2) Syllogism:

A) Meaning of Syllogism
An instance of a form of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn from two given or
assumed propositions (premises); a common or middle term is present in the two premises
but not in the conclusion, which may be invalid (e.g. all dogs are animals; all animals have
four legs; therefore all dogs have four legs ).
A syllogism (Greek: συλλογισμός, syllogismos, 'conclusion, inference') is a kind of logical
argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion based on
two propositions that are asserted or assumed to be true.
A deductive scheme of a formal argument consisting of a major and a minor premise and a
conclusion (as in "every virtue is laudable; kindness is a virtue; therefore kindness is
laudable")
Structure of Syllogisms
Syllogisms can be represented using the following three-line structure, in which A, B, and C
stand for the different terms:
1. All A are B.
2. All C are A.
3. Therefore, all C are B.
Another way of saying the same thing is as follows:
1. If A = B
2. and C = A
3. then C = B
Notice how the "A" functions as a kind of "middle" for the other terms. You could, for
instance, write the syllogism as: C = A = B, therefore C = B

What are some examples of syllogism?

Image result for examples of conditional syllogism
An example of a syllogism is
All mammals are animals.
All elephants are mammals.
Therefore, all elephants are animals.
 In a syllogism, the more general premise is called the major premise ("All mammals are
animals"). The more specific premise is called the minor premise ("All elephants are
mammals").
Syllogism: Parts of the definition and meaning
Major premise: The major premise is a statement of a general or universal nature.
Minor Premise: The minor premise is a statement regarding a particular case, related to the
subject of the major premise.

Conclusion: The conclusion is the inevitable result of accepting the major and mionr
premises.

TYPES OF SYLLOGISM
1) Categorical Syllogism
CATEGORICAL arguments have major premises that place items into categories. (All A's
are B

A categorical syllogism is an argument consisting of exactly three categorical propositions

(two premises and a conclusion) in which there appear a total of exactly three categorical
terms, each of which is used exactly twice.

One of those terms must be used as the subject term of the conclusion of the syllogism, and
we call it the minor term of the syllogism as a whole. The major term of the syllogism is
whatever is employed as the predicate term of its conclusion. The third term in the syllogism
doesn’t occur in the conclusion at all, but must be employed in somewhere in each of its
premises; hence, we call it the middle term.

Since one of the premises of the syllogism must be a categorical proposition that affirms
some relation between its middle and major terms, we call that the major premise of the
syllogism. The other premise, which links the middle and minor terms, we call the minor
premise.

Examples
As we know, our first example about roses was a categorical syllogism. Categorical
syllogisms follow an, "If A is part of C, then B is part of C" logic. Let's look at some
examples of categorical syllogisms.
 All cars have wheels. I drive a car. Therefore, my car has wheels.
o A: Major premise: All cars have wheels.
o B: Minor premise: I drive a car.
C: Conclusion: My car has wheels.
Figure: the figure of a categorical syllogism is the position of its major, minor and middle
terms.
There are four figures. The major and minor terms have standard positions in the conclusion
which are the same for all figures.
Each figure is distinguished by the placement of the middle term.

quantifie
code subject copula predicate type example
r

universal
A All S are P All humans are mortal.
affirmative

No humans are
E No S are P universal negative
perfect.

particular Some humans are

I Some S are P
affirmative healthy.

are no particular Some humans are not

O Some S P
t negative clever.

2) Conditional Syllogism
CONDITIONAL arguments have major premises that establish what will happen if certain
conditions exist. Conditional arguments are also known as hypothetical arguments. (If A,
then B.) The "If" phrase is called the ANTECEDENT. The "then" phrase is called the
CONSEQUENT.
Conditional syllogisms follow an, "If A is true, then B is true" pattern of logic. They're often
referred to as hypothetical syllogisms because the arguments aren't always valid. Sometimes
they're merely an accepted truth like these examples.
If Tabby is a cat, then she is a mammal. (Major premise)
If Tabby is a mammal, then she is warm-blooded. (Minor premise)
Therefore, if Tabby is a cat, then she is warm-blooded. (Conclusion)

Major Premise: If you do not study, you will not pass.

Minor Premise: Bill did not study
Conclusion: Then Bill did not pass
.

3) Disjunctive Syllogism Disjunctive syllogisms follow an, "Either A or B is true, if A

is false, then B is true" premise. They don't state if a major or minor premise is correct. But
it's understood that one of them is correct. DISJUNCTIVE arguments have major premises
that identify two or more alternatives. (Either A or B)

Tabby is either a cat or a dog. (Major premise – the dichotomy)

Tabby is not a dog. (Minor premise)
 Therefore, Tabby is a cat. (Conclusion)

 This cake is either red velvet or chocolate. Since its not chocolate cake, it must be red
velvet.
o Either Statement: This cake is either red velvet or chocolate.
o False Premise: It's not chocolate.
o Conclusion: Therefore, this cake is red velvet.

EXAMPLES OF FORMAL STRUCTURE

CATEGORICAL DISJUNCTIVE CONDITIONAL

Major Premise All A's are B's Either A or B If A, then B
Minor Premise C is an A Accept A Affirm A
Conclusion C is a B Reject B Affirm B
CATEGORICAL DISJUNCTIVE CONDITIONAL
Major Premise No A's are B's Either A or B If A, then B
Minor Premise C is an A Reject A Deny B
Conclusion C is not a B Accept B Deny A

Rules of Syllogism
There are rules of syllogism mainly apply to categorical syllogism, since that is the only
category that requires three components: the major premise, minor premise and conclusion.
Learn the six rules that ensure you're making a strong and accurate argument.
Rule One: There must be three terms: the major premise, the minor premise and
the conclusion — no more, no less.
Every syllogism must have three and only three terms neither more nor less. This rule can not
be regarded as a rule in the strict sense of the term because the very definition of syllogism
states that a syllogism must have three propositions and three terms. These terms include the
minor term, major term and the middle term. The middle term keeps relationship with the
extremes so that a conclusion is drawn. Similarly, we cannot avoid either the major term or
the minor term. Thus, in a syllogism, it is necessary to have three and only terms.

Cats are mammals. (Major premise)

2. Tabby is a cat. (Minor premise)
3. Therefore, Tabby is a mammal. (Conclusion)
If an argument has less than three terms (i.e. two terms), we cannot call it a syllogism, rather
it is a case of immediate inference.
For example,
Light is essential to guide our steps
Lead is not essential to guide our steps
Therefore, lead is not light.
The major term ‘light’ in the above argument has been used in one sense in the major
premise, but in another sense in the conclusion.
Rule Two: Any terms distributed in the conclusion must be distributed in the
relevant premise.
In a categorical syllogism, if a term is distributed in the conclusion, it must be
distributed in the premise.
This rule states a necessary condition of deductive validity. The conclusion of a valid
deductive argument cannot be more general than the premises; the conclusion cannot
go beyond the premises. The conclusion can only make explicit what is implicitly
present in the premises. Syllogistic arguments, being deductive, must abide by this
condition.
The conclusion of a syllogism has two terms. These are minor term and major term.
Neither the major term nor the minor term should be distributed in the conclusion if it
is not distributed in the premise. Of course, the reverse is not a fallacy. A term which
is distributed in the premise may remain undistributed in the conclusion.

If the minor term is distributed in the conclusion but not distributed in the minor
premise, we commit the fallacy of illicit minor. For example,
All men are rational.
All men are biped.

Therefore, all bipeds are rational.

Here the minor term ‘biped’ (subject term of conclusion) is distributed which is not
distributed in the minor premise (being the predicate of A proposition). So the fallacy
committed in this argument is illicit minor.
Rule Three: Do not use two negative premises.
In a categorical syllogism, no conclusion can be obtained from two negative
premises.
A negative proposition is one in which the predicate is denied of the subject i.e. the
predicate is negatively related with the subject. If both the premises are negative, the
middle term will be negatively related to the extremes and no relation can be
established between them. So a valid conclusion cannot be drawn. If we draw a
conclusion from two negative premises, we commit the fallacy of two negative
premises or fallacy of exclusive premises.
No artists are rich persons.
Some rich persons are not theists.
Therefore, some theists are not artists.
Since both the premises are negative, the conclusion (some theists are not artists) is
not valid and we commit the fallacy of two negative premises or fallacy of exclusive
premises.
Rule Four: If one of the two premises is negative, the conclusion must be
negative.
In a categorical-syllogism, if either premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative.
According to Rule-5 stated above, we cannot draw any valid conclusion from two negative
premises. So, if one premise is negative, the other premise must be affirmative. If one
premise is affirmative and the other premise is negative, then a relation of inclusion will be
asserted between the middle term and one of the extremes in the affirmative premise and the
relation of exclusion will be asserted between the middle term and the other extreme.
Thus, if one extreme is included in the middle term and the other excluded then there can be
the relation of exclusion between the extremes, and they cannot have affirmative relation in
the conclusion. Therefore, the conclusion will be negative. For example,
No poets are scientists.
Some philosophers are poets.
Therefore, some philosophers are not scientists.
This conclusion (negative one) is a valid conclusion. But if we draw any affirmative
conclusion (such as “Some philosophers are scientists”) from the above premises, it would be
a fallacious conclusion. Here, we would have committed the fallacy of drawing an
affirmative conclusion from a negative premise. Similarly, we can prove that if the
conclusion is negative, one of the premises must be negative
Rule Six: From two universal premises, no conclusion may be drawn.

Rule- Five In a categorical syllogism, if both the premises are

affirmative, the conclusion must be affirmative.
In an affirmative proposition, the predicate is affirmed of the subject. In other words, in an
affirmative premise a relation of inclusion is asserted. If both the premises are affirmative, it
is clear that the middle term is affirmatively connected with both the extremes i.e. the minor
term and the major term. Thus it is obvious that the minor term and the major term are
affirmatively related in the conclusion and the conclusion must be an affirmative proposition.

Similarly, the converse also holds good. If the conclusion is affirmative, both the premises
must be affirmative.

All bodily beings are corporeal (Affirmative)

Plants are bodily beings. (Affirmative)

Therefore, Plants are corporeal. (Affirmative)
Rule-Six
In a categorical syllogism, if both the premises are particular, no
conclusion follows.
As we know, there are two types of particular propositions. These are I and O propositions. If
both the premises are particular, then the possible
So no conclusion follows from any of the combinations when both the premises are
particular. In other words, in a categorical syllogism at least one of the premises must be
universal.

Rule-Seven
In a categorical syllogism, if one premise is particular, the conclusion will
be particular.
If one premise is particular, the other premise will be universal because according to Rule 8,
stated above, from two particular premises no conclusion follows. We have also seen that
from two negative premises no conclusion can be drawn (See Rule 5 stated above). So we get
the following possible combinations.

Rule-Eight
In a categorical syllogism, if the major premise is particular and the minor premise is
negative then no conclusion follows.
If the minor premise is negative, the conclusion becomes negative (Rule 6) and the major
premise is bound to be affirmative (Rule 5). Thus the major premise is a particular
affirmative (T) proposition. Since the conclusion is negative its predicate (major term) will be
distributed in the conclusion which is not distributed in the major premise. So the fallacy of
illicit major will be committed.
Therefore, in a syllogism when the major premise is particular and minor premise is negative,
no conclusion can be drawn.