Types of

Reasoning

From truths that we already know

there is a way or process by which
we can know (derive, infer, or
generate) new truths.

All carabaos are mammals

and All mammals have mammary
glands
are both true
= All carabaos have mammary glands

Reasoning or inference
Whose end result is called an argument
Since arguments concern truth, an argument can only consist of

statements (or beliefs)

Expressions functioning as questions, imperatives, and exclamations
cannot be part of an argument
A mere collection of statements, however, will not form an
argument.
The table is brown.
The sky is blue.

Premise and Conclusion

Premise provides a justification

for the

conclusion.

Conclusion is what follows from or

is proven

by the premise.

Standard form
All carabaos are mammals
All mammals have mammary glands
Therefore, all carabaos have mammary
glands

Certain(necessary) we are sure

about its truth
for there is no
possibility that it is false

Merely probable it is likely to be

true but there is a possibility that it is
false

Inductive and deductive

reasoning

Deductive argument
The truth of the premises is supposed to prove
that the truth of the conclusion is certain.
Either be valid or invalid
It should be noted that the validity and the
invalidity of deductive argument are solely
determined by their form of structure.

Sound and Unsound

Deductive Argument

Sound deductive
argument

Is a deductive argument that is valid and

that contains premises that are all true.

Example:
If the German shepherds are dogs,
Then the German shepherd are animals
Therefore German shepherds are animals

Unsound deductive
argument
Is a deductive argument that is valid and

that contains at least one premise that is

false

Example:
If elephants are birds,
Then, elephants can fly.
Elephant are birds,
Then, elephants can fly.

Common Deductive Argument Forms

SomeValid Form SomeInvalid Form

If P, then Q.
P.
Therefore, Q.

If P, then Q.
Not Q.
Therefore, not P.

All As are Bs.

All Bs are Cs.
Therefore, all As
are Cs

If P, then Q.
Q.
Therefore, P.
If P, then Q.
Not-P.
Therefore, not Q.
All As are Bs
All Cs are Bs
Therefore all As are
Cs

Valid Form
If P, then Q.
P.
Therefore, Q.

If the rain falls, then the ground is

wet. The rain falls. Therefore, the
ground is wet.

invalid Form
If P, then Q.
Q.
Therefore, P.

If the rain falls, then the ground is

wet. The ground is wet. Therefore,
The rain falls.

Inductive argument

The truth of the premise is supposed

to prove that the truth of the
conclusion is probable

Strong or Weak

Strong if the truth of the premises really

proves that the truth of its conclusion is probable

Weak if it does not do so

Cogent all of its premises happen

to be true.

Example:
Most Filipino boys like to play basketbal
Mario is a Filipino boy.
Therefore, Mario likes to play basketball

Uncogent if even just one of its

premises happens to be false.

Most Filipino boys likes to play basketball.

Justin Bieber is a Filipino boy.
Therefore, Justin Bieber likes to play baske

Fallacies (errors in reasoning)

are actually cases of weak
inductive reasoning.

 Fallacy of hasty
generalization
(converse accident)
- is the most typical case.
It occurs when we make a general
conclusion from an insufficient
number of cases.

 Fallacy of hasty
generalization
(converse accident)
Example:
Former President Joseph Estrada is a movie actor.
Former President Joseph Estrada is a politician.
Therefore, all or most movie actors are politicians

 Fallacy of weak analogy

Committed when we conclude that two
things have a certain similarity because
they have other similarities but which
are either insufficient number of
irrelevant to the conclusion.

 Fallacy of weak analogy

Example:
Paper plates and diamond are both made up of atoms.
Diamonds are very expensive.
Therefore, paper plates are very expensive.

Some
common
Fallacies

2 Types of fallacies

FORMAL FALLACIES
INFORMAL FALLACIES

Formal Fallacies

Are errors in reasoning

due solely to an
incorrect form or
structure of an
argument.

Informal
Fallacies
Also known as material

fallacies, are errors in

reasoning due solely to an
anomaly or defect in the
content (or in the meaning of
the words or sentences) of an
argument.

Informal Fallacies
are group into three

Fallacies of Ambiguity
Fallacies of Relevance
Fallacies of Presumption

Fallacies of Ambiguity
Referring to fallacies in which the

errors in reasoning is brought

about by the occurrence of
ambiguous terms whose meanings
are confused in an argument.

Fallacies of Relevance

Referring to fallacies in which

the error in reasoning is
brought about by the
irrelevance of the premise or
premises to the conclusion of
an argument.

Fallacies of Presumption

Referring to fallacies in which the

error in reasoning is brought about by

the occurrence of complex or loaded
expressions whose assumption are
questionable or have not yet been
proven to be true.

Fallacies of Ambiguity

Fallacy of Equivocation
Fallacy of Composition
Fallacy of Division

Fallacy of Equivocation

Is committed when several

meanings of a word or phrase

become confused in the
context of one argument.

Example
All laws should be respected

and obeyed. The law of the

gravity is a law. Therefore, the
law of gravity should be
respected and obeyed.

Fallacy of composition

Is committed when one

reasons from the qualities

of the parts of a whole to
the qualities of the whole
itself.

Example

Every part of this

machine is light in
weight. Therefore, the
whole machine is light in
weight.

Fallacy of Division

Which is the reverse of

composition, is committed when

one reasons from the qualities
of a whole to the qualities of the
parts of the whole.

Example

Filipino

cultural minorities
are disappearing. Juan is a
Filipino cultural minority.
Therefore, Juan is
disappearing.

Fallacies of Relevance
Argument from ignorance
Appeal to inappropriate authority
Appeal to the person
Appeal to pity
Appeal to popular will
Appeal to force

Fallacy of Argument
from Ignorance

Is committed when it is argued

that a proposition is true
simply on the basis that it has
not been proven false, or that
it is false because it has not
been proven true.

Example

Mental telepathy must be

accepted as a fact ; for
nobody has proven that it
is impossible.

Fallacy of Appeal to
Inappropriate
Authority
Is committed when one appeals
to an authority whose fields of
expertise does not include the
nature of the conclusion being
establish.

Example

We should vote this

candidate for he is
indorsed by our favorite
basketball player.

Fallacy of Appeal to
the Person
Is committed when one
evaluates an argument by
means of citing something
about the person who asserts
the said argument.

Example

She cannot be a good

president, for she comes from

a broken family.

Fallacy of Appeal to Pity

Is committed when one

appeals to pity to cause

the acceptance of some
conclusion.

Example

This man certainly

deserves a promotion,
for he can hardly fed his
starving family.

Fallacy of Appeal to
Popular Will

Is committed when one appeals

to general , common, popular or

stereotypical prejudices or beliefs
to cause the acceptance of some
conclusion.

Example

We should drink this

brand of beer, for it is the

regular drink of successful
men after a hard days
work.

Fallacy of Appeal
to Force
Is committed when one

appeals to force, often with

subtlety, to cause the
acceptance of a conclusion.

Example
It is your duty to pledge

allegiance to this constitution,

for otherwise rebellion charges
will be filled against you.

Fallacies of Presumption

Fallacy of complex question

Fallacy of false cause
Fallacy of begging the question
Fallacy of accident
Fallacy of hasty generalization

Fallacy of Complex
when
Is committed
Question
one ask a question
that contains
unproved
assumptions.

Example

A lawyer who wants to

establish that person A is

beating his child asks this
question : Have you stop
beating your child ?

Fallacy of False Cause

Is committed when one

attributes a wrong cause to

something, which is often
to a mere temporal
succession of two events .

Example
Edgar Allan Poes

literary genius must

have been caused by
drinking liquor.

Fallacy of Begging the

Question
Is
committed
when

reasoning is circular in
that the conclusion is
already assumed in the
premises.

Example

The soul is

immortal, for it never

dies.

Fallacy of Accident

Is committed when one

applies a general rule to

individual cases, which,
because of their special or
accidental nature , the general
rule does not properly apply.

Example
Running is good for heart.

Therefore, running will be good

for Pedro who is suffering from
a heart disease.

Fallacy of Hasty
Generalization
(or converse accident0 is

committed when one makes a

generalization from a special
or accidental case, or simply
from insufficient number of
cases.

Example

While running , Mario

had a heart attach .

Therefore, running is bad
for heart .

End