Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Legal Technique
Syllogisms:
reasoning process which is the link that joins the premises to the conclusion. This
conclusion even of a formally correct argument can still be wrong due to a false
he also noted that even with a formally correct argument, there can still be an error
“Germans are European; but the French are European; therefore, Germans are
argument with a reference to something general and from this it draws conclusion
with an antecedent that relates two terms with a third, a conclusion can be drawn
that unites or separates these two terms and such a conclusion may be in the
antecedent.
following: the extremes which entail a subject (S) which has perfection, another
perfection (P) and a (M) middle term which enables the person to relate or serve as a
bridge between the two extremes, (S) and (P). It is further noted that the middle term
and the extremes appear in the antecedent and that the middle term appears in the
first and second premise, related to either extreme, creating a relation between the
two.
Example:
The middle term allows for an inference to be made wherein human reason
entails that destruction is a predicable of war and involves the property of bringing
The predicate is the major term and included in the major premise while the
subject is the minor term contained in the minor premise. The middle term relates
both in such a way that one is enabled to make an inference based on the premises
Simple syllogisms (categorical syllogism) involve practical rules and are based
on the nature of syllogism and the function of the middle term. The Following rules
a) The middle term must always be taken in the same sense or no conclusion can be
Ex. The crime of buying and selling stolen goods is fencing, but fencing is a recreation;
The conclusion is false for fencing in the first premise refers to the crime of
buying and selling stolen goods while the second premise is actually the sport of
fencing.
Undistributed middle.
term is never distributed, then the major and minor terms might be related to
different parts of the M class, thus giving no common ground to relate S and P4.
distributed, 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 premise is
saying something about only some members of the P class5. This leads to an invalid
argument because the conclusion contains information that is not contained in the
premises.
d) A conclusion cannot have greater universality than its premise for the effect
e) The conclusion follows the weakest premise. This entails that if the antecedent is
premises must be universal in order to validly link the the major and minor premises
g) From two negative premises nothing follows. This simply states that there rule does
not allow two negative premises for it could lead to a fallacy of exclusive premises.
Hurley notes that if the premises are both negative, then the relationship
between S and P is denied; therefore, the conclusion cannot, therefore, say anything
in a positive fashion and that the information goes beyond what is contained in the
premises.
according to figure, derived from Aristotle, and mood, from medieval logicians6. The
in each figure.
a) Convertable relations entail that the same relation is produced between extremes
which are some relation in some way and that the nature of such inferences is
then X id related to Z.
related in the same or some other way to Z, then X is somehow related to Z but in a
special way.
7 Sanguinetti. supra
8 Sanguinetti. supra
statements or sentences) 9 . Sanguinetti noted that they are those whose major
denies one part of the major premise. It was further stated that the major premise
affirms a connection between various enunciations but leaves the truth of its
component parts unknown. All the while, the minor premise designates the true value
to one of the parts while the conclusion, the true value of the other 10. Dr. Naugle
noted that Compound syllogisms are more familiar and are more often used than
categorical syllogisms, and the rules of their uses are much easier to grasp.
Furthermore are several kinds of compound syllogisms are available: the conditional
grounded upon a hypothetical statement which takes the form: "IF . . . THEN." These
syllogisms are not entirely hypothetical, but one of its premises is.
Ex.
If water boils, water temperature has reached at 100 degrees Celsius; water
temperature has reached at 100 degrees Celsius; therefore, water boils. The water
temperature did not reach at 100 degrees Celsius; therefore, water did not boil.
3. An unconditional conclusion.
It has been noted that a hypothetical syllogism has only two terms rather than
operator (in this case the conjunctive, "and," symbolized by " . "), and is used to
connect exactly two propositions in such a way that the resulting compound
proposition is true if and only if both component propositions are true, and false if
either or both of the conjuncts are false. Conjunctive syllogisms are based on
“both/and” sentences.
"A and B" is true if and only if "A" is true, and "B" is true.
the two parts can neither be simultaneously true nor simultaneously false 11. A
disjunction is true if either of the disjuncts is true or if either one of its disjuncts is
11 Sanguinetti. supra
true12. Valid disjunctive syllogisms were noted to contain a disjunction as one
premise, the negation of one of the disjuncts as second premise, as well as the
affirmation of the remaining disjunct as its conclusion13. Its basic form was noted to
___________ ___________
that that
Ex.
________________________________
Furthermore, Sanguinetti noted that there are two possible ways of drawing
conclusions via disjunctive syllogisms: one involves the minor affirms of one of the
predicates while the conclusion denies the other and the second, involves the minor
denying one of the predicates while the conclusion affirms the other.
conjunctive manner in the major premise. The second or minor premise, a disjunctive
"either/or" statement then either affirms that one or the other of the antecedents is
12
PHIL chapter 10 deductive.pdf.
http://www.cos.edu/faculty/johnd/documents/phil%20chapter%2010%20deductive.pdf
13
Id.
true (constructive), or denies that one or the other of the consequents is true
(destructive)14. The conclusion forces one to choose between (1) the consequents on
the basis of affirmed antecedents or (2) the denied antecedents on the basis of denied
consequents15.
variable letters (A, B, C.....). The connection or relation between propositions are
represented by symbols (“^” means “and”; “v” means “or”; “” if this is true , the this
other thing is true”; while all and some are symbolized by quantifiers). After
constructing the formal language, symbolic logic goes on to affirm axioms (postulated
series of basic propositions), along with rules of inference17. These eventually lead to
the formation of new formulas or the conclusions. Starting from the axioms and
drawing conclusions from them via the rules of inference leads to a conclusion, called
a theorem.
Ex of use of symbols:
14
Dr. Naugle. Conjunctive Syllogisms and Dilemmas
15
Id.
16
Sanguinetti.supra
17
Id.