Existential Import

BITS Pilani
Pilani Campus
Dr. Anupam Yadav
Boolean Interpretation of Categorical
Propositions

Existential Import
•Some propositions have existential import
•A proposition is said to have existential import if it typically is
uttered to asserted the existence of objects of some kind.
I & O propositions do have EI.
•‘Some soldiers are heroes’ & ‘Some dogs are not
companions’ – The classes designated by their subject terms
are not empty.
•There is a problem. If I and O follow from A & E by
subalternation they also have EI; for, a proposition that has EI
cannot be derived from the one that does not have.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Continued

• To say that “some leprechauns wear little green hats” or

“Some frogs are not poisonous” follow from their respective
universal propositions is to assert that they also have EI.
• That is, this would permit us to infer that there really are
leprechauns.
• This creates a serious problem:
• If A & O propositions which are contradictories do have EI,
then both contradictories could be false.
• “All inhabitants of Mars are blond” & “ Some inhabitants of
Mars are not blond”. Saying that they have EI, they both can
be false , if Mars has no inhabitants and hence cannot be
contradictories.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Contd.
• Something has gone wrong in the traditional square. If particulars
are derived from the universals, then the square is not correct
when it says that A & O are not contradictories. In that case
square is also not correct to hold that I & O are subcontraries.
• Can the square be rescued? Yes, on the notion of
presupposition.
• Did you spend the money you stole? can be answered properly,
if it is presupposed that you stole money.
• To rescue traditional square, we presuppose that all four
propositions have EI, they are not empty.
• In this way, we save all the relationships set forth in the square.
• However, we have to pay heavy intellectual penalty for this
blanket presupposition.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Contd.

There are 3 reasons not to go for this blanket presupposition.

1. If we presuppose that the class designated has members,
we will never be able to formulate the proposition that
denies that the class has members. For example, “No
unicorns are creatures that exist”.
2. Our ordinary usage of language is not in complete accord
with this blanket presupposition. “All” may preferably used
to refer to empty classes.
“All trespassers will be prosecuted” . Far from
presupposing that the class has members, it is intended to
ensure that the class remains empty. The statement can
be true even if no one is ever prosecuted.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Contd.

On the other hand, consider “I” proposition, “Some

trespassers will be prosecuted’ . Unlike the word “all”, the
word “some” is incompatible with the an empty subject
class. The statement would be false, if there were no
trespassers.
3. In science and other theoretical spheres we often wish to
reason without making any presupposition about existence.
Newton’s first law of motion asserts that certain things are
true about bodies that are not acted on by any external
forces. They remain at rest. The law may be true; a
physicist may wish to defend it without wanting to
presuppose that this is the case.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Contd.

• In modern logic, it is not assumed that the classes to which

categorical propositions refer to always have members. This
Boolean interpretation has important logical consequences:
• I & O have EI and in the absence of which they are false. But,
universal propositions have no EI. Thus, ‘all unicorns have
horns’ & ‘no unicorns have wings’ may both be true, even if
there are no unicorns.
• However, A & E propositions in Boolean interpretation can
both be true and hence not contraries. “All unicorns have
wings” & “No unicorns have wings”. Interpreted as “if-then”
statements, A & E can indeed be true, if there are no unicorns.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

Contd.

• Similarly, I & O Propositions which have EI, can both be false, if

the subject class is empty. So, they cannot be subcontraries.

• Subalternation is also not valid. Plainly, because I & O

propositions cannot be validly inferred from corresponding A & E
that have no EI.
• Only contradictory relations remain in force.

• Modern logic rejects the blanket presupposition. It is a mistake to

assume that a class has members if it is not asserted explicitly
that it does. Any argument that relies on this mistaken
assumption is said to commit the fallacy of existential
assumption or existential fallacy.

BITS Pilani, Pilani Campus

 THANK YOU
BITS Pilani
Pilani Campus