Legal Technique and Logic

Logic - the study of the methods and principles

used to distinguish correct from incorrect
reasoning.
Propositions - building blocks of our reasoning.
- asserts that something is the case or it asserts
that something is not.
Sentence
Inference - process by which one proposition is
arrived at and affirmed on the basis of some
other proposition or propositions.
Argument - refers strictly to any group of
propositions of which one is claimed to follow
from the others, which are regarded as providing
support for the truth of that one. For every
possible inference there is a corresponding
argument.
Premises of the Argument propositions
which are affirmed as providing support
for the conclusion.

Conclusion of an Argument - proposition that is

affirmed on the basis of the other propositions of
the argument.
Premise indicators since, because, for, as,
follows from.. etc
Conclusion indicators therefore, this, for this
reason, so, hence.. etc.
Rhetorical question - utterance used to make a
statement, but which, because it is in
interrogative form and is therefore neither true
nor false, does not literally assert anything.
Enthymeme - argument that is stated
incompletely, the unstated part of it being taken
for granted.
Deductive argument - makes the claim that its
conclusion is supported by its premises
conclusively.

- valid when it succeeds in linking, with logical

necessity, the conclusion to its premises. Its
validity refers to the relation between its
propositionsbetween the set of propositions
that serve as the premises and the one
proposition that serves as the conclusion of
that argument.
Validity - characteristic of any deductive
argument whose premises, if they were all true,
would provide conclusive grounds for the truth
of its conclusion. Such an argument is said to be
valid. Validity is a formal characteristic; it
applies only to arguments, as distinguished from
truth, which applies to propositions.
Inductive argument - One of the two major types
of argument traditionally distinguished, the other
being the deductive argument. An inductive
argument claims that its premises give only
some degree of probability, but not certainty, to
its conclusion.
Truth - attribute of those propositions that assert
what really is the case.
Techniques for Analysis:
1. Paraphrasing most useful technique
for analysis. We paraphrase an
argument by setting forth its
propositions in clear language
and in logical order.
2. Diagramming - representing the
structure
of
an
argument
graphically

Retrograde analysis - reasoning that seeks to

explain how things must have developed from
what went before.
Definiendum - In any definition, the word or
symbol being defined.
Definiens - In any definition, a symbol or group
of symbols that is said to have the same meaning
as the definiendum.

Stipulative definition - definition in which a new

symbol is introduced to which some meaning is
arbitrarily assigned; as opposed to a lexical
definition
-

cannot be correct or incorrect.

Lexical definition - definition that reports the

meaning that the definiendum already has.
-

can be true or false.

Precising definition - definition devised to

eliminate ambiguity or vagueness by delineating
a concept more sharply.
Theoretical definition - definition that
encapsulates an understanding of the theory in
which that term is a key element.
Persuasive definition- formulated and used to
resolve a dispute by influencing attitudes or
stirring emotions, often relying upon the use of
emotive language.
Denotative definition identifies the extension
of a term, by (for example) listing the members
of the class of objects to which the term refers.
Fallacy - A type of argument that seems to be
correct, but contains a mistake in reasoning.
Classifications of Fallacies:
Fallacies of relevance - are the most numerous
and the most frequently encountered. In these
fallacies, the premises of the argument are
simply not relevant to the conclusion. However,
because they are made to appear to be relevant,
they may deceive. We will distinguish and
discuss:

R3: The red herring - A fallacy in which

attention is deliberately deflected away from the
issue under discussion.
R4: The straw man - A fallacy in which an
opponent's position is depicted as being more
extreme or unreasonable than is justified by
what was actually asserted.
R5: The attack on the person - A fallacy in
which the argument relies upon an attack against
the person taking a position.
R6: The appeal to force - A fallacy in which the
argument relies upon an open or veiled threat of
force.
R7: Missing the point (irrelevant conclusion) A fallacy in which the premises support a
different conclusion from the one that is
proposed.
Fallacies of defective induction - the mistake
arises from the fact that the premises of the
argument, although relevant to the conclusion,
are so weak and ineffective that relying on them
is a blunder. We will distinguish and discuss:
D1: The argument from ignorance - An
informal fallacy in which a conclusion is
supported by an illegitimate appeal to ignorance,
as when it is supposed that something is likely to
be true because we cannot prove that it is false.
D2: The appeal to inappropriate authority - An
informal fallacy in which the appeal to authority
is illegitimate, either because the authority
appealed to has no special claim to expertise on
the topic at issue, or, more generally, because no
authority is assured to be reliable.

R1: The appeal to the populace - An informal

fallacy in which the support given for some
conclusion is an appeal to popular belief.

D3: False cause - An informal fallacy in which

the mistake arises from accepting as the cause of
an event what is not really its cause.

R2: The appeal to emotion - A fallacy in which

the argument relies on generosity, altruism, or
mercy, rather than on reason.

D4: Hasty generalization - An informal fallacy

in which a principle that is true of a particular

case is applied, carelessly or deliberately, to the

great run of cases.

attributes of the parts of a whole to the attributes

of the whole itself.

Fallacies of presumption - too much is assumed

in the premises. The inference to the conclusion
depends mistakenly on these unwarranted
assumptions. We will distinguish and discuss:

A5: Division - An informal fallacy in which a

mistaken inference is drawn from the attributes
of a whole to the attributes of the parts of the
whole.

P1: Accident - An informal fallacy in which a

generalization is applied to individual cases that
it does not govern.

Categorical Propositions:

P2: Complex question - An informal fallacy in

which a question is asked in such a way as to
presuppose the truth of some proposition buried
in the question.
P3: Begging the question - An informal fallacy
in which the conclusion of an argument is stated
or assumed in one of the premises.
Fallacies of ambiguity - The incorrect reasoning
in fallacies of ambiguity arises from the
equivocal use of words or phrases. Some word
or phrase in one part of the argument has a
meaning different from that of the same word or
phrase in another part of the argument. We will
distinguish and discuss:
A1: Equivocation - An informal fallacy in
which two or more meanings of the same word
or phrase have been confused.
A2: Amphiboly - An informal fallacy arising
from the loose, awkward, or mistaken way in
which words are combined, leading to
alternative possible meanings of a statement.
A3: Accent - An informal fallacy committed
when a term or phrase has a meaning in the
conclusion of an argument different from its
meaning in one of the premises, the difference
arising chiefly from a change in emphasis given
to the words used.
A4: Composition - An informal fallacy in
which an inference is mistakenly drawn from the

A. Universal Affirmative All S is P

E. Universal Negative - No S is P
I. Particular Affirmative Some S is P
O. Particular Negative Some S is not P
Quality - An attribute of every categorical
proposition, determined by whether the
proposition affirms or denies class inclusion.
Thus every categorical proposition is either
universal in quality or particular in quality.
Quantity An attribute of every categorical
proposition, determined by whether the
proposition refers to all members or only to
some members of the class designated by its
subject term. Thus every categorical
proposition is either universal in quantity or
particular in quantity.
Distribution - An attribute that describes the
relationship
between
a
categorical
proposition and each one of its terms,
indicating whether or not the proposition
makes a statement about every member of
the class represented by a given term.
Opposition - The logical relation that exists
between two contradictories, between two
contraries, or in general between any two
categorical propositions that differ in
quantity, quality, or other respects. These
relations are displayed on the square of
opposition.
Contradictories - Two propositions so related
that one is the denial or negation of the other.

On the traditional square of opposition, the

two pairs of contradictories are indicated by
the diagonals of the square: A and E
propositions are the contradictories of O and I,
respectively.
Contraries - Two propositions so related that
they cannot both be true, although both may be
false.
Contingent - Being neither tautologous nor selfcontradictory. A contingent statement may be
true or false.
Subcontraries - Two propositions so related that
they cannot both be false, although they may
both be true.
Obversion- A valid form of immediate inference
for every standard-form categorical proposition.
To obvert a proposition we change its quality
(from affirmative to negative, or from negative
to affirmative) and replace the predicate term
with its complement. Thus, applied to the
proposition All dogs are mammals, obversion
yields No dogs are nonmammals, which is
called the obverse of the original proposition.
The original proposition is called the
obvertend.
Contraposition - A valid form of immediate
inference for some, but not for all types of
propositions. To form the contrapositive of a
given proposition, its subject term is replaced by
the complement of its predicate term, and its
predicate term is replaced by the complement of
its subject term. Thus the contrapositive of the
proposition All humans are mammals is the
proposition All nonmammals are nonhumans.
Syllogism - Any deductive argument in which a
conclusion is inferred from two premises.
Categorical syllogism- A deductive argument
consisting of three categorical propositions that
contain exactly three terms, each of which
occurs in exactly two of the propositions.

Parts of a Standard-Form Categorical Syllogism:

Major Term- The predicate term of the
conclusion.
Minor Term- The subject term of the conclusion.
Middle Term- The term that appears in both
premises but not in the conclusion.
Major Premise- The premise containing the
major term.
Minor Premise- The premise containing the
minor term.
Mood - A characterization of categorical
syllogisms, determined by the forms of the
standard-form categorical propositions it
contains. Since there are just four forms of
propositions, A, E, I, and O, and each syllogism
contains exactly three such propositions, there
are exactly 64 moods, each mood identified by
the three letters of its constituent propositions,
AAA, AAI, AAE, and so on, to OOO.
Rule and its associated Fallacy
1. Avoid four terms = Four terms
2. Distribute the middle term in at least one
premise. = Undistributed middle
3. Any term distributed in the conclusion must
be distributed in the premises = Illicit process of
the major term (illicit major); illicit process of
the minor term (illicit minor)
4. Avoid two negative premises = Exclusive
premises
5. If either premise is negative, the conclusion
must be negative. = Drawing an affirmative
conclusion from a negative premise
6. No particular conclusion may be drawn from
two universal premises = Existential fallacy
Fallacy of four terms- The formal fallacy that is
committed when a syllogism is constructed with
more than three terms.

Fallacy of the undistributed middle- The formal

fallacy that is committed when the middle term
of a syllogism is not distributed in at least one
premise.
Fallacy of illicit process -The formal fallacy that
is committed when a term that is distributed in
the conclusion is not distributed in the
corresponding premise.

Fallacy of exclusive premises - The formal

fallacy that is committed when both premises in
a syllogism are negative propositions (E or O).
Existential fallacy - The formal fallacy that is
committed when, in a standard-form categorical
syllogism, a particular conclusion is inferred
from two universal premises.