LOGIC ⁃ Mu + Pp, Mu - Su, Ergo, Su - Pu

TEN RULES OF CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM Fallacy of the Illicit Process of the Minor
Term?
1. A syllogism must contain only 3 terms: ⁃ results if the subject is particular in the
the major, the minor and the middle term. 
 premise and consequently becomes universal in
2. The Middle Term should not appear in the conclusion.
the conclusion. 
 ⁃ Mu + Pu, Mu - Sp, Ergo, Su - Pu
3. The quantities of both the Major and the
Minor Terms should not be universal in the Fallacy of Undistributed Middle Term?
conclusion if they are particular in the premises. ⁃ A violation of rule 4 is called Fallacy Of

 undistributed middle term, which usually
4. The quantity of the middle term must be happens if the middle term has a particular
universal at least once. 
 quantity in both premises.
5. The conclusion must be affirmative if ⁃ Pu + Mp, Mp + Sp, Ergo, Sp + Pp
both premises are affirmative. 

6. The conclusion must be negative if one Fallacy of Negative Conclusion
of the premises is negative. 
 ⁃ A violation of rule 5 is called fallacy of
7. The two premises must not be negative negative conclusion. It is a syllogistic fallacy
or not equivalently affirmative. 
 committed when a categorical syllogism has a
8. One premise must be universal. 
 negative conclusion yet both premises are
9. The conclusion should be particular if affirmative
one premise is. 
 ⁃ Mu + Pp , Mp + Sp, Ergo, SP - Pu

10.The subject term of the premise must be Fallacy of Affirmative Conclusion?
asserted in the conclusion. ⁃ In syllogism, the mixed qualities of
premises result in the negative form of
————————————— conclusion. If this simple rule will not be followed
WHAT IS: it will lead to a violation called Fallacy of
Affirmative Conclusion
Fallacy of 4 Terms? ⁃ Mu + Pp, Mp - Su, Ergo, Sp + Pp

⁃ If within the same argument one of the 3 Fallacy of Exclusive Negative Premises?
terms or all the 3 terms manifested an alteration ⁃ Negative conclusion from affirmative
or change in meaning then it will result to an premises, in which a syllogism is invalid
outright violation of the first rule because the conclusion is negative yet the
⁃ M1 + P3, S4 + M2 Ergo, S + P premises are affirmative. Fallacy of exclusive
⁃ is the formal fallacy that occurs when a premises, in which a syllogism is invalid
syllogism as four (or more) terms rather than the because both premises are negative
requisite three, rendering it invalid.
 ⁃ Mu - Pu, Mu - Su, Ergo, Su - Pu 

Fallacy of 6 Terms? Fallacy of Exclusive Particular Premises.
⁃ P1 + M2, M3 + S4 Ergo, S5 + P6 ⁃ A violation to rule 8 is called Fallacy of
Fallacy of 6 Terms Exclusive Particular Premises. This happens
when both the premises are quantitatively
Fallacy of the Middle Term in the particular.
Conclusion? 
 ⁃ Mp + Pp, Sp + Mp, Ergo, Sp + Pp

⁃ If in the process its presence is seen in Fallacy of Distributed Distributed (or
the conclusion then there is a problem resulting Universal) Conclusion.
to a violation ⁃ Naturally, if one of the premises is
⁃ Mu + Pp , Sp + Mp, Ergo, Sp + Mp particular then the conclusion should also be
particular. But if one of the premises is particular
Fallacy of the Illicit Process of the Major and the conclusion becomes universal then it
Term? follows that one of the quantities of the two
⁃ happens if the predicate term is terms either the major or the minor has been
universal in the conclusion whereas, it is extended. This will result to a Fallacy of
particular in the Premise.
Distributed Distributed (or Universal)
Conclusion. HYPOTHETICAL SYLLOGISM
⁃ Mu + Pp, Mp + Sp, Ergo, Su + Pp
 ⁃ is a syllogism which contains a major
Fallacy of Existential Import. premise that is hypothetical proposition.
⁃ A violation of rule 10 is called Fallacy of
Existential Import.The existential fallacy is an CONDITIONAL SYLLOGISM
invalid inference from premisses which are not ⁃ Normally characterized as having a
existential to a conclusion which is existential. conditional major premise. It’s minor premise
⁃ Mu + Pp , Mp + Sp, Ergo, ?p + Pp and its conclusion are formulated following the
form of categorical propositions.
Figures
⁃ Refer to the actual arrangement of the RULES OF CONDITIONAL SYLLOGISM
middle terms in syllogism. ⁃ MODUS PONENS or POSITING MODE
(Posit the antecedent in the minor premise and
First Figure posit the consequent in the conclusion)
⁃ In syllogism, the middle term is the ⁃ MODUS POLLENS or SUBLATING
subject of the major premise and the predicate MODE (Sublate the consequent in the minor
of the minor premise. premise and sublate the antecedent in the
conclusion)
Second Figure
⁃ In syllogism, the middle term is the CONJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
predicate of the major and the minor premises. ⁃ A hypothetical syllogism wherein the
In short, the middle term is the PRE- PRE. major premise is a conjunctive proposition,
whose minor premise posits one member of the
Third Figure major premise and whose conclusion sublates
⁃ In this figure, the middle term is the the other member of the major premise.
subject of the major premise and of the minor
premise. In short, the middle term is the SUB- RULE OF CONJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
SUB. ⁃ PONENDO TOLLENS (Posit one
member of the major premise in the minor
Fourth Figure premise and sublate the other member in the
⁃ In this figure, the middle term is the conclusion)
predicate of the major premise and the subject
of the minor premise. In other words, the middle DISJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
term is the PRE-SUB. ⁃ A hypothetical syllogism in which the
Major Premise is a disjunctive proposition
The Moods of the Categorical Syllogism consisting of alternatives or disjuncts. The minor
⁃ By the mood of syllogism, we mean the premise posits or sublates one of the members
proper arrangement of the premises according of the major premise and whose conclusion
to quality and quantity (A, E, I, O). The mood posits or sublates the other member or members
tells us whether the premises are to be universal of the major premise.
or particular, affirmative or negative. ⁃ Due to the special characteristic of
presenting various alternatives, logicians
16 combinations of quantity and quality of sometimes considered disjunctive syllogism as
the premises ALTERNATIVE SYLLOGISM.
⁃ Major Premise: AAAAEEEEIIIIOOOO
⁃ Minor Premise: AEIOAEIOAEIOAEIO RULES OF DISJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISM
⁃ If the minor premise posits one or more
The Valid Moods in the Four Figures members of the major premise, the conclusion
⁃ First Figure: AAA, EAE, AII, EIO must sublate the other remaining member/s
(PONENDO TOLLENS)
⁃ Second Figure: EAE, AEE, EIO, AOO
⁃ Third Figure: AAI, EAO, IAI, AII, OAO, ⁃ If the minor premise sublates one or
EIO more members of the major premise then the
⁃ Fourth Figure: AAI, AEE, IAI, EAO, EIO
conclusion must posit the remaining member/s DILEMMA
of the major premise. 
 ⁃ Another form of argument where a
NOTE: person is torn between two choices.
⁃ That the rules of conditional syllogism
say that, “if the antecedent is true provided that RULES OF DILEMMA
the sequence is valid, the consequent is also ⁃ As a matter of procedure, a dilemma is
true” and “if the antecedent is false provided that subject to the general rules of conditional
the sequence is valid the consequent is also syllogism. That is, if the minor premise posits the
false.” Also, if the consequent is false, as a antecedent then the conclusion must also posit
result, the antecedent is also false. the consequent. On the other hand, if the minor
⁃ It is to be remembered that conjunctive premise sublates the consequent then the
proposition maintains the idea that “A thing conclusion must sublate the antecedent.
cannot be and not be at the same time.” In
connection to the proposition, there is no way EPICHIREME
that a proposition is true and false at the same ⁃ Evidence is incorporated to one or both
time. of the premise.
⁃ In this form, the evidences are
——————— manifested using the causal clauses namely
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM: “since,” “for,” “because,” and others.

ENTHYMEME ————
⁃ One of the premises or the conclusion is INFORMAL FALLACY
omitted. 3 orders:
1. FIRST ORDER - if the major premise is Nature of Fallacy
omitted ⁃ Taken from the Latin word “fallo” which
2. SECOND ORDER - if the minor premise means “I deceive
is omitted. ⁃ Fallacy is an argument whose main
3. THIRD ORDER - if the conclusion is intention is to deceive people. It is sometimes
omitted. 
 regarded as an argument that seems to be
POLYSYLLOGISM correct but actually is not. Deception comes in
⁃ Consisting of a series of syllogisms so when one thinks that the argument looks valid or
arranged that the conclusion of the one is the true.
premise of the other.
Kinds of Fallacy
SORITES ⁃ Fallacy of Ambiguity - consists of using
⁃ Regarded by logicians as a form of expressions in different arguments as though
polysyllogism consisting of a series of syllogisms their meanings are related in the same way.
of which the conclusions except for the last are ⁃ Non-Sequential Fallacy - related to the
omitted. improper sequence of the premises which make
⁃ Classifications: the conclusions totally insignificant to the
⁃ CATEGORICAL SORITES are further outcome of the argument.
classified as either Aristotelian, which is
sometimes considered as PROGRESSIVE A. Fallacy of Ambiguity
SORITES, or Goclenian, which is sometimes EQUIVOCATION
considered as REGRESSIVE SORITES. ⁃ A fallacy consisting of using a word that
*ARISTOTELIAN SORITES has different meanings in the same argument
⁃ The predicate of each premise is the AMPHIBOLY
subject of the conclusion as shown in the ⁃ A fallacy expressed in using a statement
following schematic, whose meaning is ambiguous. Thus, exposing
*GOCLENIAN SORITES the statement to various interpretations
⁃ The same premises are shown but their COMPOSITION
order is inverted. It is described using the ⁃ A fallacy of considering words or
schematic presentation: statements as a whole when they should be
considered separately. In other words, it is an
error of stating that what is true of the part is ⁃ A fallacy which maintains that a
also true of the whole. statement is false because it has not been
DIVISION proven to be true or true because it has not
⁃ A fallacy of considering words or been proven to be false.
statements separately when they should have
been considered as a whole. *ACCIDENT
FALSE ANALOGY ⁃ A fallacy that confuses anyone from
⁃ A fallacy of comparing 2 things known to determining that what is true in general is also
be similar in one or more features and suggests true to some specific cases.
that they will be similar in other areas as well. 
*FALSE CAUSE
⁃ Fallacy that implies that what is not the
B. Non-Sequential Fallacy true cause is assumed to be the cause of
something.
*ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM (ATTACK 
*ILLICIT GENERALIZATION
AGAINST THE PERSON)
⁃ A fallacy which makes false
⁃ A fallacy that focuses on the personality generalization based on insufficient evidence
of the man rather than the merit of his argument.

*ARGUMENT FROM SILENCE
3 forms:
1. Abusive - attacks the person instead of ⁃ A fallacy which speaks that a fact is not
proving or disproving the issue. true or did not occur because no recorded
2. CIRCUMSTANTIAL - focuses on the document will attest to such a fact
circumstances that the person, who makes the 
*NON-SEQUITUR (IT DOES NOT FOLLOW)
assertion, is in and not on the true issue. ⁃ A fallacy of stating a given fact that will
3. TU QUOQUE (YOU, TOO) - argument inevitably result to a particular consequence.
that a person formulates as an attempt to throw
back the accusation hurled against him by the
accuser with the purpose of avoiding the issue. 
 —————————
*ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUM (APPEAL TO
THE PEOPLE) INDUCTION
⁃ Fallacy that tries to ignore the issue in
favor of an appeal for popular sympathy. Nature

*ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAM A mental process whereby the mind proceeds
from specific to general.
(APPEAL TO PITY)
⁃ Fallacy of ignoring the issue by Probability
appealing for humanitarian consideration. The hear and soul of inductive argument is

*ARGUMENTUM AD VERACUNDIAM found in the merit of its probability.
(APPEAL TO INAPPROPRIATE AUTHORITY)
⁃ Fallacy emerges when the appeal is Kinds of Induction
made to certain figure with no authoritative claim (1) RATIONAL - By which the mind proceeds
on the issue at hand. from them resulting from a universal assertion.
This universal assertion is connected to the
*ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM (APPEAL TO previous assertions made and gives no absolute
THE STICK) certainty to its formulation.
⁃ Fallacy of accepting an argument due to (2) INTELLECTIVE - By which the mind
some physical or moral pressure. proceeds from the consideration of particular
instances and through a careful analysis the
*PETITIO PRINCIPII (BEGGING THE truth of the universal is formulated.
QUESTION) (3) ARGUMENT BY ANALOGY - Solely based
⁃ A fallacy in which something which is on probability.
still to be proven is already assumed to be true. Constitute to the essential assertion of what is
true of one may also be true of another.
*ARGUMENTUM AD IGNORATIAM (APPEAL
TO IGNORANCE)
Limitations of Argument by Analogy
⁃ First, it does not represent an absolute 1. The Method of Agreement - If two or more
certitude of a certain conclusion. instances of the phenomenon under
⁃ Second, since it is based on logical truth investigation have only one circumstance in
or it is not validly deduced, it will likely lead us common, the circumstance in which alone all the
into error, if such will not be employed in instances agree is the cause of effect of the
conscientious manner. given phenomenon (event, occurrence,
Judging the Strength of Argument by happening).
Analogy 2. The Method of Difference - If an instance in
Mill’s Scientific Inductive Methods which the phenomenon under investigation
Strength of Argument by Analogy occurs, and in an instance in which it does not
occur, has every circumstance in common
————— save/except one, that one occurring only in the
The Logical Postulates or Foundations of former, the circumstance in which alone the two
Induction instances differ, is the effect, or the cause, or an
⁃ A postulate is necessary assumption; it indispensable part of the cause, of the
is a presupposition that must be taken for phenomenon.
granted in order to explain some natural 3. The Joint Method of Agreement and
phenomenon. Difference - If 2 or more instances, in which the
phenomenon occurs, have only 1 circumstance
⁃ 2 kinds: A. Formal principles
in common, while 2 or more instances in which it
(fundamental laws of logic), B. Material
does not occur have nothing in common except
principles (observation, experiment, hypothesis,
the absence of that circumstance, the
verification, and application)
circumstance in which alone all the instances
differ is the effect, or the cause, or an
A. Formal Principles
indispensable part of the cause of the
1. The Principle of Identity - A thing is what
phenomenon.
it is. It cannot be otherwise. Everything is
4. The Method of Concomitant Variations -
identical with itself. Whatever is, is; whatever is
Whatever phenomenon varies in any manner
not, is not.
whenever another phenomenon varies in some
2. The Principle of Contradiction - A thing
particular manner is either the cause or an effect
cannot be and not be under the same respects
of the phenomenon or is connected with it
and circumstances at the same time.
through some fact of causation.
3. The Principle of Excluded Middle - A
5. The Method of Residues (Process of
thing either is or is not. Everything must either
Elimination) - Subduct from any phenomenon
be or not be. Either you exist or you do not exist.
such parts as is known by previous inductions to
4. ThePrinciple of Sufficient Reason-
be the effect of certain antecedents, and the
Everything must have a sufficient reason to be
residue of the phenomenon is the effect of the
what it is in its existence and being.
remaining antecedents.
5. The Principle of the Uniformity of Nature
- The same causes, acting under similar
—————————
circumstances, produce similar results.
APPLIED LOGIC
6. The Principle of Causality - Whatever
In Argumentation and Debate
happens has a cause for its being and
existence. Every event has a cause, for every
Rules of Legal Reasoning: (Legal Logic,
effect there must be a cause.
Evangelista and Aquino, p. 125-186)
A. Rules of Collision
B. The Material Principles
B. Rules of Interpretation and Construction 
C.
⁃ Observation
Rules of Judgment 
D. Rules of Procedure 

⁃ Experiment
⁃ Hypothesis (tentative or provisional
explanation of a phenomenon)
⁃ Verification and Application 

The Five Canons or Scientific Methods of
Inductive Inference (John Stuart Mill)