Midterms: Logic and Legal Technique
Relation of Argumentation to Logic and Psychology:
I. Argumentation
1. Definition and nature of Argumentation:
o Argumentation, an art in nature, is the process of
influencing the belief or behavior of a hearer or reader
through spoken or written speech, by supplying him with
reasons and stirring his feelings.
2. Distinction between Argumentation and Debate:
1. Generally, in Argumentation, words may be employed
either through speaking or writing to appeal to the
intellect and feelings of a person; in Debate, through
speaking only.
2. Argumentation is broader in scope than debate in that
while all debates are forms of argumentation, not all
argumentations are forms of debate.
3. Two (2) methods of approach in the work of argumentation:
1. Conviction (Appeal to Intellect)
 It is that phase of argumentation whereby the
arguer directs his words to the reasoning faculty
& intellect of man, to create belief or disbelief.
2. Persuasion (Appeal to Feelings)
 It is that phase of argumentation whereby the
arguer directs his words to the emotions &
feelings of man, to create belief or disbelief.
4. Four (4) processes in the work of argumentation:
1. Invention
 It is the act of inventing the ideas or courses of
action for others to believe or adopt.
2. Selection
 It is the act of selecting the relevant facts from
the existing pool of information, to effectively
support such ideas or courses of action.
3. Arrangement
 It is the act of arranging such relevant facts in
such a way as to secure maximum effect upon
the belief and behavior of a hearer or reader.
4. Presentation
 It is the act of presenting the arranged set of
facts in a language that will effectively convey
the ideas or courses of action to a hearer or
reader with maximum force.
5.
1. Relation to Logic:
 As a science, Logic helps the arguer in his art of
influencing the belief or behavior of a hearer or
reader by understanding the laws of thought
that guarantees sound reasoning.
2. Relation to Psychology:
 Psychology furnishes the arguer with knowledge
of the human nature which he can use to suit his
words and actions to his hearer or reader,
rendering his art of argumentation effective.
II. The Proposition
1. Definition, nature, and function of the Proposition:
o Proposition, formed in a complete statement, is an
expression, in words, of an act of judgment.
o Its function is to express a mental assertion of something
as true or untrue.
2. Two (2) classes of Proposition:
1. Proposition of Fact
 Aimed at belief, a proposition of fact is concerned
with the truth or falsity of an act of judgment.
 It settles the question: “Is this assertion true?”
2. Proposition of Policy
 Aimed at action, a proposition of policy is
concerned with the wisdom or unwisdom; the
expediency or inexpediency, of a course of action.
 It settles the question: “Should it be done?”
3. Why does an arguer need to know the proposition?
o An arguer needs to know the proposition to avoid talking
lingeringly without arriving at a definite conclusion.
o Moreover, to be able to effectively know and refute the
position of his opponent, an arguer must certainly know
his proposition on the subject matter involved.
4. How proposition is introduced in the courts of law?
o In the courts of law, proposition is introduced in the
form of a pleading (complaint, information, petition, or
motion), setting forth the matters of fact or of law and
the truth to be decided in the controversy.
III. The Burden of Proof and Presumptions 2. Issues in General Argumentation:

1. Burden of proof in legal procedure:  Issues in General Argumentation are already

inherent in the proposition which must be only
o In legal procedure, the burden of proof always remains
be discovered, explained, and defined by the
on the plaintiff (affirmative) and does not shift to the
debaters through logical and careful analysis.
defendant (negative).
3. Definition and nature of Partition:
2. Nature of Presumptions:
o Partition is the statement of the main points to be taken
o Presumptions, in general, are logical inferences of the
up in the course of discussion.
truth or falsity of a point in dispute.
o Although generally they are not necessarily vital, points
3. Two (2) classes of Presumptions: in partition must be important for one to establish his
1. Presumptions of Fact: proposition in a case.
 These are simple logical inferences derived
wholly and directly from the circumstances of
V. Investigation and Research
the case through the common experience of
mankind, absent of aid or control of any rules
1. Purpose of Research:
of law. o The purpose of research is to gather relevant facts and
2. Presumptions of Law: data necessary to establish one’s case and overthrow the

 They are legal assumptions of the truth or falsity case of the opponent.

of a point in dispute, which must be regarded by 2. Two (2) Methods of Note-Taking:

the judge. 1. Card system
 They are classified into: (1) Rebuttable and (2)  Through this system, a debater may simply get
Conclusive or Unrebuttable Presumptions. the cards needed for the instant use instead of
taking the whole pack on the platform, making

IV. The Theory of the Issues it easy and convenient. However, the risk of
the cards being lost in the course of research
1. Definition and nature of the Issues:
cannot be discounted.
o Issues, inherent in the proposition, are the vital points,
2. Notebook system
elements, or sub-propositions, affirmed by the plaintiff
 Through this system, a debater may find a
and denied by the defendant, upon the establishment of
notebook convenient for taking down long
which depends upon the establishment of the main
quotations or extracts and for preserving
proposition.
clippings; although its inconvenience for
2. Issues in Law and in General Argumentation: platform use cannot be disregarded.
1. Issues in Law:
3. Nature and purpose of Assimilation:
 Issues in Law are generally the starting point of
o Assimilation is the process of converting the materials
the debate which must first be set forth in the
gathered and determined useful to advance one’s case
pleadings.
into the fibers of one’s finished arguments.
 They consist of: (1) issue of fact or a point
o Its nature demands the seamless harmony of thought
raised by a party who denies something alleged
processes and the materials gathered for the purpose of
in his opponent’s pleading; (2) issue of law or a
expressing these ideas through one’s personality.
point of law upon which the two parties differ.
 They also involve: (1) general issue referring to
a defense which denies absolutely the whole
declaration of the plaintiff; (2) special issue
which denies but one or more of the
allegations of law or fact.
VI. Evidence
1. Definition and nature of Evidence:
o Evidence is the means, sanctioned by the Revised Rules
of Court, in ascertaining in a judicial proceeding, the
truth respecting a matter of fact.
2. Evidence vs. Proof (2):
1. Evidence is the mode and manner of proving competent
facts in a judicial proceeding; proof, the conclusion or
effect thereof.
2. While Evidence is that which tends to convince, Proof is
that which eventually convinces.
3. Three (3) Sources of Evidence:
1. Persons:
 As sources of evidence, persons are witnesses
possessing a certain measure of intelligence
who transmit information through speaking,
writing, or even through voluntary signs.
2. Documents:
 As sources of evidence, documents are pieces of
printed matter or manuscripts regarded as
conveying information or evidence.
3. Things:
 As sources of evidence, things are tangible
objects presented to the senses of those who
will judge.
4. Eight (8) Classes or Kinds of Evidence:
1. Direct and indirect or circumstantial evidence
1.1. Direct Evidence
 It proves the fact in dispute without the
aid of any inference or presumption.
1.2. Indirect or Circumstantial Evidence
 It proves the fact through inference or
presumption as a necessary or probable
consequence.
2. Real and personal evidence
2.1. Real Evidence
 Its source is a thing; a tangible object
capable of observation and inspection. It
is sometimes called autopic preference.
2.2. Personal Evidence
 Its source is a human being afforded
either through discourse or voluntary
signs.
3. Documentary and testimonial evidence
3.1. Documentary Evidence
 Its source is a document regarded as
conveying information or evidence. It is
sometimes called written evidence.
3.2. Testimonial Evidence
 It refers to the oral statements of
persons sworn as witnesses. It is
sometimes called parol evidence.
4. Original and hearsay evidence
4.1. Original Evidence
 It is one which has a probative force of its
own. It does not derive its strength from
or through another.
4.2. Hearsay Evidence
 It is one that does not derive its value
solely from the credit to be given to the
witness himself, but rests also in part on
the veracity or competency of some
other persons.
5. Pre-appointed and casual evidence
5.1. Pre-appointed Evidence
 It is one which is created or preserved in
anticipation of an assertion or defense of
a right.
5.2. Casual Evidence
 It is one which is neither created nor
preserved to enforce an obligation or to
defend a right; entirely undersigned.
6. Positive and negative evidence
6.1. Positive Evidence
 It is an actual evidence.
6.2. Negative Evidence
 It is the significant absence of evidence.
7. Ordinary and expert evidence
7.1. Ordinary Evidence
 It is one that attests to the truth or falsity
of a fact in dispute without the necessity
of special training, knowledge, or skill.
7.2. Expert Evidence
 It is one that, in the interpretation of the
fact in dispute, requires special training,
knowledge, experience, and skill on the
witness’ part. It is sometimes called
opinion evidence.
 8. Primary or best and secondary evidence
8.1. Primary Evidence
 It is one which the law regards as
affording the greatest certainty of the fact
in question. It is sometimes called best
evidence.
8.2. Secondary Evidence
 It is one which is inferior to primary and is
permitted only when primary evidence is
not available. It is sometimes called
substitutionary evidence.
3. Inductive or Scientific Method of Inquiry
 It is one whereby from varying observations
and repeated experiments, analysis, and
generalization, a truth or principle is drawn.
4. Five (5) Inductive Methods or Scientific Methods of Inquiry:
1. Method of Agreement
 It states that if one element is found constant under
whatever conditions the phenomenon occurs, that
element is inferred to be probably the cause of the
phenomenon.

5. Admissibility of Evidence: 2. Method of Difference

o Admissibility of evidence, determined at the time it is  It states that if one element is constantly present if

offered to the court, refers to the question of whether or the phenomenon occurs and constantly absent

not the evidence is to be considered at all. whenever such does not occur, ceteris paribus, that
element is inferred to be probably the cause of such
o To be admissible, evidence must be (1) relevant to the
phenomenon.
issue and (2) competent, i.e. not excluded by law or by
3. Joint Method
the Revised Rules of Court.
 It states that if one element is found commonly
under two or more of instances under which
phenomenon occurs, and is absent under another set
VII. Classes of Arguments
of instances under which the phenomenon does not
1. Two (2) process of Reasoning
occur, the latter set having no common except the
1. Induction
absence of that element, that element is inferred to
2. Deduction
be probably the cause of such phenomenon.
2. Definition and nature of Induction and Deduction 4. Method of Concomitant Variations

1. Induction:  It states that if both the element and the

 It is to reason from the particular instances or phenomenon are always constant together, and

phenomena to the general principles of the always vary together, and the degree of variation

truth. between them is the same, then there exists a

2. Deduction: causal relation between the two.

5. Method of Residues
 It is to reason from the general principles (or
truth) to particular instances or phenomena of  It states that if one element is known by previous

that truth. inductions to be the effect of one instance in a

phenomenon, the remaining element should be the
3. Three (3) Kinds of Induction: effect of the unreconciled instance of such
1. Perfect Induction phenomenon.
 It is one which simply enumerates the
particulars which form a class that the 5. Argument from antecedent probability, sign, and example
conclusion does not cover new matter.
1. Argument from antecedent probability
2. Imperfect Induction
 It is an inference from a known cause to an
 It is one which from certain known individual
unknown effect. It is sometimes called a priori
cases, facts, or phenomena, a general principle
argument.
is drawn.
 2. Argument from sign 6. If one premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative; and
 It is an inference that depends for its strength we cannot arrive at a negative conclusion unless of the premises
upon the assumption that since the facts under is negative.
consideration have been observed to accompany 7. From two (2) particular premises no conclusion can be drawn.
each other invariably, the presence of one is a 8. If one premise is particular, the conclusion must also be
sign of the presence of the other. particular.
3. Argument from example
9. Three (3) Modified Forms of Syllogism:
 It is an inference which depends for its strength 1. Enthymemes
upon the similarity between the case in question
 It is an argument in the form of the syllogism in
and some other cases which are alleged either
which one of the premises or the conclusion is
as analogous to the case in question, or as
implied, not expressed.
establishing a general postulate that is
2. Sorites
applicable to it.
 It is a chain-syllogism or a chain or reasoning
6. Definition and Nature of Syllogism consisting of more than 3 propositions so
o It is the act of thought by which from two given joined that the 2 terms of the conclusion are
propositions, called the premises, the arguer proceeds to united through the mediation of more than
a third proposition, the truth of which necessarily follows one intervening middle term.
from the truth of these propositions. 3. Inferences in quantitative relations
 It is a form of reasoning similar to the syllogism
7. Three (3) Classes of Syllogism:
in which the true major premises is not
1. Categorical Syllogism
expressed, but implied or understood.
 It is one in which all the propositions are
categorical – declaring something absolutely,
admitting no condition or limitation.
2. Hypothetical Syllogism
 It is one in which the major premise is a
hypothetical proposition; the minor premise
and the conclusion, categorical.
3. Disjunctive Syllogism
 It is one in which the major premise is a
disjunctive proposition (predicate is made of
words or phrases expressing opposition,
separation, or mutual exclusion); the minor
premise and the conclusion, categorical.

8. Eight (8) Rules in Syllogism

1. Syllogism has only 3 terms – major, middle, minor – and these
must be the used in a same sense.
2. Syllogism has only 3 propositions – major (general truth), minor
(particular fact), and conclusion (inference).
3. Middle term must be distributed at least once in the premises
and must not be ambiguous.
4. No term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not
distributed in one of the premises.
5. From negative premises nothing can be inferred.