SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 26
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




1. ENTHEMEME –             a syllogism in which one of the premises or the
                           conclusion is omitted.


The enthymeme is not a distinct form of syllogism, but an incomplete statement of
any of the forms of syllogism previously discussed.

Three Orders of Enthymemes:


         1st Order:        The Major Premise is Omitted
         2nd Order:        The Minor Premise is Omitted
         3rd Order:        The Conclusion is Omitted
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM


                     Example:


Major:            What is spiritual is immortal,
Minor:            But the human soul is spiritual,
Conclusion:       Therefore the human soul is immortal.

1.   Minor:       The human soul is spiritual,
     Conclusion: and therefore immortal.

2.   Conclusion: The human soul is immortal,
     Minor:       because it is spiritual.

3.   Major:       What is spiritual is immortal,
     Conclusion: for this reason, the human soul is immortal.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM


                   Example:


Major:           What is spiritual is immortal,
Minor:           But the human soul is spiritual,
Conclusion:      Therefore the human soul is spiritual.



4.   Conclusion: The human soul is immortal,
     Major:      since whatever is spiritual is immortal.


5.   Minor:      The human soul is spiritual,
     Major:      and whatever is spiritual is immortal.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




EXERCISES:

Directions: Using the following format, make complete syllogisms of the enthymemes given
below. First pick out the conclusion, expressing it if it not already given. Then fill in the other
members, supplying those that are not expressed. Finally criticize the examples by applying to
them the various rules of inference.

EXAMPLE

The open shop is good for unions because it makes them more democratic.

Major: Whatever makes unions more democratic is good for unions.
Minor: But the open shop (is something that) makes unions more democratic.
Concl: Therefore the open shop is for unions.

 1. Communism, simply because it is a godless philosophy, contains within itself the
        seeds its own destruction.
 2. Teachers’ unions are not desirable because they take away local control of schools.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




2. EPHICHIREME –           a syllogism in which a proof is joined to one or both
                           of the premises. The proof often expressed by a
                           causal clause (“for”, “because”, “since”, etc.)

Note:   It is important to distinguish the main syllogism from the proofs of a
        premise.

Example:

        Major:             If man has spiritual activities, he has spiritual soul,
                           because every activity requires an adequate
                           principle.
        Minor:             But since man knows immaterial things, man has
                           spiritual activities.
        Conclusion:        Therefore man has spiritual soul.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




3. POLYSYLLOGISM–            A polysyllogism, as the name suggest (poly is the
                             Greek word for “many”), it is a series of syllogism
                             connected together in which the conclusion of the
                             preceding syllogism becomes the Major Premise of
                             he following syllogism. Polysyllogism is also known
                             as chain argument.

Example:

       The more one is closed to god, the more one suffers;
       The more one suffers, the more one understands life;
       Ergo, the more one is close to God, the more one understands life.
       The more one understands life, the more one relates to people;
       Ergo, the more one is close to God, the more one relates to people.
       The more one relates to people, the more one understands himself;
       Ergo, the more one is close to God, the more one understands himself.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




4. SORITES –     a polysyllogism consisting of a series of simple syllogism
                 whose conclusion, except for the last, are omitted. It is either
                 categorical or conditional.

     a.) Categorical Sorites -    consist of a series of simple categorical
                                  syllogisms of the first figure whose conclusions,
                                  except for the last, are omitted. It links or
                                  separates the subject and predicate of the
                                  conclusion through the intermediacy of many
                                  middle terms.

      Two Kinds of Categorical Sorites

       Aristotelian (or progressive) Sorites - the predicate of each premise is the
       subject of the following premise, and the subject of the first premise is the
       subject of the conclusion.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




Example:


           All A is B;
           All B is C;
           All C is D;
           All D is E;
           Therefore, All A is E.



           All philosophers are wide readers;
           All wide readers are intelligent;
           All intelligent people are creative;
           All creative people are producers of great ideas;
           Therefore, All philosophers are producers of great ideas.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




Goclenian (or regressive) Sorites -   the same premises occur, but their
order is reversed.

Example:

     All A is B;
     All C is A;
     All D is C;
     All E is D;
     Therefore, All E is B.

     One who will not sacrifice truth for power is a responsible person.
     One who is a paragon of honesty will not sacrifice truth for power;
     One who is worth emulating is a paragon of honesty;
     A model of decency is worth emulating;
     Therefore, A model of decency is a responsible person.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




There is no essential difference between the Aristotelian sorites and the
Goclenian sorites except in the manner of the arrangement of the
premises. To construct the Aristotelian sorites from Goclenian and vice-
versa, we start with the last premise and end with the first. The
conclusion remains the same.

RULES: The procedure of reducing the Sorites to its component categorical
       syllogism, for checking purposes, is rather lengthy and cumbersome. It
       does not allow for a quick checking. For the later purpose, we may rely on
       the following Two Rules. These rules apply to the Sorites as such, whether
       it is Aristotelian, or Goclenian. They are:
          1.   Only one premise may be particular: one that carries the Minor term.
          2.   Only one premise may be negative: one that carries the Major term.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




b.) Conditional Sorites -   is one whose premise contains a series of
                            conditional propositions, each of which (except
                            the first) has as its antecedent the consequent
                            of the preceding premise.


                            Sometimes all the premises, including the last,
                            are conditional propositions, and then the
                            conclusion must be conditional proposition.
                            Sometimes the last premise is a categorical
                            proposition, and then the conclusion must be a
                            categorical proposition.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




Example:   1.)   If A, then B;
                 If B, then C;
                 If C, then D;
                 If D, then E;
                 Therefore, If A, then E.



           2.)   If A, then B;
                 If B, then C;
                 If C, then D;
                 If D, then E;
                 Therefore, If not E, then not A.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




3.)   If A, then B;
      If B, then C;
      If C, then D;
      If D, then E;
      but A:
      Therefore, E.

4.)   If A, then B;
      If B, then C;
      If C, then D;
      If D, then E;
      but not E;
      Therefore, If not E, then not A.
EXERCISES:

  1. The human soul is endowed with intellect and will; what is endowed with intellect and
            will is spiritual; what is spiritual is incorruptible; and what is incorruptible is
            immortal; therefore the human soul is immortal.

  2. The more you exercise, the hungrier you get; the hungrier you get, the more you eat; the
            more you eat, the fatter you get; the fatter you get, the less you move around;
            therefore, the more you exercise, the less you move around.

  3. Peace begets prosperity; prosperity begets pride; pride begets war; war begets poverty;
             therefore peace begets poverty.

  4. Education implies teaching; teaching implies knowledge; knowledge is truth; the truth is
             everywhere the same; hence, education should be everywhere the same.

  5. The prudent man is temperate; the temperate man is constant; the constant man is
             unperturbed; buy he who is unperturbed is without sadness; and he who is
             without sadness is happy; therefore, the prudent man is also happy.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




5. DILEMMA – a syllogism that is both conditional and disjunctive. The
        major premise is a compound conditional proposition
        consisting of two or more simple conditional propositions
        connected by “and” or its equivalent. The minor premise is a
        disjunctive proposition that alternatively posits the
        antecedent (constructive dilemma), of each of these simple
        conditional propositions.

                 In the constructive dilemma the disjunctive proposition is
                 commonly placed first; in the destructive dilemma, however,
                 the conditional propositions are commonly placed first. The
                 conclusion is either a categorical or a disjunctive proposition.

                 If the disjunctive premise has three members, the syllogism is a
                 trilemma; if it has many members, the syllogism is a
                 polylemma. But the name “dilemma” is also applied to these.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




a. Simple Constructive Dilemma – the conditional premise infers the same
         consequent from all the antecedents presented in the disjunctive
         proposition. Hence, if any antecedent is true, the consequent
         must be true.

   Example:

          I must either jump or stay – there is no other alternative.
                   If I jump, I shall die immediately (from the fall)
           But
                   If I stay, I shall die immediately, (from the fire)
          Therefore, I shall die immediately.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




b. Complex Constructive Dilemma – the conditional premise infers a
        different consequent from each of the antecedents presented in
        the disjunctive proposition. If any of the antecedent is true, its
        consequent is likewise true. But since the antecedents are
        posited disjunctively and since a different consequent flows
        from each of them, the consequents must likewise be posited
        disjunctively.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




Example: Men brought to Jesus the woman caught committing adultery

     Jesus will either urge that she be stoned to death or that she be
     released without stoning.
              If he urges the first, he will make himself unpopular
              with the people because of his severity;
       But
              If he urges the second, he will get into trouble with the
              Jewish authorities for disregarding the law of Moses.
     Therefore, he will either become unpopular with the people or get
     into trouble with the Jewish authorities.

     Jesus slipped between the horns of this dilemma by writing on the
     sand saying “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




                 CONSTRUCTIVE DILEMMA
   (The disjunctive proposition posits the antecedents of the conditional
          propositions; the conclusion posits their consequence)


  1. SIMPLE CONSTRUCTIVE                 2. COMPLEX CONSTRUCTIVE


Either A or B.                          Either A or B.

      if A, then Z.                           if A, then X.
But                                     But
      if B, then Z.                           if B, then Y.

Therefore, Z.                           Therefore, either X or Y.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




c. Simple Destructive Dilemma – the conditional premise infers more than
         one consequent from the same antecedent. If any of the
         consequents is false, the antecedent is false. Hence, since the
         disjunctive sublates the consequents alternatively, at least one of
         them must be false, and consequently the antecedent must also
         be false.
   Example:

          If I am to pass the examination, I must do two things – I must
          study all night and I must also be mentally alert as I write.
                    either I will not study all night,
            But
                    or I will not be mentally alert as I write.
          Therefore, I will not pass the examination.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




d. Complex Destructive Dilemma – the conditional premise infers a
        different consequent from each antecedent. The disjunctive
        premise sublates these consequents alternatively, and the
        conclusion sublates their antecedents alternatively

   Example:

         If John were wise, he would not speak irreverently of holy
         things in jest; if he were good, he would not do so in earnest.
                  he does it either in jest,
           But
                  or in earnest.
         Therefore, John is either not wise or not good.
SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM




                 DESTRUCTIVE DILEMMA
 (The disjunctive proposition sublates the consequents of the conditional
         propositions, the conclusion sublates their antecedents)


   1. SIMPLE DESTRUCTIVE                 2. COMPLEX DESTRUCTIVE


If A, then X and Y.                    If A, then X; and if B, then Y.

      either not X                           either not X
But                                    But
      or not Y                               or not Y

Therefore not A.                       Therefore either not A or not B.
RULES OF THE DILEMMA (ANSWERING A DILEMMA)


  1.) The disjunction must state all the pertinent alternatives.


  2.) The consequents in the conditional proposition must flow
           validly from the antecedents.


  3.) The dilemma must not be subject to rebuttal.
Example for the first rule (Escape between the horn)

    I must either devote myself to the interest of my soul or to secular
             pursuits.
    If I devote myself to the interest of my soul, my business will fail;
    If I devote myself to secular pursuit, I shall lose my soul.
    Therefore either my business will fail, or else I shall lose my soul.


   There is a third alternative, to devote myself both in the interest of my soul
   and to secular pursuits with the proper subordination of the latter to the
   former. “You can be upright and at the same time rich too.”
Example for the second rule (Take the dilemma by the horn)


    The mother argued:
    If your say what is just, men will hate you; if you say what is unjust,
             the gods will hate you. But you must either say what is just or
             what is unjust. Therefore you will be hated.
    The son replied:
    If I say what is just, the gods will love me; if I say what is unjust, men
              will love me. But I must say either the one or the other.
              Therefore I will be loved.
EXERCISE:


     Criticize the following dilemmas. Supply the missing members of those that are stated incompletely.


1.   A universal skeptic (that is, one who denies that anything can be known for certain) is refuted as
     follows:


     Either you regard it as certain that nothing can be known for certain, or else you regard it as uncertain.
     If you regard it as a certain, you hold at least one thing as certain; if you regard it as uncertain, you also
     hold at least one thing as certain, namely, that you regard it. Therefore you hold it as certain.


2.   Tertullian criticizes the policy of the Emperors of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius in persecuting the
     Christians.


     The Christians have either committed crimes, or else they have not. If they have committed crimes,
     your policy is unjust in that you forbid them to be hunted out: if they have not committed crimes, your
     policy is unjust in that you punish those who have been brought to your attention. Therefore, your
     policy is unjust.

More Related Content

What's hot

Hypothetical proposition
Hypothetical propositionHypothetical proposition
Hypothetical propositionlp tangcuangco
 
Categorical syllogism
Categorical syllogismCategorical syllogism
Categorical syllogism3842
 
Logical Opposition (Social Philosophy and Logic)
Logical Opposition (Social Philosophy and Logic)Logical Opposition (Social Philosophy and Logic)
Logical Opposition (Social Philosophy and Logic)Daryl Melo
 
Categorical syllogism
Categorical syllogismCategorical syllogism
Categorical syllogismNoel Jopson
 
Human Acts and Morality
Human Acts and MoralityHuman Acts and Morality
Human Acts and MoralityDebbie Pelias
 
Hypothetical & Modal Propositions
Hypothetical & Modal PropositionsHypothetical & Modal Propositions
Hypothetical & Modal PropositionsEm Dangla
 
Dilemma in Logic
Dilemma in LogicDilemma in Logic
Dilemma in LogicMah Noor
 

What's hot (20)

Hypothetical proposition
Hypothetical propositionHypothetical proposition
Hypothetical proposition
 
Dilemma
DilemmaDilemma
Dilemma
 
Conversion (LOGIC)
Conversion (LOGIC)Conversion (LOGIC)
Conversion (LOGIC)
 
Division of logic
Division of logicDivision of logic
Division of logic
 
Eduction (ph1)
Eduction (ph1)Eduction (ph1)
Eduction (ph1)
 
ETHICS
ETHICSETHICS
ETHICS
 
Categorical syllogism
Categorical syllogismCategorical syllogism
Categorical syllogism
 
Hypothetical Syllogism
Hypothetical SyllogismHypothetical Syllogism
Hypothetical Syllogism
 
Logical Opposition (Social Philosophy and Logic)
Logical Opposition (Social Philosophy and Logic)Logical Opposition (Social Philosophy and Logic)
Logical Opposition (Social Philosophy and Logic)
 
judgment and proposition
judgment and propositionjudgment and proposition
judgment and proposition
 
Categorical syllogism
Categorical syllogismCategorical syllogism
Categorical syllogism
 
judgment(proposition)
judgment(proposition)judgment(proposition)
judgment(proposition)
 
Propositions
PropositionsPropositions
Propositions
 
NCM 109 WEEK 2
NCM 109 WEEK 2NCM 109 WEEK 2
NCM 109 WEEK 2
 
Human Acts and Morality
Human Acts and MoralityHuman Acts and Morality
Human Acts and Morality
 
Logic.ppt.
Logic.ppt.Logic.ppt.
Logic.ppt.
 
Hypothetical & Modal Propositions
Hypothetical & Modal PropositionsHypothetical & Modal Propositions
Hypothetical & Modal Propositions
 
Dilemma in Logic
Dilemma in LogicDilemma in Logic
Dilemma in Logic
 
logic - workbook summary
logic - workbook summarylogic - workbook summary
logic - workbook summary
 
Logical Fallacies
Logical FallaciesLogical Fallacies
Logical Fallacies
 

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (7)

Critical And Creative Thinking Henderson
Critical And Creative Thinking HendersonCritical And Creative Thinking Henderson
Critical And Creative Thinking Henderson
 
Syllogism
SyllogismSyllogism
Syllogism
 
Lesson 6: Informal Logic
Lesson 6: Informal LogicLesson 6: Informal Logic
Lesson 6: Informal Logic
 
Dev.read.( final)
Dev.read.( final)Dev.read.( final)
Dev.read.( final)
 
Logic
LogicLogic
Logic
 
Logic Ppt
Logic PptLogic Ppt
Logic Ppt
 
Ethics
EthicsEthics
Ethics
 

Similar to Syllogism

Ethical ReasoningThere are a number of different types of ethica.docx
Ethical ReasoningThere are a number of different types of ethica.docxEthical ReasoningThere are a number of different types of ethica.docx
Ethical ReasoningThere are a number of different types of ethica.docxSANSKAR20
 
9 2 t4_chapterninepowerpoint
9 2 t4_chapterninepowerpoint9 2 t4_chapterninepowerpoint
9 2 t4_chapterninepowerpointsagebennet
 
Categorical syllogism
Categorical syllogismCategorical syllogism
Categorical syllogismKate Sevilla
 
Fallacy of Particular Premises
Fallacy of Particular PremisesFallacy of Particular Premises
Fallacy of Particular PremisesMary Grace Mancao
 
Logic in argumentative writing
Logic in argumentative writingLogic in argumentative writing
Logic in argumentative writingmdecaney
 
Categorical Syllogism.pdf
Categorical Syllogism.pdfCategorical Syllogism.pdf
Categorical Syllogism.pdfMazayaVillame
 
Handout 11-aristotle
Handout 11-aristotleHandout 11-aristotle
Handout 11-aristotleAbi Vijayaraj
 
What is Science?
What is Science?What is Science?
What is Science?6500jmk4
 
1. introduction to infinity
1. introduction to infinity1. introduction to infinity
1. introduction to infinityBiagio Tassone
 
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING.pptx
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING.pptxMETHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING.pptx
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING.pptxMariaSuzanneHizole
 
How to Think: Introduction to Logic, Lecture 4 with David Gordon - Mises Aca...
How to Think: Introduction to Logic, Lecture 4 with David Gordon  - Mises Aca...How to Think: Introduction to Logic, Lecture 4 with David Gordon  - Mises Aca...
How to Think: Introduction to Logic, Lecture 4 with David Gordon - Mises Aca...The Ludwig von Mises Institute
 
Philosophy Lecture 01
Philosophy Lecture 01Philosophy Lecture 01
Philosophy Lecture 01Mr-Mike
 
Informal Fallacies.pptx
Informal Fallacies.pptxInformal Fallacies.pptx
Informal Fallacies.pptxnatyesu
 

Similar to Syllogism (20)

Ethical ReasoningThere are a number of different types of ethica.docx
Ethical ReasoningThere are a number of different types of ethica.docxEthical ReasoningThere are a number of different types of ethica.docx
Ethical ReasoningThere are a number of different types of ethica.docx
 
9 2 t4_chapterninepowerpoint
9 2 t4_chapterninepowerpoint9 2 t4_chapterninepowerpoint
9 2 t4_chapterninepowerpoint
 
Categorical syllogism
Categorical syllogismCategorical syllogism
Categorical syllogism
 
Fallacy of Particular Premises
Fallacy of Particular PremisesFallacy of Particular Premises
Fallacy of Particular Premises
 
Logic in argumentative writing
Logic in argumentative writingLogic in argumentative writing
Logic in argumentative writing
 
Categorical Syllogism.pdf
Categorical Syllogism.pdfCategorical Syllogism.pdf
Categorical Syllogism.pdf
 
3 Logic.pptx
3 Logic.pptx3 Logic.pptx
3 Logic.pptx
 
Chapter 5
Chapter 5Chapter 5
Chapter 5
 
Handout 11-aristotle
Handout 11-aristotleHandout 11-aristotle
Handout 11-aristotle
 
What is Science?
What is Science?What is Science?
What is Science?
 
1. introduction to infinity
1. introduction to infinity1. introduction to infinity
1. introduction to infinity
 
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING.pptx
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING.pptxMETHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING.pptx
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING.pptx
 
How to Think: Introduction to Logic, Lecture 4 with David Gordon - Mises Aca...
How to Think: Introduction to Logic, Lecture 4 with David Gordon  - Mises Aca...How to Think: Introduction to Logic, Lecture 4 with David Gordon  - Mises Aca...
How to Think: Introduction to Logic, Lecture 4 with David Gordon - Mises Aca...
 
Lecture 1.pptx
Lecture 1.pptxLecture 1.pptx
Lecture 1.pptx
 
Philosophy Lecture 01
Philosophy Lecture 01Philosophy Lecture 01
Philosophy Lecture 01
 
Informal Fallacies.pptx
Informal Fallacies.pptxInformal Fallacies.pptx
Informal Fallacies.pptx
 
What is Philosophy.pptx
What is Philosophy.pptxWhat is Philosophy.pptx
What is Philosophy.pptx
 
Q1_W1.pptx
Q1_W1.pptxQ1_W1.pptx
Q1_W1.pptx
 
Chapter 1 lesson 3
Chapter 1 lesson 3Chapter 1 lesson 3
Chapter 1 lesson 3
 
Logic
LogicLogic
Logic
 

Syllogism

  • 1. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM 1. ENTHEMEME – a syllogism in which one of the premises or the conclusion is omitted. The enthymeme is not a distinct form of syllogism, but an incomplete statement of any of the forms of syllogism previously discussed. Three Orders of Enthymemes: 1st Order: The Major Premise is Omitted 2nd Order: The Minor Premise is Omitted 3rd Order: The Conclusion is Omitted
  • 2. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM Example: Major: What is spiritual is immortal, Minor: But the human soul is spiritual, Conclusion: Therefore the human soul is immortal. 1. Minor: The human soul is spiritual, Conclusion: and therefore immortal. 2. Conclusion: The human soul is immortal, Minor: because it is spiritual. 3. Major: What is spiritual is immortal, Conclusion: for this reason, the human soul is immortal.
  • 3. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM Example: Major: What is spiritual is immortal, Minor: But the human soul is spiritual, Conclusion: Therefore the human soul is spiritual. 4. Conclusion: The human soul is immortal, Major: since whatever is spiritual is immortal. 5. Minor: The human soul is spiritual, Major: and whatever is spiritual is immortal.
  • 4. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM EXERCISES: Directions: Using the following format, make complete syllogisms of the enthymemes given below. First pick out the conclusion, expressing it if it not already given. Then fill in the other members, supplying those that are not expressed. Finally criticize the examples by applying to them the various rules of inference. EXAMPLE The open shop is good for unions because it makes them more democratic. Major: Whatever makes unions more democratic is good for unions. Minor: But the open shop (is something that) makes unions more democratic. Concl: Therefore the open shop is for unions. 1. Communism, simply because it is a godless philosophy, contains within itself the seeds its own destruction. 2. Teachers’ unions are not desirable because they take away local control of schools.
  • 5. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM 2. EPHICHIREME – a syllogism in which a proof is joined to one or both of the premises. The proof often expressed by a causal clause (“for”, “because”, “since”, etc.) Note: It is important to distinguish the main syllogism from the proofs of a premise. Example: Major: If man has spiritual activities, he has spiritual soul, because every activity requires an adequate principle. Minor: But since man knows immaterial things, man has spiritual activities. Conclusion: Therefore man has spiritual soul.
  • 6. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM 3. POLYSYLLOGISM– A polysyllogism, as the name suggest (poly is the Greek word for “many”), it is a series of syllogism connected together in which the conclusion of the preceding syllogism becomes the Major Premise of he following syllogism. Polysyllogism is also known as chain argument. Example: The more one is closed to god, the more one suffers; The more one suffers, the more one understands life; Ergo, the more one is close to God, the more one understands life. The more one understands life, the more one relates to people; Ergo, the more one is close to God, the more one relates to people. The more one relates to people, the more one understands himself; Ergo, the more one is close to God, the more one understands himself.
  • 7. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM 4. SORITES – a polysyllogism consisting of a series of simple syllogism whose conclusion, except for the last, are omitted. It is either categorical or conditional. a.) Categorical Sorites - consist of a series of simple categorical syllogisms of the first figure whose conclusions, except for the last, are omitted. It links or separates the subject and predicate of the conclusion through the intermediacy of many middle terms. Two Kinds of Categorical Sorites Aristotelian (or progressive) Sorites - the predicate of each premise is the subject of the following premise, and the subject of the first premise is the subject of the conclusion.
  • 8. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM Example: All A is B; All B is C; All C is D; All D is E; Therefore, All A is E. All philosophers are wide readers; All wide readers are intelligent; All intelligent people are creative; All creative people are producers of great ideas; Therefore, All philosophers are producers of great ideas.
  • 9. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM Goclenian (or regressive) Sorites - the same premises occur, but their order is reversed. Example: All A is B; All C is A; All D is C; All E is D; Therefore, All E is B. One who will not sacrifice truth for power is a responsible person. One who is a paragon of honesty will not sacrifice truth for power; One who is worth emulating is a paragon of honesty; A model of decency is worth emulating; Therefore, A model of decency is a responsible person.
  • 10. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM There is no essential difference between the Aristotelian sorites and the Goclenian sorites except in the manner of the arrangement of the premises. To construct the Aristotelian sorites from Goclenian and vice- versa, we start with the last premise and end with the first. The conclusion remains the same. RULES: The procedure of reducing the Sorites to its component categorical syllogism, for checking purposes, is rather lengthy and cumbersome. It does not allow for a quick checking. For the later purpose, we may rely on the following Two Rules. These rules apply to the Sorites as such, whether it is Aristotelian, or Goclenian. They are: 1. Only one premise may be particular: one that carries the Minor term. 2. Only one premise may be negative: one that carries the Major term.
  • 11. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM b.) Conditional Sorites - is one whose premise contains a series of conditional propositions, each of which (except the first) has as its antecedent the consequent of the preceding premise. Sometimes all the premises, including the last, are conditional propositions, and then the conclusion must be conditional proposition. Sometimes the last premise is a categorical proposition, and then the conclusion must be a categorical proposition.
  • 12. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM Example: 1.) If A, then B; If B, then C; If C, then D; If D, then E; Therefore, If A, then E. 2.) If A, then B; If B, then C; If C, then D; If D, then E; Therefore, If not E, then not A.
  • 13. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM 3.) If A, then B; If B, then C; If C, then D; If D, then E; but A: Therefore, E. 4.) If A, then B; If B, then C; If C, then D; If D, then E; but not E; Therefore, If not E, then not A.
  • 14. EXERCISES: 1. The human soul is endowed with intellect and will; what is endowed with intellect and will is spiritual; what is spiritual is incorruptible; and what is incorruptible is immortal; therefore the human soul is immortal. 2. The more you exercise, the hungrier you get; the hungrier you get, the more you eat; the more you eat, the fatter you get; the fatter you get, the less you move around; therefore, the more you exercise, the less you move around. 3. Peace begets prosperity; prosperity begets pride; pride begets war; war begets poverty; therefore peace begets poverty. 4. Education implies teaching; teaching implies knowledge; knowledge is truth; the truth is everywhere the same; hence, education should be everywhere the same. 5. The prudent man is temperate; the temperate man is constant; the constant man is unperturbed; buy he who is unperturbed is without sadness; and he who is without sadness is happy; therefore, the prudent man is also happy.
  • 15. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM 5. DILEMMA – a syllogism that is both conditional and disjunctive. The major premise is a compound conditional proposition consisting of two or more simple conditional propositions connected by “and” or its equivalent. The minor premise is a disjunctive proposition that alternatively posits the antecedent (constructive dilemma), of each of these simple conditional propositions. In the constructive dilemma the disjunctive proposition is commonly placed first; in the destructive dilemma, however, the conditional propositions are commonly placed first. The conclusion is either a categorical or a disjunctive proposition. If the disjunctive premise has three members, the syllogism is a trilemma; if it has many members, the syllogism is a polylemma. But the name “dilemma” is also applied to these.
  • 16. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM a. Simple Constructive Dilemma – the conditional premise infers the same consequent from all the antecedents presented in the disjunctive proposition. Hence, if any antecedent is true, the consequent must be true. Example: I must either jump or stay – there is no other alternative. If I jump, I shall die immediately (from the fall) But If I stay, I shall die immediately, (from the fire) Therefore, I shall die immediately.
  • 17. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM b. Complex Constructive Dilemma – the conditional premise infers a different consequent from each of the antecedents presented in the disjunctive proposition. If any of the antecedent is true, its consequent is likewise true. But since the antecedents are posited disjunctively and since a different consequent flows from each of them, the consequents must likewise be posited disjunctively.
  • 18. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM Example: Men brought to Jesus the woman caught committing adultery Jesus will either urge that she be stoned to death or that she be released without stoning. If he urges the first, he will make himself unpopular with the people because of his severity; But If he urges the second, he will get into trouble with the Jewish authorities for disregarding the law of Moses. Therefore, he will either become unpopular with the people or get into trouble with the Jewish authorities. Jesus slipped between the horns of this dilemma by writing on the sand saying “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”
  • 19. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM CONSTRUCTIVE DILEMMA (The disjunctive proposition posits the antecedents of the conditional propositions; the conclusion posits their consequence) 1. SIMPLE CONSTRUCTIVE 2. COMPLEX CONSTRUCTIVE Either A or B. Either A or B. if A, then Z. if A, then X. But But if B, then Z. if B, then Y. Therefore, Z. Therefore, either X or Y.
  • 20. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM c. Simple Destructive Dilemma – the conditional premise infers more than one consequent from the same antecedent. If any of the consequents is false, the antecedent is false. Hence, since the disjunctive sublates the consequents alternatively, at least one of them must be false, and consequently the antecedent must also be false. Example: If I am to pass the examination, I must do two things – I must study all night and I must also be mentally alert as I write. either I will not study all night, But or I will not be mentally alert as I write. Therefore, I will not pass the examination.
  • 21. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM d. Complex Destructive Dilemma – the conditional premise infers a different consequent from each antecedent. The disjunctive premise sublates these consequents alternatively, and the conclusion sublates their antecedents alternatively Example: If John were wise, he would not speak irreverently of holy things in jest; if he were good, he would not do so in earnest. he does it either in jest, But or in earnest. Therefore, John is either not wise or not good.
  • 22. SPECIAL TYPES OF SYLLOGISM DESTRUCTIVE DILEMMA (The disjunctive proposition sublates the consequents of the conditional propositions, the conclusion sublates their antecedents) 1. SIMPLE DESTRUCTIVE 2. COMPLEX DESTRUCTIVE If A, then X and Y. If A, then X; and if B, then Y. either not X either not X But But or not Y or not Y Therefore not A. Therefore either not A or not B.
  • 23. RULES OF THE DILEMMA (ANSWERING A DILEMMA) 1.) The disjunction must state all the pertinent alternatives. 2.) The consequents in the conditional proposition must flow validly from the antecedents. 3.) The dilemma must not be subject to rebuttal.
  • 24. Example for the first rule (Escape between the horn) I must either devote myself to the interest of my soul or to secular pursuits. If I devote myself to the interest of my soul, my business will fail; If I devote myself to secular pursuit, I shall lose my soul. Therefore either my business will fail, or else I shall lose my soul. There is a third alternative, to devote myself both in the interest of my soul and to secular pursuits with the proper subordination of the latter to the former. “You can be upright and at the same time rich too.”
  • 25. Example for the second rule (Take the dilemma by the horn) The mother argued: If your say what is just, men will hate you; if you say what is unjust, the gods will hate you. But you must either say what is just or what is unjust. Therefore you will be hated. The son replied: If I say what is just, the gods will love me; if I say what is unjust, men will love me. But I must say either the one or the other. Therefore I will be loved.
  • 26. EXERCISE: Criticize the following dilemmas. Supply the missing members of those that are stated incompletely. 1. A universal skeptic (that is, one who denies that anything can be known for certain) is refuted as follows: Either you regard it as certain that nothing can be known for certain, or else you regard it as uncertain. If you regard it as a certain, you hold at least one thing as certain; if you regard it as uncertain, you also hold at least one thing as certain, namely, that you regard it. Therefore you hold it as certain. 2. Tertullian criticizes the policy of the Emperors of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius in persecuting the Christians. The Christians have either committed crimes, or else they have not. If they have committed crimes, your policy is unjust in that you forbid them to be hunted out: if they have not committed crimes, your policy is unjust in that you punish those who have been brought to your attention. Therefore, your policy is unjust.