CATEGORICA

L
SYLLOGISMS
STANDARD FORM, MOOD, AND FIGURE
STANDARD FORM
A Categorical Syllogism is a deductive argument (what makes it
deductive?) that always has:

 Three categorical statements

 Three different terms

All A are B
All B are C
All A are C

In all categorical syllogisms, the term shared between the

premises is called the middle term. The predicate of the
conclusion is called the major term, and the subject of the
conclusion is called the minor term.
STANDARD FORM
(CONTINUED)
All A are B
All B are C
All A are C

The major premise is the premise containing the major

term. The minor premise contains the minor term.

So, we can now define ‘Standard Form’:

1)All three statements are standard form categorical
propositions
2)The two occurrences of each term are identical
3)Each term is used in the same sense throughout
4)The major premise is listed first, the minor second,
conclusion last
STANDARD FORM
(CONTINUED)
All B are C
Some A are B
Some A are C

Now we have a Standard Form Categorical

Syllogism

What mood and figure is it?

MOOD AND FIGURE
All B are C
Some A are B
Some A are C

We can tell if this argument is valid or invalid by identifying its

mood and figure. Mood is simple: it is just the letter names of
the propositions in order of appearance:

(A) All B are C

(I) Some A are B
(I) Some A are C

Mood = AII
MOOD AND FIGURE
(CONTINUED)
All B are C
Some A are B
Some A are C

Figure is determined by the arrangement of the appearances

of the middle term

Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4

M P P M M P P M
S M S M M S M S
S P S P S P S P
MOOD AND FIGURE
(CONTINUED)
So our syllogism

All B are C
Some A are B
Some A are C

is AII-1

To determine validity or invalidity we have to look at a list of

valid forms to see if AII-1 appears.
VENN DIAGRAM TECHNIQUE
FOR TESTING SYLLOGISMS
•We have used two-circle Venn diagrams to
represent standard-form categorical
propositions. In order to test a categorical
syllogism by the method of Venn diagrams, one
must first represent both of its premises in one
diagram. That will require drawing three
overlapping circles, for the two premises of a
standard-form syllogism contain three different
terms-minor term, major term, and middle term.
Most descriptions of Venn Diagrams introduce the three
symbols used as follows.
1. An empty circle is used to represent a subject
class or a predicate class and is generally so labeled with an S or
a P. Putting the name of the actual subject or predicate class next
to the circle is preferred. The area inside the circle represents
members of the class in question, if there are any. The area
outside the circle represents all other individuals (the
complementary class) if there are any. Note that the label "things"
is written outside the circle, even though "things," if there are any,
would be inside the circle.
2. Shading or many parallel lines are used to indicate areas which are
known to be empty. I.e., there are no individuals existing in that area.
E.g., the diagram to the right represents the class of ”Idle."
3. The third symbol used is an "X" which represents "at
least one" or "some" individual exists in the area in which it is placed.
The diagram to the right indicates "some thing."
C. Perhaps the most important symbol of all is the blank area
where no marks of any kind are made. If an area is not shaded or has no
"X," then it is not considered empty, but the blank area represents "no
information is known." In other words, a blank area represents the
possibility of something existing in that area, nothing more. It is also
worth noting, that if an "X" is drawn on a line, the "X" represents only the
possibility of being "on either side," but where it is exactly is not known.
II. Given this interpretation, the four standard-form
categorical propositions are diagrammed as
follows.
1. The A form, "All S is P," is shown in the
diagram to the right. Notice that all of the S's are pushed
out, so to speak, into the P class. If S's exist, they must
be inside the P circle since the left-hand Lune of the
diagram is shaded and so is empty.
2. The E form, "No S is P," is shown in the diagram to the
right. Notice that the lens area of the diagram is shaded and
so no individual can exist in this area. The lens area is where
S and P are in common; hence, "No S is P." All S, if there are
any, are in the left-hand lune, and all P, if there are any, are
relegated to the right-hand lune.
3. The I form, "Some S is P," is much more easily seen. The "X"
in the lens, as shown in the diagram to the right, indicates at least
one individual in the S class is also in the P class. Note that the
blank lunes indicate that we do not know whether or not there are
individuals in these areas. In fact, we have no information.
4. The O form, "Some S is not P," is also easily drawn. The S that
is not a P is marked with an "X" in the S-lune. This area is not
within the P circle and so is not a P. It is worth while to note, that
from this diagram we cannot conclude that "Some S is P"
because there is no "X" in the lens area. Thus, studying this
diagram will explain why "Some S is not P" does not entail "Some
S is P.”
Let’s start with this example:
No doctors are professional wrestlers.
All cardiologists are doctors.
 No cardiologists are professional wrestlers.
Since this argument, like all standard-form
categorical syllogisms, has three category-terms (in
this case, “cardiologists,” “professional wrestlers,”
and “doctors”), we need three interlocking circles
rather than two to represent the three categories. The
minor term will go on the top left, the major term
will go on the the top right, and the middle term will
be the bottom circle.
The diagram for our example is as follows:

The first premise states that no doctors are

professional wrestlers. To represent this claim, we
shade that part of the Doctors circle that overlaps
with the Professional wrestlers circle, as follows:
The second premise states that all cardiologists
are doctors. To represent this claim, we shade
that part of the Cardiologists circle that does not
overlap with the Doctors circle:
We now have all the information we need to see
whether the argument is valid. The conclusion
tells us that no cardiologists are professional
wrestlers. This means that the area where the
Cardiologists and Professional wrestlers circles
overlap is shaded, that is, empty. We look at the
diagram to see if the area is shaded, and we see
that it is indeed shaded. That means that the
conclusion is implicitly “contained in” (i.e. follows
logically from) the premises. Thus, the argument
is shown to be valid.
Let’s look at a second example:
All snakes are reptiles.
All reptiles are cold-blooded animals.
 All snakes are cold-blooded animals.
Next, we diagram the first premise. The premise
states that all snakes are reptiles. We represent
this information by shading the area of the
Snakes circle that does not overlap with the
Reptiles circle.
Next, we diagram the second premise. The
second premise states that all reptiles are cold-
blooded animals. We represent this claim by
shading that part of the Reptiles circle that does
not overlap with the Cold-blooded animals circle.
Finally, we look to see if the information
contained in the conclusion is depicted in the
diagram. The conclusion tells us that all snakes
are cold-blooded animals. This means that the
part of the Snakes circle that does not overlap
with the Cold-blooded animals circle should be
completely shaded. Inspection of the diagram
shows that this is not the case. So, the argument
is invalid.
Let’s look at a third example:
Some Baptists are coffee-lovers.
All Baptists are Protestants.
 Some Protestants are coffee-lovers.
Notice that this example includes two “some”
statements. Diagramming “some” statements is a
little trickier than diagramming “all” or “no”
statements. As we have seen, “some” statements
are diagrammed by placing Xs rather than by
shading. Most mistakes in Venn diagramming
involve incorrect placement of an X.
To avoid such mistakes, remember the following
rules:
1. If the argument contains one “all” or “no”
statement, this statement should be diagrammed
first. In other words, always do any necessary
shading before placing an X. If the argument
contains two “all” or “no” statements, either
statement can be done first.
2. When placing an X in the area, if one part of the
area has been shaded, place the X in the unshaded
part. Examples:

x
3. When placing an X in an area, if one part of
the area has not been shaded, place the X
precisely on the line separating the two parts.
Example:

x
Back to the third example:
Some Baptists are coffee-lovers
All Baptists are Protestants.
 Some Protestants are coffee-lovers.
First, we draw and label our three circles:
Next, we need to decide which premise to diagram
first. Should it be the “some” premise or the “all”
premise? Rule one states that we should start
with the “all” premise:
Now we can diagram the first premise, which
states that some Baptists are coffee-lovers. To
represent this claim, we place an X in the area of
the Baptists circle that overlaps with the Coffee-
lovers circle. Part of this area, however, is
shaded. This means that there is nothing in that
area. For that reason, we place the X in the
unshaded portion of the Baptists circle that
overlaps with the Coffee-lovers circle, as follows:
Finally, we inspect the completed diagram to see
if the information contained in the conclusion is
represented in the diagram. The conclusion states
that some Protestants are coffee-lovers. This
means that there should be an X in the area of the
Protestants circle that overlaps with the Coffee-
lovers circle. A glance at the diagram show that
there is an X in this area. Thus, the argument is
valid.
So far, all the categorical syllogisms we have
looked at have been valid. But Venn diagrams
can also show when a categorical syllogism is
invalid. Here is one example:
All painters are artists.
Some magicians are artists.
 Some magicians are painters.
First, we draw and label our three circles:
Since the premise begins with “all” and the
second premise begins with “some,” we diagram
the first premise first. The first premise states
that all painters are artists. To depict this claim,
we shade that part of the Painters circle that does
not overlap with the Artists circle:
Next, we enter the information of the second
premise, the claim that some magicians are
artists. To represent this claim, we place an X in
that portion of the Magicians circle that overlaps
with the Artists circle. That area, however, is
divided into two parts (the areas here marked “1”
and “2”), and we have no information that
warrants placing the X in one of these areas
rather than the other. In such cases, we place the
X precisely on the line between the two sections, as
follows:
The X on the line means that we have no way of
knowing from the information given whether the
magician-who-is-an-artist is also a magician-who-
is-a-painter.
The conclusion states that some magicians are
painters. This means that there should be an X
that is definitely in the area where the Magicians
and Painters overlap. There is an X in the
Magicians circle, but it dangles on the line
between the Artists circle and the Painters circle.
We don’t know whether it is inside or outside the
Painters circle. For that reason, the argument is
invalid.
RULES AND
FALLACIES
CATEGORICAL
SYLLOGISM
A categorical syllogism is a formal deductive argument
consisting of three statements

TERMS:

MIDDLE TERM:
It is a term that occurs in both premises and does not occur
in conclusion.
THREE TERMS

MAJOR TERM:
Major term is the predicate of the conclusion.

MINOR TERM:
Minor term is the subject of the conclusion.

EXAMPLE:

No homework is fun ……… major premise

Some reading is homework……… minor premise
Some reading is not fun………. Conclusion
DISTRIBUTION OF
TERMS:

A categorical term is said to distributed if all individual members of that

category are accounted.

There are four categorical propositions that distribute there terms. A, E

I,O are the standard names for type of statement indicated

STATEMENT TYPE TERM DISTRIBUTED

A: All X are Y subject

E: No X are Y subject, predicate
I: some X are Y none
O: some X are not Y predicate
RULES AND FALLACIES
Valid syllogism conforms to certain rules which if violated, a
specific “Formal Fallacy “ is committed and the syllogism
becomes invalid

RULES:
There are six rules for standard form syllogisms which are
presented follows
RULE NO: 1

RULE:
A valid standard-form categorical syllogism must contain
exactly three terms, each of which is used in the same sense
throughout the argument.

FALLACY:
FALLACY OF FOUR TERMS
EXAMPLE
1. All rare things are expensive things.
All great novels are rare things.
Therefore ,all great novels are expensive things.

This syllogism appears to have only three terms but there are
really four terms, since one of them, the middle term, is
used in different senses in two premises.
2. All dogs are animals,
All cats are mammals,
So all dogs are mammals.
The four terms are: dogs, animals, cats and mammals
RULE NO :2

RULE:
In a valid standard form categorical syllogism the middle
term must be distributed at least once.

FALLACY:
Undistributed middle
RULE NO : 3

All sharks are fish.

All salmon are fish
All salmon are sharks.

In this syllogism the middle term is “fish”. In both premises

“fish” occurs as the predicate of an A proposition and
therefore it is not distributed in either premises. Thus
syllogism commits the fallacy of undistributed middle.
RULE:
If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be
distributed in a premise.

FALLACY:
Illicit major ; illicit minor
All horses are animals
Some dogs are not horses
Some dogs are not animals

In this example there is fallacy of “illicit major.”

All tigers are mammals

All mammals are animals
All animals are tigers

In this example there is fallacy of “illicit minor.”

RULE NO :4

RULE:
In a categorical syllogism, two negative premises are not
allowed

FALLACY:
Exclusive premises
No fish are mammals.
Some dogs are not fish.
Some dogs are not mammals.

This syllogism is invalid because it has two negative

premises and because of that it commit the fallacy of
exclusive premises.
RULE NO:5

RULE:
A negative premise requires a negative conclusion, and a
negative conclusion requires a negative premise.

FALLACY:
Drawing an affirmative conclusion from negative premise or
drawing a negative conclusion from affirmative premises.
All crows are birds
Some wolves are not crows
Some wolves are birds

All triangles are three angled polygon

All three angled polygons are three sided polygons
Some three sided polygons are not triangles

Both are invalid because 1st draws an affirmative conclusion

from a negative premise. And 2nd draws negative conclusion
from affirmative premises
RULE NO :6

RULE:
If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be
particular.

FALLACY:
Existential fallacy.
All mammals are animals
All unicorns are mammals
Some unicorns are animals.

This syllogism is invalid because in this case the conclusion

is EXISTENTIAL i-e Beginning with ‘Some’.