. Their interaction is based on the fact
that correct thinking can be expressed through the use of
words and sentences. Language allows us not only to
convey words and compose sentences but also to
develop our skills in making our reasoning correct, clear
and sound. Our reasoning can be filled with errors or
fallacies because we are simply unaware of how our
language is correctly stated.
This lesson discusses the nature of language, the
elements of signs, the three areas in semiotics, and the
basic functions of language.
The Nature of Language
Our world today is a sign-saturated cultural
environment. In communication, man uses signs in order
for him to be understood. Language, as a product of
man, is an expressive sign of his inner feelings,
emotions, thoughts, rationalizations, and creativities.
Language makes us all humans. It enables us to build,
unbuild, and rebuild social relationships.
There are two categories of language. They are natural
and artificial. A natural language is an ordinary
language that is spoken by a group of individuals as their
native tongue. It is being passed from one generation to
generation. Ordinary languages differ from one culture
to another. An example of a natural language is English,
French, and Filipino. An artificial language is a machine
language used to code letters, numbers, instructions, and
storage locations. An example of an artificial language is
a computer. It does not require any translation in order to
function according to its coded instructions.
The Elements of Signs
Semiotics or Semiology (Greek semion, sign) is
basically the study of signs. These signs include spoken
words, sounds, images, gestures, and a wide variety of
objects in our everyday lives.
The emergence of semiology can be attributed to
Ferdinand de Saussure and Roland Barthes. They have
different perspectives on the discipline. As a linguist,
Saussure (1983) centered his work on verbal signs. He
introduced the idea of the "signifier" and the "signified"
which we will discuss later. Barthes, on the other hand.
focused on non-verbal semiotics. He viewed "sign" in
relation to its meaning (1967) From their standpoints, we
can draw the basic elements involved in every sign.
Language, as a sign, is something that stands for
something else (aliquid stat pro aliquol. As Pierce (1958)
writes,
"anything can be a sign as long as someone interprets it
as signifying' something-referring to or standing for
something other than solf."
A sign therefore, consists of two elements. They are a
signifier and a signified.
A signifier is a material or physical form of the sign. It is
something which can be seen, hoard, touched, smelt or
tasted (Saussure: 1983). A signified is the mental
concept represented by the signifier. To llustrate, the
spoken or written word "dog" is the material signifier of
the universal concept "dog" which is the signified
Aside from the signifier and the signified, there is one
aspect of sign that we need to take into account, that is,
the referent. A referent is a concrete phenomenon with
which we continually interact in the real world. The
concept 'dog' then, may have these referents: Brownie,
Blackie, White. The tie between the signifier and the
referent is known as the explicit referential meaning
(reference).
The connotation of a "dog" may include irrational,
domestic, trainable animal.
The meaning behind every sign is subject-dependent.
We need to have a person who perceives the meaning in
the context of his psychophysical experiences, emotional
feelings, social overtones and cultural implications. Man,
as the perceiver, is the focal point of the study of
language and logic. In the presence of man's
consciousness, even clouds, volcanoes, mountains, and
trees are no longer regarded simply as mute objects.
They can become active symbols or signs, alive and
replete with meaning.
The Three Areas in Semiotics
Charles Morris (1946) divided the areas in the study of
semiotics into three. They are syntactics, semantics and
pragmatics.
Syntactics, or syntax, is concerned with the way
sentences are constructed from smaller parts, such as
words and phrases. It is known also as the science of
grammar (Timbreza: 1992).
Semantics is the study of meaning in language, i.e.,
the study of the relationship between linguistic
expressions and reality. While syntactics is concerned
with the form of expressions in a language, semantics
focuses on the word itself and on the content or meaning.
Martinich (1996) may refer these to either the referents
or the reference. Let us consider two of his examples:
"The present king of France is bald." "Colorless green
ideas sleep furiously."
Both sentences are syntactically correct, but semantically
deviant. In the former, the subject term has no referent
and, in the latter, the meaning is absurd and incoherent.
Pragmatics is the third area of semiotics. It is the study
of the relation of signs to their context. The socio-
cultural context of the speaker may serve to alter the
meaning of the word and develops its practical uses and
effects. Martinich (1996) provides us this example which
is an illustration of a pragmatically-deviant sentence:
"Susie is one of the best two students in the class. In fact,
it is unmentioned that there are only two students in the
class."
This is syntactically and semantically correct
pragmatically deviant because it communicates
something false.
PAGE 18
A sentence we use in Logic must be syntactically.
semantically, and pragmatically correct so as to produce
a sound argument.
The Basic Functions of Language
Language permeates all the undertakings of man, and
man uses language in many ways and for many
purposes. Wittgenstein, as quoted by Acuña (2001), says
that:
"the function of words is as diverse as the functions of
the different objects in the toolbox."
However, we are to limit only to the three basic uses of
language as provided for by Copi and Cohen (1997).
They are the descriptive, expressive, and directive
functions of language.
The descriptive function of language is also known as
informative function. It focuses on language as the tool
in conveying information. The information
communicated is accomplished through declarative
sentences or propositions which can be evaluated as
either true or false. For example, we say:
"EDSA Revolution took place on February 25, 1986."

The above sentence imparts an information that involves
the concept of truth and not of falsity. Since this function
typically presumes the truth of what is communicated,
then, this will be our central focus in the study of
language and logic.
The expressive function of language deals with the
speaker's use of language in conveying his feelings and
in evoking emotional response from the listener. Truth
and falsity have no bearing under this basic function of
language. Feelings, emotions, and attitudes have the
characteristics of being right or wrong, proper or
improper, appropriate or inappropriate, but not that they
are true or false. This function ordinarily takes the form
of exclamatory sentences.
The directive function of language relates to commands
and requests where sentences are used and evaluated as
right or wrong and not as true or false. The imperatives
"Close the door," "Take these medicines, and the like
should appropriately be evaluated as either good or bad,
right or wrong before performing them. This function
seems to be applicable under the realm of morality or
ethics, specifically in making moral decisions or
arguments.
Page 19
The Variations in Linguistic Functions
It does not follow that a single utterance of a word has
also a singular function. It is possible that in
conversations, whether spoken or written, an utterance
may serve a variation of linguistic functions.
We may take this example: "I really enjoyed reading
your paper. This sentence takes the declarative form but
is not necessarily informative. Rather, it sounds
expressive since it exhibits a feeling of appreciation or
recognition. The example, "Oh, Carlos, you're late!" is
an exclamatory sentence (expressive function) but may
also function as a command to hurry (directive function).
A sentence, in its declarative grammatical form, may
have several functions as expressive, directive,
ceremonial, and the like. What we are concerned with in
logic is the usefulness of a declarative sentence that is
informative in its function and no other. Logic is
primarily concerned with matters of truth and falsity.
The use of declarative sentences takes the lead in the
study of logic not because of its grammatical form, but
because it conveys information as true or false.
Summary of Main Points
1. There are two categories of language, which include
natural language and artificial language
2. Semiotics is a study of sign. Every sign has these
elements: signifier, signified, referent, and reference
(meaning).
3. The three areas in semiotics are syntactics
(arrangement of language), semantics (meaning of
language), and pragmatics (language in relation to its
context).
4. There are three basic functions in language. They are
descriptive (information), expressive (emotion), and
directive (command). 5. A word or language may take
several functions according to how it is delivered or used
in a given circumstance.
Group Discussion Questions
1. What is language?
2. Enumerate the elements of language and show their
relationships.
3. Distinguish the three different areas of semiotics.
Chapter 1 Lesson 2
TERMS
A term is a basic component of a syllogism. By having
two terms, we come up with a proposition. A series of
propositions can make up a syllogism. The traditional
order of treatment, therefore, begins with the study of
terms, proceeds with the study of gropositions, and ends
with the study of syllogisms.
This lesson discusses the nature and distinction of words,
concepts, and terms. It further deals on the different
classification of terms according to their quantity,
quality, and incompatible relations.
Words, Concepts, and Terms
A word, which is a basic unit of language, is composed
of different letters. It has two categories, namely:
function word and content word. Function words
refer to words that have no semantic content or meaning
like articles (ie., a, an, the), prepositions (ie., at, to, for,
in, by), and conjunctions (ie., and, that, when, while,
although). Content words refer to words that have
meaning. They point to a certain concept like nouns.
Concepts are made up of ideas. Words are used to
represent an idea or concept. However, some ideas
cannot be given a word (Acuña: 2001). These words can
only be understood when our attention goes to the object
that the word is meant to designate.
When a word or group of words is used to express a
concept, we call them terms. Concepts refer to the
mental representation of an object in reality (Bachhuber:
1967). They are abstract, immaterial and intelligible.
Terms are the external sign of a concept. They are
concrete, material, and sensible.
Concept and term are often used interchangeably but
care must be taken to distinguish one from the other as
explained above. Sometimes, notion is also used to mean
concept, idea or term.
The more important distinction is between term and
word. A term is a word but not all words are terms. As
discussed, word has a wider meaning and it includes
elements of language like articles, prepositions, and
conjunctions, which do not really represent an object in
reality.
In Logic, we are concerned with the term, which carries
a meaning that points to an object in reality. This can be
llustrated clearly by the difference between a "dog" (a
term) and "in" (e mere word)
Terms as Conventional Signs
Terms are signs. They stand for things in the objective
world. There are two kinds of sign: natural and
conventional (Agapay: 1991). Natural signs symbolize
natural occurrences, e.g., smoke is the sign of fire. The
relation between the fire and the smoke is that of a cause
an effect in the order of nature.
Conventional signs, on the contrary, derive their
meaning from human convention. This convention is an
agreement that is binding in a given community, either
because people have come to accept it or because of an
expliat understanding among people. Traffic light and
road signs are good examples of conventional signs.
Terms are conventional signs because they are products
of convention and are used in a more or less the same
way (Acuña: 2001). People create their meaning and
usage. Due to the diversity of cultures and people, a term
could vary in meaning and usage with each culture and
group of people.
The Comprehension and Extension of Terms
A term has twofold elements: comprehension and
extension. Comprehension includes the characteristics,
attributes, or qualities that the term implies (Bittle:
1950). Let us take the term "bachelor." This term implies
the "state of being unmarried" of a "man," so that the
comprehension of the term "bachelor" is an unmarried
man." This is true of every one who is labeled a
"bachelor." The comprehension of a term, therefore,
refers to the features shared by all objects to which the
term may be rightly applied.
Extension, on the other hand, is the group of individual
objects to which the term may be correctly applied.
Thus, the extension of the term "bachelor" includes
every person who is unmarried.
To illustrate the distinction more clearly, here is another
example: the term "university" has for its comprehension
"a higher institute of learning"; and for its extension
"Mindanao State University. Xavier University, Notre
Dame University," among others.
The comprehension and the extension of a term are
inversely proportional (Ardales: 1998) to each other so
that according to a principle of Logic: "when the
comprehension is increased, the extension decreases; and
when the extension is increased, the comprehension
decreases."
Let us give an example to explain this relationship
between the comprehension and the extension of a term.
Let us use the term "mother." The extension of this term
applies to all female human beings who have given birth
to a child. If we add to the comprehension of the term by
qualifying it, say, "Filipino mothers," the extension will
be greatly reduced and will exclude non-Filipino women
who have begotten a child. If we further expand the
comprehension by saying "teenage Filipino mothers, we
further decrease the extension.
Now, let us begin with the extension of a term. Let us
take the case of one professor and say that the full
comprehension is "a female English professor at
Mindanao State University." increase the extension by
adding to the number other English professors, including
male, the comprehension will have to be limited to
"English professors at Mindanao State University.
Suppose we add more English professors from other
universities, the comprehension will now be reduced to
"English professors." And if we add philosophy
professors to the group, thus increasing their number, the
comprehension will further be restricted to "professors."
The Classification of Terms
There are various classifications of the term, but for the
purpose of this book classification covers only the
following: extension (quantity), comprehension
(quality), and incompatibility.
Terms According to Quantity
According to quantity, terms are either singular,
particular and universal (Keynes: 1887).
Singular term applies to one definite individual, e.g.,
Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr.
Particular term applies to some portion of a class.
Examples are "most graduates," "some teachers," "few
students," "many sections," and the like.
Universal term applies to all the members of a class,
e.g.. "man" (referring to the human species). In Logic,
the universal term is often introduced by the quantifier
all in the affirmative - e.g., "all animals" (which means
every member of the class animal is included) or no in
the negative-e.g., no animal (which means every
member of the class animal is excluded).
Terms According to Quality
According to quality, terms are classified into univocal
and equivocal (Timbreza: 1992).
A term is said to be univocal when it carries exactly the
same meaning even if it is predicated of two or more
individuals. The term "tree, for instance, whether applied
to a 'narra,' a 'maple, a 'coconut,' or a 'mahogany,' means
the same thing.
A term is equivocal when it changes its meaning when it
is predicated of different individuals. The term "star"
when applied to Venus means a 'celestial body' but when
applied to Nora Aunor means an 'actress."
Terms According to Incompatibility
According to incompatibility, terms are classified into
contradictory and contrary (Bauzon: 1994).
Contradictory terms are absolutely opposed to each
other in meaning. If one is an affirmation, the other is its
complete negation. There is no possible middle ground
between contradictory, terms. They totally exclude each
other. For example, the term "black" is the contradictory
of "non- black," and "living" of "non-living." 'An object
is either black or non- black; a thing is either living or
non-living. There is no other possible option.
Contrary terms are opposed to each other since they
represent two extremes in a particular order or class of
nature or reality. As such they are not totally exclusive
and a middle ground or alternative is possible between
them. "Black," for instance, in the order of color, is the
contrary of "white," and between them there can be other
colors. In the order of life, "alive" is the contrary of
"dead" and between them there can be a state of being
half-alive (biologically) and half dead (mentally). Some
other examples of contraries are "extra large and extra
small," (class of size) "tall and short," (class of height)
"pretty and ugly." (class of beauty) "happy and
miserable," (class of emotion), etc.
Summary of Main Points
1. Word is composed of letters. It has two categories:
function word and content word.
2. Concepts are immaterial and intelligible signs of
objective reality whereas terms are material and sensible
signs of the same reality.
Chapter 1' Lesson 3
DEFINITION
Definition is important in Logic for two reasons. First, it
makes a term clear and a sentence true. The soundness of
an argument depends on the clarity of terms and the truth
of the sentences used within the argument Second, it
helps us identify sentences with predicate terms that are
definitions for purposes of quantifying terms.
This lesson discusses the nature of definition, the
classifications of definition according to purpose, the
methods of definition, and the rules of good connotative
definition.
The Nature of Definition
We define whan an 'unfamiliar term is explained with
familiar term (Acuña: 2001) Definition is not a sentence,
but it's a set of words that explain a term. The term to be
defined is the subject term and is called the definiendum,
and the definition is the predicate erm and is called the
definiens. Consider the following examples:
A tiger is a jungle animal.
The Philippines is an Asian country.
The terms "tiger" and "Philippines" are the subjects to be
defined known as "definiendum," while the predicates
"jungle animal" and "Asian country" are the definitions
or the "definiens."
Classifications of Definition according to Purpose

A definition of a word may, in relation to its purpose, be
classified into five, namely: lexical, stipulative,
precising, persuasive, and theoretical (Hurley: 1988).
Lexical or Reportive
A lexical definition simply reports the way in which a
term is already used within a language community. The
purpose here is to inform someone else of the accepted
meaning of the term. This means that a lexical or
reportive definition always involves three persons: first,
the definer who is explaining the meaning of the word;
second, the hearer to whom the meaning is defined; and
third, the group of people or the language community
using the word and giving its meaning.
When we use this definition, we receive a definition that
is commonly used by a group of people. Strictly
speaking, dictionary definitions are neither true nor false.
The hearer's acceptance of the definition's truth or falsity
is dependent on the meaning held by a group of people
or language community. Therefore, the statement that
"The word "car" means a wheeled vehicle used for
conveyance of passengers," is true. It is true because it is
a report of how a group of people uses the word "car." If
you restate or redefine this word, your definition may
become true and the lexical definition may be false.
Stipulative
A stipulative definition freely assigns meaning to a
completely new term, creating a usage that has not
previously existed. Since the purpose is to propose the
adoption of a shared use of a novel term, there are no
existing standards against which it can be compared. It
involves only two persons: the definer who assigns a
meaning to the word and the hearer to whom the
meaning is defined. There is no third person involved as
in a descriptive definition. When people deviate from
what had been used before and put a new meaning on the
word, then they are doing a stipulative definition. Once
newly crafted definitions are absorbed into a language
community, they cease to be a stipulative definition and
become part of the lexical or reportive definition.
Precising
Precising definitions are used for the purpose of
eliminating ambiguity or vagueness. If a term is vague or
its meaning is misunderstood, it is always useful to
present a précising definition to help others grasp what is
being proposed. For example, the term "poor" might
sound to be broad and vague for some. Thus to be
precise, you may define it as "those with incomes under
P 5,000 per year." Another example is the term
"students" which has a wide application. To make it
more specific and precise, we may have its definition as
"the accountancy students of MSU-IIT."
Persuasive
Persuasive definition is an attempt to attach an emotive
meaning to the use of a term. Since this can only serve to
confuse the literal meaning of the term, persuasive
definitions are not practical to be used. Examples are:
"Logic" means "the study of the means by which to win
an argument," "Government" means "the subjugation of
the masses by bureaucrats," and "A real woman" is "the
one who knows how to please a man."
Theoretical
Theoretical definitions are constructed in the light of
certain physical theories. Here, we will establish the use
of this term within the context of a broader intellectual
framework. The definition of "Water," for example, is "a
certain cluster of properties (e.g. liquidity. transparency,
non-acidity, non-causticity, etc.) that occur together.
It is important to note that theories are not constant.
Theories change, so do meanings. The adoption of any
theoretical definition requires Investigation, observation,
or experimentation, so that we must be cautious in
agreeing with it
The Methods of Definitions
Definitions can be classified not only according to their
purpose but also according to their method. The method
of a definition is the means by which the definition
achieves its purpose.
There are two basic methods of defining terms, namely,
the denotative method and the connotative method. The
denotative method defines a term by identifying the
extensions or objects the definiendum significs.
However, there are terms to which the denotative
definition is not applicable because there is no way to
indicate the class members of the term or the
definiendum by enumeration, example, or astension. In
order to define terms of this sort, and more conveniendy
to define general terms of every variety. we rely upon
the second method of definition, that is, the connotative
method.
The connotative method defines a term by identifying
the intensions or qualities the definiendum implies.
The Denotative Method of Definition
There are four sub-methods under the denotative
method. They are the definition by description, the
definition by example, the definition by enumeration,
and the definition by ostension or demonstration
Definition by Description
Descriptive definition lists the different material
descriptions being ascribed to a certain word. To
illustrate: The tarm house" ca be defined as a building
with a receiving parlor." "a bedroom" " dining hall," and
the like.
Definition by Example/Enumeration
Definition by example simply points out examples
associated with the word defined. For example, we
would define the term "school" by listing down
examples such as UP, UST, DLSU, ADMU and so forth.
A variation of definition by example is definition by
enumeration of sub-classes. For example, in defining
"citrus fruit." one might mention lemons, oranges,
tangerines and grapefruits.
This definition is easy to do. However, it has a
disadvantage. Terms or words cannot have their
extensions enumerated completely for various reasons.
For example, the extensions of the terms "star" and
"sand" would be very difficult to enumerate completely.
Thus, we may have only partial enumeration.
Definition by Ostension or Demonstration
This method consists of presenting pointing.
demonstrating a concrete object which the term implies.
An example of this is uttering "This is a table" while
pointing at a table. Definition by ostension is restricted
to terms whose extensions include members which exist
at present or in the very near future and which, further,
are in one's immediate vicinity.
The Connotative Method of Definition
There are two sub-methods under the connotative
method. They are the definition by synonyms and the
definition by analysis.
Definition by Synonyms
Definition by synonyms is a simple method. Another
word with a similar meaning is used in place of the word
being defined. Let us take the statement "Pope John Paul
II is the vicar of Christ." The word vicar means
"substitute" or "representative." The attributes vicar,
substitute, or representative, have the same meaning as
the term or the definiendum, "Pope." The Pope, then,
serves as a substitute or representative of Christ on earth.
This definition violates the second rule of good
connotative definition, that is, "avoid circularity."
Definition by Analysis
The definition by analysis is also known as the
Aristotelian method of defining by genus and specific
difference. By genus, we mean the attribute of the whole
class of which the definiendum is a part. And by specific
difference, we mean the attribute which distinguishes the
definiendum from other members of the class.
We may have these examples:
Man is a rational animal.
A ball pen is an educational device for writing.
In the first example, the definiendum is the word "man,"
and the definiens of the connotative definition includes
the words "rational," and "animal." Between these two
words, the term "animal" is a broad category that is true
to all human beings. Animal then, is the genus of the
word, "man." The word "rational will enable us to set
"man" apart from the class of animals, and thus is called
the specific difference.
In the second example, the definition of the word "ball
pen" identifies "educational device" as the genus to
which all ball pens belong, and then specifies "for
writing" as the specific difference that distinguishes
them from books, papers, and so forth.
Rules of Good Connotative Definition
Copi and Cohen (1997) lists five rules through which we
can evaluate the success of connotative definition
through genus and specific difference:
1. Focus on essential features. A good connotative
definition should try to point out the features that are
essential to the designation of things as members of the
relevant group.
2. Avoid circularity. When we use the term defined
(definiendum) as part of the connotative definition
(definiens), we are not giving a more useful information.
It defeats the purpose of definition. Our aim is to give
the audience clearer information about the term being
defined and yet, we are giving them no new data to make
them understand the term better. Thus, there isn't much
point in defining "Cordless phone" as "a telephone that
has no cord" and "Socialism" as a doctrine that
advocates socialistic ideas."
3. Capture the correct extension. The good connotative
definition must be applicable to all objects denoted by
the term being defined. For example, "Man is a rational
animal." The definiens rational animal" is applied to all
men, no more and no less. Thus, the definition must be
co-extensive with or equivalent to (not too broad, not too
narrow) the term being defined so that even if the
definiens and the definiendum are interchanged, there is
nothing altered in the statement. Consider these two
alternative definitions of the word "bird":
A bird is a "warm-blooded animal."
A bird is a "flying animal."
In the first sentence, the definition is "too broad" since
includes the rest of the animals other than the birds. In
the second sentence, the definition is "too narrow since it
excludes the non-flying birds such as penguin, kiwi, and
the like. Another example:
A house means dwelling used for shelter.
A house means a wooden structure used for shelter.
In the first, the definition of the word "house" is too
broad Since we can apply it to things other than houses
(ie, caves). In the second, the definition is too narrow
since not all houses are made of wood. There are houses
which are made of bricks and others.
4. Avoid figurative or obscure language. Again, the
goal of definition is to explain the meaning of a term to
someone who is unfamiliar with it. Thus, one must be
very clear in his definition so as not to make it much
more obscure or ambiguous than the term being defined.
The definition of "politics as the science of the possible"
seems to be informative but does not lead us to a
thorough understanding of the meaning of the
definiendum.
5. Be affirmative rather than negative. Terms should
be defined positively whenever possible so as to keep the
audience informed of the meaning of the word. It would
be quite absurd for the speaker to give a definition using
negative designations about the term. By so doing, no
accurate information is passed to the listener about the
word being defined. We may have these examples:
Faith is not an expression of infidelity.
Inexpensive means that which is not expensive.
Right is that which is not wrong.
Honesty is not untruthfulness.
Summary of Main Points
1. Definition refers to the meaning behind every term.
The term defined is the definiendum and the definition is
the definiens.
2. According to its purpose, definition is classified into
lexical. stipulative, precising, persuasive, and theoretical.
3. The two methods of definition include the denotative
and the connotative. Defining a word by identifying the
objects it signifies is a denotative method of definition
while defining a word by identifying the qualities it
implies is a connotative method of definition.
4. The five rules of a good connotative definition are as
follow:
4.1. Focus on essential features.
4.2. Avoid circularity.
4.3. Capture the correct extension.
4.4. Avoid figurative or obscure language. 4.5. Be
affirmative rather than negative.
Chapter 2 Lesson 1
THE PROPOSITIONS
A proposition is another essential part of an argument or
a syllogism. It is a kind of declarative sentence that
makes an assertion about facts as either true or false.
This lesson discusses the nature of propositions, the
types of propositions, the basic elements of categorical
propositions, and the quantity and quality of
propositions.
The Nature of Judgment
A proposition is interchangeably known as judgment.
Judgment is a mental activity that requires two subject
matters to be compared. For example, in court cases, the
honorable judge has to listen to both camps, the plaintiff
and the defendant, before giving his judgment on the
case. His judgment proceeds from the comparison of
facts presented for litigation by both sides.
In the same manner, logical judgment deals with the
correlation of concepts and finds their agreement or
disagreement McCall: 1967). This judgment, once
verbally expressed, becomes a proposition.
Bauzon (1994) reiterates these three necessary things for
making a judgment.
1. The mind must consider and comprehend the two
concepts about which a judgment has to be made.
2. The mind should proceed to compare these two
concepts.
3. The mind must express mentally the agreement ar
disagreement between the two concepts. This is the most
essential in making a judgment.
To illustrate, we shall take two concepts: "This car" and
"red." The first concept is "car", and the second concept
is "red." The mind compares the two concepts by
looking into their agreement or disagreement. It is a
matter of agreement when the mind enunciates a
judgment "This car is red. However, it is a matter of
disagreement when the mind enunciates a judgment
"This car is not red."
The Nature of Propositions
Proposition makes a claim as either true or false. It takes
the form of a declarative sentence. Other sentences like
exclamatory. interrogative, and imperative do not make
any claim of true or false and therefore, they do not
express any proposition at all. Thus, it is right to say that
all propositions are sentences, but not all sentences are
propositions.
Truth and Falsity of Propositions
There is no truth or falsity when we speak of ideas,
concepts or terms. It is because in terms the act of
judgment is not involved. Since agreement or
disagreement is a characteristic of a proposition. it is
deemed proper to attribute truth and falsity to a
proposition. We must take note always that there is no
truth or falsity until such time that we take two or more
concepts, compare them, and express an agreement or
disagreement between them.
How are we going to determine if a proposition is true or
false? The truth or falsity of a proposition proceeds from
the evaluation we make on the relations between the
subject and the predicate. If such evaluation coincides
with the reality (Bauzon 1994), then the proposition is
said to be true, and if not, the proposition is false.
When we have the propositions, "All men are rational
animals," and "No cars are carabaos," then, we are
making an assessment that every human being is a
thinking animal, and that cars are not carabaos. This
constitutes a declaration of a factual or objective truth
(true). But when we have the propositions. "No men. are
rational animals," and "All cars are carabaos," then the
truth-value assessment shifts into the opposite, that is,
"false."
Contingent and Necessary Propositions
A proposition can either be necessary or contingent
(Dolhenty: 2003). On the one hand, necessary
propositions are those propositions having predicate
terms whose attributes are essentially predicated to the
subject term. In other words, the attributes indicated in
the predicate term cannot be excluded (necessary) from
the subject. On the other hand, contingent propositions
are those propositions having predicate terms whose
attributes are not essentially predicated to the subject
term. In other words, the attributes indicated in the
predicate term may or may not be excluded (contingent)
from the subject.
Let us take for example, "Square is a plane figure with
four equal sides." "Plane figure" is the genus while "with
four equal sides" is the specific difference. These are the
attributes necessarily contained in the comprehension of
a "square." Thus, a square is necessarily a plane figure
with four equal sides, and vice-versa.
A contingent proposition is illustrated by this example,
"Salt is an inexpensive mineral." The predicate
"inexpensive mineral" is not essentially related to the
subject "salt" because it does not follow that salt is
inexpensive at all times and in all places.
The Types of Propositions
The two types of proposition are the categorical and the
hypothetical. Categorical propositions come in single
propositions while hypothetical propositions come in
multiple propositions.
The Single Propositions
Single proposition can easily be determined because it
consists of only one subject term and one predicate term.
For example:
Earth is a planet.
Man is a creature.
The Multiple Propositions
The multiple propositions are those that contain two or
more propositions united as one, as in the example,
"John is handsome and a good student."
There are two main classifications of multiple
propositions, namely, the overtly multiple proposition
and the covertly multiple proposition. If there is a clear
appearance of several propositions, the proposition is
called overtly multiple proposition. Examples are:
Cebu is in Region 7 and Cagayan de Oro is in Region
10. Peter is brilliant in the class, but a stupid
organization president.
If the union of the propositions is not clear, the
proposition is known as covertly multiple proposition. It
has the appearance of a single proposition but on
examination it contains multiple propositions. Take for
example this proposition, "All students. except the
juniors, are invited to the symposium." It appears to be a
single proposition, but actually it contains two
assertions. One is, "All students are invited to the
symposium," and the other is, "No juniors are invited to
the symposium."
The Categorical Propositions
Propositions not compounded with other propositions
are called "categorical". It contains two categories,
namely: the subject term and the predicate term, and
asserts that some or all of the referents of the subject
term are included in or excluded from the class
designated by the predicate term. We have these
propositions as examples:
All imported goods are non-taxable products.
Some revenues are intended for infrastructures.
No assemblies are constitutionally illegal.
Some NGOs are not well-organized institutions.
The Hypothetical Propositions
A hypothetical proposition is one which does not
directly attribute a predicate to its subject, but asserts the
dependence of one proposition on another proposition.
The examples are:
If Marcos reigns until this day, then there is no true
democracy.
Either Willy or Martin is graft and corrupt.
There are three different types of hypothetical
propositions, namely: conditional, disjunctive, and
conjunctive. Each of them will be discussed in Chapter
4.
The Basic Elements of Categorical Propositions
When we construct a categorical proposition, there are
three basic elements to consider, namely: the subject
term, the copula, and the predicate term.
The subject term is the term designating the concept
about which the pronouncement is made. The predicate
term is the term designating the concept which is
affirmed or denied of the subject. The copula (or the
linking verb) is the word expressing the mental act
which pronounces the agreement or disagreement
between the subject and the predicate terms. The copula
is usually expressed by these words: "is" or "are" for
affirmative propositions, and is not" or "are not for
negative propositions.
The Quality and Quantity of Propositions
The Quality of Propositions
Aristotelian Logic, as cited by Robin Smith (2003)
presents two qualities of the propositions: the
affirmative and the negative. The copula plays an
important role in determining the quality of the
proposition. If the copula is "is" or "are" then the
proposition is affirmative, but if the copula is "is not" or
"are not", then the proposition is negative. Let us
consider the following propositions:
1. "That horse is the winner."
2. That horse is not the winner."
The first proposition is an affirmative proposition. The
copula "is" affirms the predicate of the subject. The
second proposition is a negative one. The copula "is not"
denies the predicate of the subject.
The Quantity of Propositions
There are also two quantities of the propositions:
universal and the particular (Ibid). A proposition is
universal when the subject term is also universal. In an
affirmative proposition, the quantifier "All" coming
before the subject indicates the universality of the
proposition. In a negative proposition, the article "No"
before the subject signifies the universality of the
proposition. The article "No" is an indicator of the
quality and quantity of the proposition as negative and
universal respectively. We shall consider the following
illustrative
propositions:
1. All accountants are professionals.
2. No professionals are illiterates.
The first example demonstrates the kind of proposition
that is universal and affirmative, while the second
example demonstrates the kind of proposition that is
universal and negative.
A proposition is particular when its subject term is also
particular. In both affirmative and negative particular
propositions. the subject term is indicated by the
quantifier propositions "Some politicians are Cebuanos."
and "Some Cebuanos are not politicians," are clear
examples of particular propositions. The "Some. The
quantifier "some" applies to all particular propositions
irrespective of whether they are affirmative or negative.
Be vigilant with the quantifier "not all attached to a
subject term, for example, "Not all men are drunkards."
"Not all" is equivalent to "some are not" and would
make the proposition particular and negative. However,
"not all" should not be used under the standard form
categorical propositions.
There are also what we call "singular propositions." A
proposition is singular when the subject applies to a
single individual. Consider the following examples:
1. Victor Hugo is the author of Les Miserables.
2. That employee is a CONCORD proponent.
Singular propositions are to be treated as universal
propositions.
The Quantity of the Subject and Predicate Terms
The Quantity of Subject Terms
We have already learned that the quantity of subject
terms can be known through their quantifiers (all, some,
no) as either universal or particular. There are
propositions that their quantifiers are non-standard (i.e.
everyone, anybody, few, most, several, etc.) or even
unexpressed. We need to change or supply these
propositions with their standard quantifiers. This is the
topic of the third lesson.
The Quantity of Predicate Terms
The quality of the proposition has something to do with
the quantity of the predicate term. If the proposition is
affirmative, the quantity of the predicate term is
particular, but if the proposition is negative, the quantity
of the predicate term is universal (Bittle: 1950).
Let us take these as our examples:
1. All dogs are animals. (Affirmative - Particular)
2. No dogs are cats. (Negative - Universal)
In affirmative propositions, the subject forms part of the
extension of the predicate. Consequently, the predicate
term is taken only as a particular term. Notice that in the
first example the total objects of the subject "dogs"
constitute only a part of the predicate term, "animals. We
can legitimately say that "all dogs" are "some animals,
but we cannot legitimately say that "all dogs are "al
animals. It is because the class of animals does not refer
only to "dogs" but to some other animals like cats,
horses, and others. To illustrate this proposition in a
diagram, we have:
(particular)
P-Some Animals
S-All Dogs
(universal)
In negative propositions, the extensions of the subject
are completely excluded from the extensions of the
predicate. In other words, both the subject and the
predicate belong to totally different classes and neither
one belongs to the class of the other. In the second
example, "No dogs are cats", the predicate "cat" is taken
according to the whole of its extension. The same is true
with the subject "dogs. Simply speaking, no cats belong
to the class of dogs. and no dogs belong to the class of
cats. Thus, the extensions of "cats" and "dogs" are
separate from each other and remain integral whole. In
effect, the quantity of the predicate term is universal."
We have this diagram to illustrate this explanation:
All
Dogs
(S) - universal
All
Cats
(P)
Universal
Propositions with Definitions as Predicate Terms
The preceding rules shall not apply to propositions with
definitions as predicate terms. In these propositions, the
subject and predicate terms have the same extension. Let
us take an example: "Man is a rational animal." If the
quantity of "man" is universal, the quantity of "rational
animal" is also universal and not particular for to assign
the predicate term with a particular quantity would mean
that "some rational animals are men," and which is
wrong.
The Indicators for the Quality and Quantity of
Propositions
To look for the...
Quantity of the Subject Term
Quantity of the Proposition
Quality of the Proposition Quantity of the Predicate
Term
The indicator is the...

Quantifier
Quantity of the Subject Term
Copula
Quality of the Proposition

Summary of Main Points

1. The verbal expression of judgment is a proposition.

2. All propositions are sentences for they take the form
of declarative sentences, but not all sentences are
propositions for some sentences (i.e. interrogative,
exclamatory, imperative) do not make a claim about
facts as either true or false.
3. There is no truth for ideas. Truth presupposes
judgment.
4. There are two types of propositions: the categorical
and hypothetical. Categorical propositions are either
single or multiple propositions while hypothetical
propositions are always multiple propositions.

5. The three basic elements of a proposition include the

subject term, the copula, and the predicate term.
6. The quality of the proposition is either affirmative or
negative. The quality is determined by the copula.
7. The quality of a proposition affects the quantity of the
predicate terms under two instances: a. If the proposition
is affirmative, the predicate term is particular. b. If the
proposition is negative, the predicate term is universal.