The document discusses the divisions of logic. There are two main divisions - traditional logic and symbolic logic. Traditional, or Aristotelian logic, uses deductive syllogisms to attain demonstrated knowledge. Symbolic logic uses symbols to analyze arguments and determine their validity. Logic can also be divided into formal logic, which examines argument structure and validity, and material logic, which considers the meaning and truth of concepts in arguments. Language has three basic functions - informative, which communicates information; expressive, which expresses emotions; and directive, which causes or prevents actions through commands, requests, and recommendations.

1. THE DIVISIONS OF LOGIC
From out from the historical development of logic, we
can say that Logic may be devided into main divisions-the
Traditional Logic and the Symbolic Logic. Traditional Logic
is the first known method in order to attain a certain
demostrated knowledge. this is also to be called the
Aristotelian logic as this is the logic that is invented by
Aristotle. It uses syllogistic method, hich is typically
deductive because it reasons out from universal into
particular or less universal idea.

2. This kind of argument is parallel to the kind of reasoning
and attitude Euclidean Geometry, which is precise and
seemingly absolute.
Aristotelian argumentation makes use of syllogism as
a primary instrument for the establishment of a new true
contention. For instance,
A1 All Filipinos are respectable individuals.
But the Badjaos are Filipinos.
Therefore, the Badjaos are respectable
individuals.

3. Symbolic Logic is also known as mathematical logic, which
may also be deductive in its approach. However, unlike the
traditional logic, symbolic logic uses symbols in the analysis
of the arguments in order to easily determine the validity of
such given arguments.
Going back to the discussion on the aristotelian or the
traditional logic, let us have these arguments.
A2 All orchids are flowers;
But waling-walingis an orchid.
Ergo, waling-waling is a flower.

4. A3 Love is blind
But god is love
Therefore, God is blind.
We can notice from these two arguments (A2 and A3) that
they share common scheme, form, or structure. In A2, the
conclusion “waling-waling is an orchid” has an internal and
an exteranal consistency with the premises. How ever, in
the second argument (A3), the conclusion “ God is blind”
does not follow necessarily from premises although this
argument (A3 may have the same structure as the other
argument (A2).

5. The error in A3 lies on the fact that there is something
wrong with the meaning of the terms used in the premises
of A3, particularly the term “love”.
From the given examples,it becomes reasonable to
devide logic into two:the formal logic and the material
logic. Formal logic is that division of Aristotelian logic
Aristotelian logic which concerned it self with the rules
governing the structure and the validity f argument forms
or patterns.

6. On the other hand, material logic is concerned with the
meaning and truth of the concept and sentences, which
comprise a syllogism. To simplify this idea, formal logic is
concerned with the aspect of form or structure, which has
something to do with the correctness of sequence or the
following of rules.

7. In this case, if we say
A4 All human being are God's creature
and Juan de la Cruz is a human being;
it follows that Juan de la Cruz is God's
creature,
this argument (A4) is considered to be valid as it
follows a sequence.

8. Nevertheless, if we say,
A5 All Filipinos are God-fearers.
But Jose Rizal is Filipino
Ergo, Apolinario Mabini is a God-fearer,
This argument (A5) does not follow the
rules of logical reasoning because it has no sequence. For
this reason, this argument will be considered illogical.

9. As mentioned earlier, material logic is concerned with the
aspect of subject matter, content, or truth. If we are going to look
at the example in A4, we can say that this argument is true only
insofar as Juan de la Cruz is taken here as puppet, and we are
actually referring to the puppet which we named Juan de la Cruz,
then A4 can be considered invalid due to the error in meaning.

10. Eventually, the discussion on formal logic should be
related to the three orders of rational operation, which are
also known as the three acts of the mind:
1. Simple apprehension, i.e., the grasping of an object
or an essence of a thing without affirming or denying
something about it.
2. Judgement,i.e., affirming or denying something
of s omething else.
3. Reasoning,i.e., the act of proceeding to new
knowledge from a previous knowledge.

11. These three acts of the mind suggest a natural threefold
division of formal logic into:
• 1. THE TERM OR CONCEPTS
• 2. PROPOSITIONS
• 3. ARGUMENTS

12. THE THREE BASIC FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE
• 1. INFORMATIVE
• LANGUAGE IS BEING INFORMATIVELY WHEN IT IS USED TO
COMMUNICATE INFORMATION. INFORMATION LANGUAGE IS
USED TO EXPRESS A TRUTH CLAIM..i..e.. TO CLAIM THAT
WHAT IS ASSERTED IS TRUE.

13. 1. INFORMATIVE
• EXAMPLE:
• THE ONLY PURPOSE FOR WHICH POWER CAN BE RIGHTFULLY
EXERCISED OVER ANY NUMBER OF A CIVILIZED COMMUNITY,
AGAINST HIS WILL, IS TO PREVENT HARM TO OTHERS. HIS
OWN GOOD, EITHER PHYSICAL OR MORAL, IS NOT A
SUFFICIENT WARRANT.
• JOHN STUART MILL
• ON LIBERTY (1859)

14. 2.EXPRESSIVE FUNCTIONS
• LANGUAGE HERE IS USED IN ORDER TO EXPRESS CERTAIN
EMOTIONS THAT THE POET FELT VERY KEENLY AND EVOKE
SIMILAR FEELINGS IN THE READER OR IN LISTENER.
• LANGUAGE SERVES THE EXPRESSIVE FUNCTION WHENEVER IT
IS USED TO VENT OR TO AROUSE FEELINGS OR EMOTIONS.

15. 2.EXPRESSIVE FUNCTIONS
EXAMPLE:
“YESTERDAY I WAS A SINGING BIRD, SOARING FREELY HERE
AND THERE IN FIELDS. TODAY I AM SLAVE, TO FICKLE WEALTH,
SOCIETY;S RULES, THE CITY'S CUSTOMS, AND PURCHASED
FRIENDS, PLEASING THE PEOPLE BE CONFORMING TO THE
STRANGE AND NARROW LAWS OF MEN.
-KAHLIL GIBRAN
TEARS AND LAUGTHER

16. 3. DIRECTIVE FUNCTIONS
 WHEN IT IS INTENDED TO CAUSE OR TO PREVENT ACTIONS.
 IT MAY SEEN IN THE ISSUING OF COMMANDS, REQUESTS,
INSTRUCTIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS.

17. 3. DIRECTIVE FUNCTIONS
EXAMPLE:
“ AM YOURSELVES OF NOBLE HEARTS. ARM YOURSELVES. DRIVE
AWAY THE PATIENT TOLERATION OF SUFFERINGS. “
- EMILIO JACINTO
PAHAYAG (1897)