This document discusses the structure and rules of categorical syllogisms. It explains that a categorical syllogism has three terms - the major term, minor term, and middle term. The major term is the predicate of the conclusion, the minor term is the subject of the conclusion, and the middle term occurs in both premises but not the conclusion. It then lists 10 rules that categorical syllogisms must follow regarding the terms, propositions, quantity, and existential import. Examples are provided to illustrate valid and invalid syllogisms.
Based from the book : "Logic Made Simple for Filipinos" by Florentino Timbreza here is the summary made into powerpoint of Lesson 12: The Categorical Syllogism.
It Includes:
Introduction to categorical syllogism
General Axioms of the Syllogism
Eight Syllogistic Rules
Figures and Moods of the Categorical Syllogism
Examples in these slides are our own, there were no examples derived from the book.
Based from the book : "Logic Made Simple for Filipinos" by Florentino Timbreza here is the summary made into powerpoint of Lesson 12: The Categorical Syllogism.
It Includes:
Introduction to categorical syllogism
General Axioms of the Syllogism
Eight Syllogistic Rules
Figures and Moods of the Categorical Syllogism
Examples in these slides are our own, there were no examples derived from the book.
This is a PPT intended for Secondary School students. Some rules were not included for they may be very complex for the intended learners. Please COMMENT if this has become useful to you!
Ethical ReasoningThere are a number of different types of ethica.docxSANSKAR20
Ethical Reasoning
There are a number of different types of ethical reasoning. If we think about the complexities of our decision-making process, it only makes sense that each of us grounds our thoughts and actions with different priorities in mind. For our purposes, we will be addressing five key concepts in the ethical reasoning realm. Below, you will find a synopsis of each type:
Utilitarian
Description – Ethical concept that deems the right course of action is the one that produces more good than bad for the majority involved.
Cons - So long as a decision creates a benefit for most, Utilitarianism is not concerned with the minority.
Example – I won the lottery. I wanted to take my family on a vacation. I allowed them to have input as to where they would like to go. The majority chose the Bahamas, while one member chose Alaska, as she doesn’t like the hot weather. We ended up going to the Bahamas, which most of us were happy with.
Egoism
Description – Ethical concept that deems the right course of action is the one that produces the greatest benefits for the individual.
Cons – So long as a decision creates a benefit for the individual, Egoism is not concerned with the majority.
Example –I decided to take a new job. My previous employment paid well, but I found the duties boring and tedious. I have a family of four who depends solely on my paycheck. The new job pays considerably less, but I am happier in my work.
Deontology
Description – Ethical concept that deems the right course of action is the one that adheres to the duty, law or rule.
Cons – So long as a decision is made to adhere to duty, law, or rule, Deontology is not concerned with personal or social measures of morality.
Example – I noticed my coworker, John, leaving work 30 minutes before we closed every day, while the rest us stayed until the end of our shift. John explained that he was a single father and needed to pick his children up from school, as there was no one else to help him. I reported John to my boss, as that is what we are told to do when a coworker is violating any of the policies in the employee handbook.
Relativism
Description - Ethical concept that deems the right course of action is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced.
Cons – So long as a decision is made to adhere to the culture’s norms, Relativism is not concerned with individual moral beliefs for the social norm.
Example – I drive on the right side of the road in accordance with the law. I went to London and quickly realized that driving on the right side of the road was unacceptable and illegal. What was lawful in the United States was a violation in another country.
Justice
Description – Ethical concept that deems the right course of action is the one that treats everyone fairly unless there is a sufficient reason to treat anyone (or anything) unequally.
Cons – The definitions of fairness are ...
Deductive Reasoning
moodboard/Thinkstock
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Define basic key terms and concepts within deductive reasoning.
2. Use variables to represent an argument’s logical form.
3. Use the counterexample method to evaluate an argument’s validity.
4. Categorize different types of deductive arguments.
5. Analyze the various statements—and the relationships between them—in categorical arguments.
6. Evaluate categorical syllogisms using the rules of the syllogism and Venn diagrams.
7. Differentiate between sorites and enthymemes.
By now you should be familiar with how the field of logic views arguments: An argument is just a collection of sentences, one of which is the conclusion and the rest of which, the premises, provide support for the conclusion. You have also learned that not every collection of sentences is an argument. Stories, explanations, questions, and debates are not arguments, for example. The essential feature of an argument is that the premises support, prove, or give evidence for the conclusion. This relationship of support is what makes a collection of sentences an argument and is the special concern of logic. For the next four chapters, we will be taking a closer look at the ways in which premises might support a conclusion. This chapter discusses deductive reasoning, with a specific focus on categorical logic.3.1 Basic Concepts in Deductive Reasoning
As noted in Chapter 2, at the broadest level there are two types of arguments: deductive and inductive. The difference between these types is largely a matter of the strength of the connection between premises and conclusion. Inductive arguments are defined and discussed in Chapter 5; this chapter focuses on deductive arguments. In this section we will learn about three central concepts: validity, soundness, and deduction.
Validity
Deductive arguments aim to achieve validity, which is an extremely strong connection between the premises and the conclusion. In logic, the word valid is only applied to arguments; therefore, when the concept of validity is discussed in this text, it is solely in reference to arguments, and not to claims, points, or positions. Those expressions may have other uses in other fields, but in logic, validity is a strict notion that has to do with the strength of the connection between an argument’s premises and conclusion.
To reiterate, an argument is a collection of sentences, one of which (the conclusion) is supposed to follow from the others (the premises). A valid argument is one in which the truth of the premises absolutely guarantees the truth of the conclusion; in other words, it is an argument in which it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. Notice that the definition of valid does not say anything about whether the premises are actually true, just whether the conclusion could be false if the premises were true. As an example, here is a silly but valid ar.
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
Biological screening of herbal drugs: Introduction and Need for
Phyto-Pharmacological Screening, New Strategies for evaluating
Natural Products, In vitro evaluation techniques for Antioxidants, Antimicrobial and Anticancer drugs. In vivo evaluation techniques
for Anti-inflammatory, Antiulcer, Anticancer, Wound healing, Antidiabetic, Hepatoprotective, Cardio protective, Diuretics and
Antifertility, Toxicity studies as per OECD guidelines
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...Levi Shapiro
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in EducationPeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty, In...Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
Exploiting Artificial Intelligence for Empowering Researchers and Faculty,
International FDP on Fundamentals of Research in Social Sciences
at Integral University, Lucknow, 06.06.2024
By Dr. Vinod Kumar Kanvaria
Synthetic Fiber Construction in lab .pptxPavel ( NSTU)
Synthetic fiber production is a fascinating and complex field that blends chemistry, engineering, and environmental science. By understanding these aspects, students can gain a comprehensive view of synthetic fiber production, its impact on society and the environment, and the potential for future innovations. Synthetic fibers play a crucial role in modern society, impacting various aspects of daily life, industry, and the environment. ynthetic fibers are integral to modern life, offering a range of benefits from cost-effectiveness and versatility to innovative applications and performance characteristics. While they pose environmental challenges, ongoing research and development aim to create more sustainable and eco-friendly alternatives. Understanding the importance of synthetic fibers helps in appreciating their role in the economy, industry, and daily life, while also emphasizing the need for sustainable practices and innovation.
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
How to Make a Field invisible in Odoo 17Celine George
It is possible to hide or invisible some fields in odoo. Commonly using “invisible” attribute in the field definition to invisible the fields. This slide will show how to make a field invisible in odoo 17.
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
Categorical syllogism
1. Kate S. Magpoc
BSTM- 3A
THE SIMPLE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
THE BASIC STRUCTURE
A Simple Categorical Syllogism is composed of three (3) categorical or attributive propositions so put
together that the subject (t) and predicate (T) of the conclusion are united or separated through the
intermediacy of a middle term (M) Every animal is mortal; but every dog is an animal; therefore every
dog is mortal.
THE SIMPLE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
The first proposition is the major premise; the second proposition is the minor premise; and the third is
the conclusion. “Mortal” the predicate of the conclusion, is the major term; “dog,” the subject of the
conclusion, is the minor term; and “animal,” which occurs in both premises but not in the conclusion, is
the middle term.
A. Major Term The major term is the predicate of the conclusion. It must occur in the conclusion and in
the premise, generally the first, which is therefore called the major premise . The major term shall be
symbolized by T , or, to display the structure of a syllogism more graphically, by a rectangle .
B. Minor Term The minor term is the subject of the conclusion. It must occur in the conclusion and in the
premise in which the term does not occur. It is often introduced by the adversative conjunction “but”
(because in controversy it introduces a turn of thought to the expectations of an opponent). Minor term
shall be designated by t , or, to display the structure of a syllogism more graphically, by an ellipse .
C. Middle Term The middle term occurs in each of the premises but not in the conclusion. In the major
premise, it occurs in conjunction with the major term; and in minor premise, in conjunction with the
minor term. It is the medium through which the major and minor term are united in the affirmative
syllogism and separated in the negative syllogism. As opposed to the middle term , the minor and major
terms are called extremes.
Example of a graphically marked simple categorical syllogism: Every animal is mortal; But every dog is
an animal; Therefore every dog is mortal.
GENERAL RULES OF THE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
THE RULES OF THE TERMS
1. Their Number and Arrangement
Their Number…
2. Their Quantity, or Extension 3. The Quantity of the Minor and Major Terms: …
Their Arrangement…
4. The Quantity of the Middle Term: …
GENERAL RULES OF THE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
The Rules of the Terms
1. THEIR NUMBER AND ARRANGEMENT
Rule 1. There must be three terms and only three- the major term, the minor term and the middle
term. The necessity of having only three terms follows from the very nature of a categorical
2. syllogism, in which a minor (t) and a major (T) term are united or separated through the intermediacy
of a third term, the middle term (M).
The terms must have exactly the same meaning and (except for certain legitimate changes in supposition)
must be used in exactly the same way in each occurrence. A term that has a different meaning in each
occurrence is equivalently two terms. We must be especially on our guard against ambiguous middle
terms. Example: Every animal is mortal; but every dog is an animal; therefore every dog is mortal.
Violation: Men must eat; but the picture on the wall is a man; therefore the picture on the wall must eat.
Rule 2. Each term must occur in two propositions. The major term must occur in the conclusion, as
predicate, and in one of the premises, which is therefore called the major premise. The minor term must
occur in the conclusion, as subject, and in the other premise, which is therefore called the minor premise.
The middle term must occur in both premises but not in the conclusion. Hence, there must be three
propositions. The necessity of having three terms arranged in this way in three propositions also follows
from the very nature of a categorical syllogism. Two propositions (the premises) are required for the
middle term to fulfill its function of uniting or separating the minor and major terms and a third
proposition (the conclusion) is required to express the union or separation of the minor and major terms.
1. THE QUANTITY, OR EXTENTION, OF THE TERMS The reason for this rule is that we may not
conclude about all the inferiors of a term if the premises have given us information about only some of
them. The conclusion is an effect of the premises and must therefore be contained in them implicitly; but
all are not necessarily contained in some —at least not by virtue of the form of argumentation alone.
Violation: All dogs are mammals; but no men are dogs; therefore no men are mammals. Rule 3. The
major and minor terms may not be universal (or distributed) in the conclusion unless they are universal
(or distributed) in the premises.
Violation of this rule is called either extending a term or an illicit process of a term. There is an illicit
process of the major term if the major term is particular in the premise but universal in the conclusion;
and an illicit process of the minor term, if the minor term is particular in the premise but universal in the
conclusion. Take note that there is no illicit process if the major or minor term is universal in the premises
and particular in the conclusion. To go from a particular to a universal is forbidden, but to go from a
universal to a particular is not permissible.
Rule 4. The middle term must be universal, or distributed, at least once. The reason for this rule is that
when the middle term is particular in both premises it might stand for a different portion of its extension
in each occurrence and thus be equivalent to two terms, and therefore fail to fulfill its function of uniting
or separating the minor and major terms. Violation: A dog is an animal; but a cat is an animal; therefore
a cat is a dog. Violation of this rule is often called the fallacy of the undistributed middle.
GENERAL RULES OF THE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
The Rules of the Propositions
1. THE QUALITY OF THE PROPOSITIONS Rule 5. If both premises are affirmative, the conclusion
must be affirmative. The reason for this rule is that affirmative premises either unite the minor and major
terms, or else do not bring them into relationship with one another at all—as when there is an
undistributed middle. In neither case may the major term be denied of the minor term. Hence, to get a
negative conclusion you must have one—and only one—negative premise. Violation: All sin is
detestable; but some pretense is sin; therefore some pretense is not detestable.
As soon as you see that both premises are affirmative but the conclusion negative, you can be sure that
your syllogism is invalid. Be on your guard, however, against apparent affirmative or negative
3. propositions. Example: Animals differ from angels; but man is an animal; therefore man is not an angel.
The syllogism is valid because ‘differ from’ is equivalent to ‘are not’.
Rule 6. If one premise is affirmative and the other negative, the conclusion must be negative. The reason
for this rule is that the affirmative premise unites the middle term with one of the extremes (that is, with
either the minor or the major term) and the negative premise separates the middle term from the other
extreme. Two things, of which the one is identical with a third thing and the other is different from that
same third thing, cannot be identical with one another. Hence, if a syllogism with a negative premise
concludes at all, it must conclude negatively. Violation: Every B is a C; but some A is not a B; therefore
some A is a C.
However, there are apparent exceptions to this rule. Keep in mind that many negative propositions are
equivalent to affirmative propositions and can be changed into them by one or other kinds of immediate
inference. Example: Dogs are not centipedes; but hounds are dogs; therefore hounds differ from
centipedes. This is a valid syllogism since the conclusion is equivalently negative, since “differ from” is
equivalent to “are not”.
Rule 7. If both premises are negative—and not equivalently affirmative—there is no conclusion at all. To
fulfill its function of uniting or separating the minor and the major term, the middle term must itself be
united with at least one of them. But if both premises are negative, the middle term is denied of each of
the extremes and we learn nothing about the relationship of the extremes towards one another. Violation:
A stone is not an animal; but a dog is not a stone; therefore a dog is not an animal.
2. THE QUANTITY OF THE PROPOSITIONS Example: Every animal is mortal; but every dog is
an animal; therefore every dog is mortal. Rule 8. At least one premise must be universal. Rule 9.
If a premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular.
3. THE EXISTENTIAL IMPORT OF THE PROPOSITIONS The reason for this rule is the general
principle that nothing may ever be asserted in the conclusion that has not been asserted implicitly in the
premises. This rule takes us out of the domain of formal logic, which does not consider existence except
incidentally. We mention it only as a practical aid to argumentation. Rule 10. The actual real existence of
a subject may not be asserted in the conclusion unless it has been asserted in the premises.
4. Contradictories are opposites; but black and white are opposites; therefore black and white are
contrdictories. 5. All mammals have lungs; but most fish do not have lungs; therefore most fish are not
mammals. 6. No dog is a man; but Fido is not a man; therefore Fido is a dog. 7. All mammals are
viviparous; but whales are viviparous; therefore whales are mammals.
8. Those who are not sick may go; but Johnny is not sick; therefore Johnny may go. 9. No dog is not an
animal; but no hound is not a dog; therefore all hounds are animals. 10. Democracies are free; but some of
the governments of the Middle Ages were not democracies; therefore some of the governments of the
Middles Ages were not free.