Reasoning and

Syllogism
PHL 2/102: Logic
Reasoning
• By way of inference, the intellect determines a new
truth based on the previously known truths
1) Immediate Inference – passing directly from a single premise
to a conclusion
Example: Some mammals are dogs  Some dogs are mammals.

2) Mediate Inference – based on at least two propositions, it

employs a third term
Example: All dogs are animals.
No plants are animals.
Therefore, no plants are dogs.
Argument
• A group of statements, one or more of which (premise) are
claimed to provide support for, or reasons to believe, one of the
others (conclusion)
1) Premise – statements that set forth the reasons or evidence
Premise indicators: inasmuch as, follows from, is implied by,
because, can be shown by, for the reason that, for, due to,
is deduced from, is shown by, is proved by, assuming that
2) Conclusion – statement that the evidence is claimed to
support or imply
Conclusion indicators: therefore, shows that, entails that,
ergo, as a result, it follows that, thus, implies that, proves that,
hence, consequently, then, allows us to infer that,
demonstrates that, so
Kinds of Reasoning
1) Deductive Argument – an argument incorporating the
claim that is IMPOSSIBLE for the conclusion to be false
given that the premises are true. Deductive arguments are
those that involve necessary reasoning
a) Categorical syllogism – syllogism in which each statement
begins with one of the words “all,” “no,” or “some”
b) Hypothetical syllogism – syllogism having a conditional
(“if…then”) statement for one or both of its premises
c) Disjunctive syllogism – syllogism having a disjunctive
(“either…or”) statement for one or both of its premises
Kinds of Reasoning
2) Inductive Argument – an argument incorporating the
claim that it is IMPROBABLE that the conclusion be false
given that the premises are true. Inductive arguments
involve probabilistic reasoning
a) Prediction – an argument that proceeds from our knowledge
of the past to a claim about the future
b) Argument from analogy – an argument that depends on the
existence of an analogy or similarity between two things or
states of affairs.
c) Generalization – an argument that proceeds from the
knowledge of a selected sample to some claim about the
whole group.
Syllogistic Arguments
• An argument composed of two premises and one
conclusion; the conclusion must always follow from the
premises (logical connected)
1) Categorical syllogism – composed of categorical
propositions. It contains 3 terms: major, minor and middle
terms
Example: No painters are sculptors.
Some sculptors are artists.
Therefore, some artists are not painters.
2) Hypothetical syllogism – composed of hypothetical
syllogism. The terms are not identified as major, minor or
middle terms
Example: If it rains, then the streets are wet.
But the streets are not wet.
Therefore, it did not rain.
Reasoning and Syllogism

Categorical Syllogisms
Categorical Syllogism
• composed of major premise, minor premise and conclusion.
The conclusion expresses agreement or disagreement
between the two main terms in the premises
STANDARD FORM OF CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISMS
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 the
argument.
4) The major premise is listed first, the minor premise second,
and the conclusion last.
Categorical Syllogism
• Major term – appears as the predicate in the conclusion
• Minor term – appears as the subject in the conclusion
• Middle term – does not appear in the conclusion
TERM SYMBOL QUALITY SYMBOL QUANTITY SYMBOL

Major P Affirmative + Universal u

Term
Minor S Negative - Particular p
Term
Middle M
Term
All poems are uplifting. A: Mu + Pp
Some songs are poems. I: Sp + Mp
Therefore, some songs are uplifting. I: Sp + Pp

No abortionists are pro-life E: Pu - Mu

Some pro-life persons are Catholics I: Mp + Sp
Therefore, some Catholics are not abortionists O: Sp - Pu

Some mammals are dogs. I: Mp + Pp

All mammals are animals. A: Mu + Sp
Therefore, some animals are dogs I: Sp + Pp
Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogisms
Rule 1: There must only be 3 terms in the syllogism
a) Fallacy: Fallacy of Four-term construction
Example: All lawyers are good liars S + P.
Some politicians are good actors. M + Q.
Some politicians are lawyers. M + S.

b) Fallacy: Fallacy of equivocation

Example: All fathers have children
Pope Francis is a father.
Pope Francis has children.
Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogisms
Rule 2: If the term is distributed in the conclusion, then it
must distributed in the premise

a) Fallacy: Fallacy of Illicit major term

Example: All lawyers are liars. Mu + Pp
Some politicians are not lawyers. Sp - Mu
Some politicians are not liars Sp – Pu

b) Fallacy: Fallacy of illicit minor term

Example: No lawyers are liars. Mu - Pu
All lawyers are politicians. Mu + Sp
No politicians are liars. Su - Pu
Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogisms
Rule 3: The middle term must not appear in the
conclusion
a) Fallacy: Fallacy of misplaced middle term

Example: No lawyers are liars Pu - Mu

Some politicians are liars. Sp + Mp
Some liars are not lawyers. Mp - Pu
Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogisms
Rule 4: The middle term must be distributed at least once.
a) Fallacy: Fallacy of undistributed middle term

Example: All lawyers are liars Pu + Mp

Some liars are not politicians. Mp - Su
Some politicians are not lawyers. Sp - Pu
Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogisms
Rule 5: Only an affirmative conclusion can be drawn
from two affirmative premises.
a) Fallacy: Fallacy of negative conclusion drawn from
affirmative premises

Example: All lawyers are liars. Mu + Pp

Some politicians are lawyers. Sp + Mp
Some politicians are not liars. Sp - Pp
Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogisms
Rule 6: No conclusion can be drawn from two negative
premises (no common ground)
a) Fallacy: Fallacy of two negative premises

Example: No lawyers are liars. Pu - Mu

All liars are not politicians. Mu - Su
All politicians are liars Su - Pu
Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogisms
Rule 7: No valid conclusion can be derived from two
particular premises
a) Fallacy: Fallacy of double particular premises

Example: Some lawyers are liars. Mp + Pp

Some actors are not lawyers. Sp - Mp
Some actors are not liars. Sp - Pu
Eight Laws of Categorical Syllogisms
Rule 8: The conclusion always follows the weaker
premise
a) Fallacy: Fallacy of stronger conclusion than the
premises

Example: No lawyer is a liar. Mu - Pu

Some actors are lawyers. Sp + Mp
All actors are not liars. Su - Pu
Reasoning and Syllogism

Moods and Figures of

Categorical Syllogisms
Figures of the Syllogism
FIGURE –arrangement of the
syllogism based on the position
of the middle term in the FIG. 1 FIG. 2 FIG. 3 FIG. 4
premises. The middle term may
be: MP PM MP PM
1) Subject of the major premise SM SM MS MS
2) Predicate of the major SP SP SP SP
premise
3) Subject of the minor premise;
or
4) Predicate of the minor
premise
Figures of the Syllogism
1) Figure 1 – The middle term is the subject of the major
premise and the predicate of the minor premise
Rule: The major premise must be universal; the minor premise
must be affirmative

2) Figure 2 – The middle term is the predicate of both

premises
Rule: One of the premises must be negative; the major premise
must be universal
Figures of the Syllogism
3) Figure 3 – The middle term is the subject of both premises
Rule: The minor premise must be affirmative; the conclusion
must be particular

4) Figure 4 – The middle term is the predicate of the major

premise and the subject of the minor premise
Rule: If the major premise is affirmative, the minor premise must
be universal. If the minor premise is affirmative, the conclusion
must be particular
Mood of the Syllogism
MOOD – pattern of syllogism based on the type of
propositions that composed the syllogism (A, E, I, O).
There are more than 256 different forms of categorical
syllogisms but there are only 19 valid moods in all figures
Moods of the Syllogism
Figure 1 Figure 2
1) Barbara (AAA) 1) Cesare (EAE)
2) Celarent (EAE) 2) Camestres (AEE)
3) Darii (AII) 3) Festino (EIO)
4) Ferio (EIO) 4) Baroco (AOO)
Moods of the Syllogism
Figure 3 Figure 4
1) Darapti (AAI) 1) Bramantip (AAI)
2) Disamis (IAI) 2) Camenes (AEE)
3) Datisi (AII) 3) Dimaris (IAI)
4) Felapton (EAO) 4) Fesapo (EAO)
5) Ferison (EIO) 5) Fresison (EIO)
6) Bocardo (OAO)
Reduction
• Expressing in the First Figure those moods which are
valid in other figures
• First Figure – perfect figure (Barbara, Celarent, Darii,
Ferio)
• Barbara – perfect mood
Steps in Reduction
1. Memorize the mnemonic of each mood and its figure.
2. The moods in Figures 2, 3 and 4 must be reduced to Figure 1
according to the first letter of their names (B, C, D, F). Example:
Bramantip  Barbara
3. The other consonants (s, p, m, c) in the mood represent the
logical process that must be performed in reducing the
syllogism to the Figure 1
Reducing to Figure 1
1. S (Simple conversion) – The proposition followed by
letter S must be converted simply.
 HOW: Switch S and P without changing quality or quantity

Example: Fig. 3 DAtIsI) Fig. 1 (DArII)

All A are B. All A are B.
Some A are C.  Some C are A.
Some C are B. Some C are B.
Fig. 2 CEsArE Fig. 1 CElArEnt
No A are B. No B are A.
All C are B.  All C are B.
No C are A. No C are A.
Reducing to Figure 1
2. P (Accidental Conversion) – The proposition followed
by the letter P must be converted accidentally
 HOW: Switch S and P; and change the quantity but not
quality
Example: Fig. 3 FElAptOn Fig. 1 FErIO
No A are B. No A are B.
All A are C.  Some C are A.
Some C are not B. Some C are not B.

Fig. 4 FEsApO Fig. 1 FErIO

No B are A. No A are B.
All A are C.  Some C are A.
Some C are not B. Some C are not B.
Reducing to Figure 1
3. M (Mutation) – The two premises must be
interchanged
 HOW: The major and minor premises must switch places.
Example: Fig. 4 CAmEnEs Fig. 1 CElArEnt
All B are A. No A are C.
No A are C.  All B are A.
No C are B. No B are C.
Fig. 4 BrAmAntIp Fig. 1 BArbArA
All A are B. All B are C.
All B are C.  All A are B.
Some C are A All A are C.
Reducing to Figure 1
4. C (Contradiction) – The proposition followed by C must
be expressed in contradiction; can only be found in
Bocardo and Baroco
 HOW: Contradict O propositions and then switch their
positions.

Example: Fig. 2 BArOcO Fig. 1 BArbArA

All A are B. All A are B.
Some C are not B.  All C are A.
Some C are not A. All C are B.
Fig. 3 BOcArdO Fig. 1 BArbArA
Some A are not B. All C are B.
All A are C.  All A are C.
Some C are not B. All A are B.