Know the basic structure of syllogisms.

A syllogism has three parts: major premi se, minor premise, and conclusion. Each part is composed of two categorical term s, linked in the form "Some/all A is/are [not] B." Each of the premises has one term in common with the conclusion: the major term in the major premise, which f orms the predicate of the conclusion, and the minor term in the minor premise, w hich forms the subject of the conclusion. The categorical term in common in the premises is called the "middle term". For example: Major premise: All birds are animals. Minor premise: All parrots are birds. Conclusion: All parrots are animals. In this example, "animal" is the major term and predicate of the conclusion, "pa rrot" is the minor term and subject of the conclusion, and "bird" is the middle term. Understand each part is expressed as "Some/all/no A is/are [not] B," with four p ossible variation. The universal affirmative (symbolized as A) is expressed as " all A is/are B," abbreviated as AaB. The universal negative (symbolized as E) is expressed as "no A is/are B," abbreviated as AeB. The particular affirmative (s ymbolized as I) is expressed as "some A is/are B," abbreviated as AiB. The parti cular negative (symbolized as O) is expressed as "some A is/are not B," abbrevia ted as AoB. Think of each term as representing a category. For example, "animal" is a catego ry composed of everything that can be described as an animal. Determine the figure of the syllogism. Depending on whether the middle term serv es as subject or predicate in the premises, a syllogism may be classified as one of four possible figures: First figure: The middle term serves as subject in the major premise and predica te in the minor premise. Thus, first figure take the form: Major premise: M-P..........e.g., "All birds are animals" Minor premise: S-M..........e.g., "All parrots are birds" Conclusion:......S-P..........e.g., "All parrots are animals" Second figure: The middle term serves as predicate in the major premise and pred icate in the minor premise. Thus, first figure take the form: Major premise: P-M..........e.g., "No foxes are birds" Minor premise: S-M..........e.g., "All parrots are birds" Conclusion:......S-P..........e.g., "No parrots are foxes". Third figure: The middle term serves as subject in the major premise and subject in the minor premise. Thus, first figure take the form: Major premise: M-P..........e.g., "All birds are animals" Minor premise: M-S..........e.g., "All birds are mortals" Conclusion:......S-P..........e.g., "Some mortals are animals". Fourth figure: The middle term serves as predicate in the major premise and subj ect in the minor premise. Thus, first figure take the form: Major premise: P-M..........e.g., "No birds are cows" Minor premise: M-S..........e.g., "All cows are animals" Conclusion:......S-P..........e.g., "Some animals are not birds".

Determine whether a given syllogism is valid: by checking to see if it fits into one of the valid forms of syllogism for the given figure. A syllogism is valid if and only if the conclusion necessarily follows the premises, i.e., if the pre mises are true, the conclusion must be true. Although there are 256 possible for ms (4 possible variations (a, e, i, o) for each part, three parts (major premise , minor premise, conclusion), and four figures, so 4*4*4*4=256) of syllogism, on ly 19 of them are valid. The valid forms for each figure is given below, with th eir mnemonic names (each containing three vowels specifying the form of the part (a, e, i, o) in order of major premise, minor premise, conclusion): First figure has 4 valid forms: Barbara, Celarent, Darii, Ferio Barbara (AAA): for example, All birds are animals. All parrots are birds. All parrots are animals. Celarent (EAE): for example, No birds are foxes. All parrots are birds. No parrots are foxes. Darii (AII): for example, All dogs are animals. Some mammals are dogs. Some mammals are animals. Ferio (EIO): for example, No dogs are birds. Some mammals are dogs. Some mammals are not birds. Second figure has 4 valid forms: Cesare, Camestres, Festino, Baroco Cesare (EAE): for example, No foxes are birds. All parrots are birds. No parrots are foxes. Camestres (AEE): for example, All foxes are animals. No trees are animals. No trees are foxes. Festino (EIO): for example, No restaurant food is healthy. Some recipes are healthy. Some recipes are not restaurant foods. Baroco (AOO): for example, All liars are evil-doers. Some doctors are not evil-doers. Some doctors are not liars. Third figure has 6 valid forms: *Darapti, Disamis, Datisi, Felapton, Bocardo, Fe rison Darapti (AAI): for example, All men are fallible. All men are animals. Some animals are fallible. Disamis (IAI): for example, Some books are precious. All books are perishable. Some perishable things are precious. Datisi (AII): for example, All books are imperfect. Some books are informative.

Some informative things are imperfect. Felapton (EAO): for example, No snakes are good to eat. All snakes are animals. Some animals are not good to eat. Bocardo (OAO): for example, Some websites are not helpful. All websites are internet resources. Some internet resources are not helpful. Ferison (EIO): for example, No lepers are allowed to enter the church. All lepers are human. Some humans are not allowed to enter the church. Fourth figure has 5 valid forms: Bramantip, Camenes, Dimaris, Fesapo, Fresison Bramantip (AAI): for example, All pigs are unclean. All unclean things are best avoided. Some things that are best avoided are pigs. Camenes (AEE): for example, All trees are plants. No plants are birds. No birds are trees. Dimaris (IAI): for example, Some evil doers are lawyers. All lawyers are human. Some humans are evil doers. Fesapo (EAO): for example, No meals are free. All free things are desirable. Some desirable things are not meals. Fresison (EIO): for example, No dogs are birds. Some birds are pets. Some pets are not dogs. Rules and Fallacies for Categorical Syllogisms Hurley, Section 5.3

Rule 1: The middle term must be distributed at least once. Fallacy: Undistributed middle Example:

All sharks are fish All salmon are fish All salmon are sharks

Justification: The middle term is what connects the major and the minor term. If the middle term is never distributed, then the major and minor terms might be r

elated to different parts of the M class, thus giving no common ground to relate S and P.

Rule 2: If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise. Fallacy: Illicit major; illicit minor Examples:

And: All horses are animals Some dogs are not horses Some dogs are not animals

All tigers are mammals All mammals are animals All animals are tigers

Justification: When a term is distributed in the conclusion, let s say that P is d istributed, then that term is saying something about every member of the P class . If that same term is NOT distributed in the major premise, then the major prem ise is saying something about only some members of the P class. Remember that th e minor premise says nothing about the P class. Therefore, the conclusion contai ns information that is not contained in the premises, making the argument invali d.

Rule 3: Two negative premises are not allowed. Fallacy: Exclusive premises Example:

No fish are mammals Some dogs are not fish Some dogs are not mammals

Justification: If the premises are both negative, then the relationship between S and P is denied. The conclusion cannot, therefore, say anything in a positive fashion. That information goes beyond what is contained in the premises.

Rule 4: A negative premise requires a negative conclusion, and a negative conclu sion requires a negative premise. (Alternate rendering: Any syllogism having exa ctly one negative statement is invalid.) Fallacy: Drawing an affirmative conclusion from a negative premise, or drawing a negative conclusion from an affirmative premise. Example:

All crows are birds Some wolves are not crows Some wolves are birds Justification: Two directions, here. Take a positive conclusion from one negativ e premise. The conclusion states that the S class is either wholly or partially contained in the P class. The only way that this can happen is if the S class is either partially or fully contained in the M class (remember, the middle term r elates the two) and the M class fully contained in the P class. Negative stateme nts cannot establish this relationship, so a valid conclusion cannot follow. Take a negative conclusion. It asserts that the S class is separated in whole or in part from the P class. If both premises are affirmative, no separation can b e established, only connections. Thus, a negative conclusion cannot follow from positive premises. Note: These first four rules working together indicate that any syllogism with t wo particular premises is invalid.

Rule 5: If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. Fallacy: Existential fallacy Example:

All mammals are animals All tigers are mammals Some tigers are animals Justification: On the Boolean model, Universal statements make no claims about e xistence while particular ones do. Thus, if the syllogism has universal premises , they necessarily say nothing about existence. Yet if the conclusion is particu lar, then it does say something about existence. In which case, the conclusion c ontains more information than the premises do, thereby making it invalid.