THE STUDY OF LOGIC
Logic comes from the Greek word logike, meaning”
thought”. Aristotle [384-322] who started the study of logic believes
that it is “organon” or instrument for discovering and presenting
truths.
Logic is the instrument of all scientific investigation. It is
through logical methods that the sciences discover the truths
peculiar to their subject matter. It is also through logical
demonstration or arguments that they prove their findings to be
true and therefore, acceptable. Logic then is a prerequisite of all the
sciences.
NATURAL LOGIC
The Supreme Creator has seen it fit to endow each
creature with talent or power commensurate to its nature. The
wonders of his gift may be glimpsed in the fierceness of the lion, in
the speed of the horde, in the strength of the elephant, in the flight
of the sparrow, in the sight of the eagle, in the agility of the shark
and in the docility of the carabao. But the rarest of the gifts belongs
to the man. This is the ability to reason.
LOGIC: THE ESSENTIALS OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING
The ability to reason correctly is innate to man. He has the
gift of common sense which St. Thomas Aguinas defines as” the
habit of the first principles”. This is the natural logic.
It was natural logic which guided man to the use of fire
and of the wheel. These discoveries, long before man ever thought
of building a schoolhouse, laid the cornerstone of progress and
civilization. And yet, common sense needs to be trained and
sharpened to bring out the fullness of its potentials. Without proper
instruction, common sense is prone o mistakes, leaving the process
of reasoning to “trial-and error”.
The singer the dancers, the athlete, the painter, and
speaker –all need systematized instruction on how to develop their
natural talents and hoe to use them effectively. In like manner, each
person needs the science and art of logic to develop the habit
confident reasoning.
Logic does not away with common sense. It presupposes it
and codifies its laws, shaping it into reliable instruments for the
acquisition of knowledge.
LOGIC AS A SCIENCE
Logic defined as the science of correct of correct thinking.
It is the systematized study of the reasoning process for the purpose
of helping us think clearly, easily and correctly.
1. Logic is defined as the science because it is a body of
knowledge systematically arranged and demonstration to be true.
Logic however, differs from the empirical science such as, biology
physics, sociology and others, because these give us information
about the world around us while logic does not. Logic deals with the
reasoning process leading to the discovery of truths. As a science on
its own right, logic has its formal and material object. The material
object is the subject matter being studied. The formal object is that
aspect which is being considered of the subject matter. The material
object of logic is thinking. The formal objects is correctness of
thinking.
2. Thinking, in ordinary speech, refers to any or all the
movements of the mind, such as imaging, recalling memorizing,
comprehending, analyzing, or even day-dreaming. In logic, thinking
means inference.
Inference comes the verb “to infer” which means to draw
out or to get a truth or conclusion from something previously known
to the thinker. As a mental activity, it is called reasoning and is
studied in psychology. Inference is the mental result of the act
reasoning and this is what we study in logic. Irving M. Copi defines
inference as “a process by which one proposition is arrived at and
affirmed on the basis of one or more others proposition accepted as
the starting point.”
Inference, being a mental reality, is studied in its linguistic
expression, called argument. An argument is “any group of
proposition of which one is claimed to follow from the others which
are regarded as providing support or ground for the truth of that
one.” Below are examples of arguments:
A) Juanito is rational because he is a man.
b) Juanito, being a man, is rational.
c) Since all men are rational, Juanito is rational.
The above declarations express a single a single argument,
proving that “Juanito is rational”. This is the conclusions gathered on
the basis of the assumption “He is a man”,or, “ All men are rational.”
Noticed how such conclusion comes.
LOGIC: THE ESSENTIALS OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING
Smoothly and necessarily from the assumed propositions or
premises. Expressed in syllogistic form, the argument is.
All men are rational, (premise)
But Juanito is a man, (premise)
Therefore, Juanito is rational. (conclusion)
A syllogism is an oral or written discourse expressive of an
argument. It is the logical form of an argument.
3. The correctness of an argument is the formal object of
logic now; correctness implies conformity with a set of rules. A
sentence for example, is said to be “correct “when it is in agreement
with the rules of grammar. Likewise, an argument is correct if it
conforms with the rules of logic and these us how to presents an
argument correctly.
MATERIAL AND FORMAL LOGIC
The study of logic is divided into material logic and formal
logic.
Material logic teaches us how truths are arrived at with
certitude. It provides for the principles by which we may acquire
true and certain knowledge. Formal logic teaches how we may be
correct in the presentation of an arguments. It gives us the
principles and rules of logical thinking.
Every argument has matter and form. The matter refers to
the thought – content to the propositions. It belongs to the function
of material logic on how the matter logic on how the matter or
thought. Content of an argument is true.
The form refers to the structure of an arguments it is the
function of formal logic to determine when the pattern or structure
is correct.
A valid, that is, acceptable arguments is one which is true
in its matter and correct in its form. The syllogism given earlier is an
example of a valid argument.
INDUCTIVE AND DEDUCTIVE INFERENCE
Inference can either be by inductive or deductive method.
Inductive inference draws a universal or general
conclusion from a series of individual related facts. For example, I
may conclude that “All students in this class are Filipinos” by first
determining the citizenship of each student in class If x1, x2, x3, x4,
x5, etcetera- is b, then we may conclude correctly that “all x is b”, or
that at least “some x is B”. Inductive inference proceeds from a
particular to a general truth.
Inductive reasoning is often used in surveys, such as that
which determines the popularity rating of our public officials or TV
programs.
Deductive inference draws a particular conclusion on the
basis of assumed general or universal principles. In the earlier
example, we conclude that “Juanito is rational”. Deductive
reasoning, therefore, is a process of going down to a particular
specific truth on the basis of a universal truth.
In this study, we are primarily interested with deductive
inference, with its principles and rules governing its correctness.
LOGIC: ESSENTIALS OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING
LOGIC AS AN ART
Art, in general, is the habit of doing something with certain
degree of order harmony. In this sense logic is an art. It practical
science which leads to the formation of the habit of thinking easily,
orderly and correctly.
Logic, however, belongs to liberal arts not to fine arts.
Liberal arts constitute the foundation of higher education, such as
sociology, history and mathematics. Such as that of music, poetry,
painting.
THE IMPORTANCE OF LOGIC
1. The intellect separates man from the beasts. But if
reason is superior power logic is its dynamo. Without logic science
would not possible. And, without science, human civilization would
not have gone this far. It is the force of logical reasoning
Which uncovers for men those truths necessary for the cultivation
and enrichment of the human condition. Logic, therefore, is
important since it contributes to the quality of human life.
2. Logic, besides, contributes to the growth of the
individual. Every person has thought at all times and under even the
most ordinary circumstances. He who has an alert mind is better
equipped to handle day-to-day responsibilities. A side from helping
make prudent decisions, the habit of good thinking saves one from
unnecessary heartaches and regrets due to misapprehension of
facts. Indeed, since life is not always simple, the ability to sort out
things mentally leads to a better organized life-style. Logic,
therefore, builds self-confidence, provides a feeling of direction, and
gives the assurance of being in control of one’s situation.
3. The practice of a profession of a profession presupposes
the art of creative thinking. In the complex world of ideas, the
professional who thinks surely and clearly has a good chance of
advancing in the field. The scatterbrain usually gets lost along the
way. This is not to say that good thinking is all that is needed to
succeed professionally. There are indeed other factors. But the
ability to “see” things in their proper perspective spells competence.
It is the mark of intelligence. Mainly because of the ability to think
clearly, Aristotle would like the philosopher to be king. In
contemporary society, we expect our leaders to think, not only
correctly, but honestly too.
THE SCOPE OF OUR STUDY
Inferential thinking, our subject matter proper, is a
complex process involving three distinct mental operations: simple
apprehension, judgment and reasoning. The first two mental
operations, simple apprehension and judgment, though complex in
themselves, are intermediate to reasoning. It is the act of reasoning
that makes inference possible.
1. Simple apprehension is the act of the mind by which
we grasp the essence of a thing. Simple apprehension
produces the concept or idea.
2. Judgment is the act of mined which we compare two
concepts and declare them to be either in agreement
or disagreement with each other. Judgment produces
the proposition, which is a statement expressing
truth.
3. Reasoning is the act of the mind by which we derive
new truths from what is previously assumed to be
true. The result of reasoning is inference.
These three mental operations constitute the basis of
rational knowledge as opposed to sense knowledge. Rational
knowledge begins with perception of the senses of the material
qualities of physical objects. Perception constitutes sense knowledge
and its study belongs properly to psychology.
LOGIC: THE ESSENTIALS OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING
Our present study will take us progressively into the
discussion of these three mental operations. The focus will also be
discussed. Finally, we shall discuss the “fallacies” or errors of
reasoning, since the ability to recognize errors in reasoning.
THE NATURE OF CONCEPTS
Concepts are mental realities. They are presents only in
the mind. They represent the things we know. The material world
and everything on it are object of our mind. They are what we know,
the things we can possibly understand.
When we are confronted with something yet unknown,
such as a rare subject, it becomes instinctive to ask “what is it?” This
is curiosity urging the mind to penetrate the object, to take hold of
its, nature and to understand it. Knowledge begins when the mind
fully grasps the essence of a thing.
SIMPLE APPREHENSION
The essence of a thing is what constitutes it to be what it is
in itself. The mental expression of an essence or quiddity is what we
call the concept. The concept then is the meaning of the thing,
mentally evolved and expressed.
The mental act which evolves a concept is simple
apprehension. It is defined as “the mental process by which we
grasp the general meaning of a thing without affirming or denying
anything about it”10
Our bodily senses, both external and internal, are our
primary contact with the outside world. The total impressions of
stimuli on the senses constitute common sense.
Knowledge is common to man and beasts. But man goes
further beyond the limitations of the senses. By his intellectual
power of abstraction, he attains a level of intellectual knowledge.
While sense knowledge is material, concrete and particular,
intellectual knowledge is spiritual abstract, and universal. Simple
apprehension is the first act of the intellect.
IDEOGENESIS: THE INTELLECTUAL EVOLUTION OF CONCEPT
This topic properly belongs to psychology. We discuss it
here to provide it here to provide the student a broader background
on the nature of concepts.
We have distinguished between sense knowledge and
intellectual knowledge, or, knowledge of the sensible order and
knowledge of the intelligible order or level. Sense knowledge derives
from the perception of the senses acting on their proper stimuli. The
data supplied by the senses, such as the external senses of sight,
smell hearing, taste and touch, are the percepts which common
sense analyzes and synthesizes as imagination and memory express
the percepts in the mind as sensible images or phantasms.
The phantasm is a sort of mental picture of the thing
bearing all the physical qualities, such as color and size, of that thing
in that exact condition as impressed on the senses. The phantasm is
the raw material, so to speak, from which the intellect evolves a
concept.
The intellect has the dual function of abstraction and
understanding. The power of abstraction is called agent intellect and
the power of understanding, the possible intellect.
The agent intellect works on the phantasm, abstracts or
separates from it only those forms or species which reveal the
essence of the thing, leaving aside those material qualities which
make up the physical appearance of the thing. The result of
abstraction is an impressed species of abstracted nature. This
abstracted nature is what the possible intellect expresses as a
concept or idea simple apprehension is the act of the intellect.
Robert Edward Brennan presents this chart to show the
moments of ideogenesis. Note how the concept is involved from the
data of the senses by the process of intellectual abstraction.
(Thomistic Psychology, p. 185)
TYPES OF ABSTRACTION
We distinguish between formal and total abstraction.
1. Formal abstraction withdraws a form or formal quality
from a thing which Is either material or immaterial. For example,
“whiteness” is an abstraction from a white thing, such as dress or
house; “quantity” from something which can be measures
quantitatively; “justice” from a just action or a just person. In the
physical world, such abstracted forms or qualities do not exist apart
from a subject manifesting them.
2. Total abstraction withdraws a universal nature or
essence from particulars or individuals. For example, the nature
“animality” is abstracted from animals; “humanity” from humans;
and divinity from god.
PHANTASM AND CONCEPT
Most concepts are accompanied by phantasm. A
phantasm is a material, concrete and changeable image expressed
image expressed by the imagination. It is material because it is
impressed on the senses which can react only to material stimulus. It
is concrete because it is a mental replica of an individual thing
mirrored exactly as it appears to the external senses. It is
changeable because the thing it mirrors is prone to change, or our
memory of it is bound to fade.
The concept, on the other hand, is immaterial, abstract
and unchangeable. It is immaterial because it is an intelligible
species or form of the intellect whose object is something
immaterial. It is abstract because it is not limited to the physical
attributes of the thing as a particular object. It is unchangeable
because it is expressive of an essence which does not change. Our
concept, for example, of mother as “a women with a child of her
own” is not limited to this or that particular women, but applies to
all women falling under the given description. It will not change even
if women were to refuse becoming mothers. This concept of
“mother” will not change even if all women were to refuse
becoming mothers.
THE CONCEPT AS A SIGN
A sign, in general, is anything which leads us to be aware
of something else. The smoke is a sign of fire, dark clouds is the sign
of a coming rain, and a logo is a sign of a business corporation. Signs
are ether natural, conventional, or formal.
Natural signs are those that by their nature signify
something else. The smoke is a natural sign of fire the fever is a
natural sign of infection, the footprint is a natural sign of animal, and
laughter is a natural sign of joy and gladness.
Conventional sign are those that by convention or
tradition are assigned to signify something. These are also called
arbitrary sign. Example are flag, traffic sign, billboards military
patches, school uniforms, and others.
Formal sign are those that do not only signify things but
explain them to be what they are. A picture is a formal sign because
it offers the resemblance or likeness of a person. A concept is a
formal sign because it brings out those essential features which
constitute a thing to be what it is in itself. It is in this sense that we
say that a concept is a mental representation of a thing. Thus, to
have a concept is a mental representation of thing. Thus, to have a
concept of a thing is tantamount to understanding that thing. A
concept, then is that “by which we know” something.
COMPREHENSION AND EXTENSION
COMPREHENSION AND THE TWO PROPERTIES OF CONCEPT
1. Comprehension is the sum total of notes by which a
thing is known. “Notes”, refer to those essential attributes which
constitute the nature of a thing.
The nature of physical things is often complex. It cannot be
expressed mentally by a single note. The nature of man, for
example, is expressed by several conceptual notes, namely:
Substance, corporeal, vegetative, sentient and rational. The concept
“man” is a “rational animal” implies the notes of substance,
corporeal, vegetative and sentient.
Likewise, the concept “mother” implies all of the above
mentioned notes plus these: woman/with a child/ of her own. It is
sufficient to say that mother is woman with a child of her own” adult
female”. Notice, however, that it would not suffice to say that
mother is “a women”, nor a women with a child.” We have to
include all the notes in order to grasps the precise meaning of
“mother”.
Comprehension then is the totality of all those qualities by
which a thing is known to us. A partial or incomplete presentation of
these qualities or notes renders a concept vague.
2. Extension is the sum total of real things or individuals to
which the applies. The individuals, falling within the comprehension
of a concept, are said to be the inferiors of that concept. The
inferiors of “man” would be all men, taken individually as rick,
Anthony, Chinese, Japanese, Indonesian, American, etcetera. It
would, it would, in fact, include all actual and possible men.
The inferiors of “mother” would include “my mother”, “your
mother”, “his mother”, “their mother” or, Aling Marsha, Aling Otek,
Anita, etcetera.
INVERSE RATIO OF COMPREHENSION AND EXTENSION
Comprehension and Extension are reciprocal. They are
also inversely proportional to each other. This means that increasing
the number of notes in comprehension necessarily decreases the
number of inferiors in the extension. Thus, the greater the
comprehension, the lesser the extension, and vice-versa.
The clarity and preciseness of a concept depends upon the
sum total of notes included in its comprehension. The more notes a
concept has, the clearer and definitive does it become and,
therefore, to fever inferiors will it apply.
The diagram below show how the single conceptual note
“substance” applies to several categories of inferiors which include
spirits, minerals, plants, animals and men. Progressively, as more
and more notes are added, the inferiors decrease in number. Finally,
the total of notes listed applies only to inferior “man” and to nothing
else.
COMPREHENSION
EXTENSION
Substance spirits, minerals,
plants, beasts, men
Material substance minerals, plants,
beasts, men
Living material substance plants, beasts,
men
Sentient living material substance beasts, men
Rational sentient living material substance
3 KINDS OF CONCEPT
Concepts are mental representations of realities. As such,
they are present only in the mind and are referred to as “logical”
realities or being of reason as opposed to physical being existing
outside the mind.
This chapter discusses the different types of concepts. The
purpose is to provide the thinker with a guide with which he may
organize his thoughts. One may not expect to reason well, if his
thoughts are vague and muddled.
CONCEPTS OF THE FIRST AND SECOND INTENTION
Intention refers to the act mind as representing reality.
The mind can either present a concept as formal sign of nature or
quiddity, or as a logical reality present in the mind.
1. First intention is a concept presenting the nature or
quality of a thing in itself. It presents to us what something is in the
realm of physical realities. Notice in the examples below how the
concept man stands for what he is in reality:
a) Man is a corporeal substance.
b) Man is capable of abstract reasoning.
c) Man is endowed with body and soul.
2. Second intention is a concept which presents the mode
or manner how the mind understands such nature or quality as a
logical reality. Notice in the examples below how the concept man
does not stand for a physical being but for a concept aspect:
a) Man is the subject of the sentence.
b) Man is a species
c) Man is a universal.
Man, as we find him in the physical world, is an individual. As such
he can never be said to be “the subject of the sentence”, “a
species”, nor “a universal”. It is only our concept man which can be
any of these logical realities
CONCRETE AND ABSTRACT CONCEPTS
This distinction is based on the manner we conceptualize
the nature or quality of thing. We can either conceptualize nature or
quality as “form” inherent or residing in a” subject” or individual
being exhibiting such nature or quality.
1. Concrete concept signifies a nature or quality as found
residing in an individual or subject. The concept man stands for an
individual endowed with rational nature. Other concrete concepts
are animal, dog, chair, house, flower, friend, father, etcetera.
2. Abstract concept signifies a nature or quality as though
it exist on its. We can think, for we can think, for instance, in terms
of “manhood” or “manliness”. These are abstract concepts. So are
our concepts of animality, friendship, freedom, studentry, royalty,
etcetera.
Abstract concepts refer to the abstracted nature or quality
of things. They stand, therefore, for something real and objective.
They are not simply pigments of the imagination. Accordingly we
believe in “friendship” and are willing to die for “freedom”.
CONCEPT ACCORDING TO COMPREHENSION
We distinguish between simple and compound, absolute and
connotative concepts:
1. A simple concept expresses a single aspect or feature of
thing such as being, essence, action potentiality. There are but a few
simple concepts since the nature or attributes of things are not
simple.
A compound concept expresses several aspects or features
of a thing such as, man, Filipino, philosopher, society, stone wall, a
beautiful song, ercetera.
2. Absolute concept expresses a thing existing as a
substance or as though it were a substance or as though it were a
substance. The word “substance” refers to the nature of a thing
capable of existing on its own and of “substance” refers to the
nature of a thing capable of existing on its own and of supporting
the attributes belonging to such nature. The study of substance and
accidents or attributes belongs to metaphysics.
Our concrete concepts representing substances existing
independently from others are absolute concepts such as, man
animal, sun, angel, god, etcetera. Likewise, all abstract concepts are
absolute concepts since they present nature or quality as though it
were a substance such as, animality, humanity, kindness, beauty,
fatherhood, etcetera.
Opposed to absolute is the connotative concept. It is a
concept which signifies, not a substance, but a quality or feature
inhering in and, therefore, implying a substance. Strong, long rider,
beautiful, interesting-are connotative concepts. The adjective
“strong”, for instance connotes something or someday possessing
strength, without expressing it explicitly. Adjectives are connotative
concepts. Nouns derived from verbs are also connotative concepts
such as, rider, runner, teacher, worker, negotiator, fighter.
The thing to remember is that absolute concepts signify
substances, while connotative concepts signify qualities or
attributes.
Some authors classify concrete and abstract concepts
under the category of comprehension .
CONCEPTS ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
1. Singular concept signifies one specific individual such as,
my father, his teacher in logic, pres. Cory Aquino, the boy seated at
the last row by the window.
2. Universal concept signifies all the individuals within the
extension of such concept. Universal concepts are expressed
verbally with the quantifiers “all, “each”, and “every” everybody,
each one, all students, nobody, none, nothing-are particular
concepts.
3. Particular concept signifies but a part or portion of the
total extension of such concept. The quantifiers “some”, “several”,
“few” and their equivalents denote particularity, somebody, few
books, several teachers, majority of them, six hundred pesos – are
particular concepts.
4. Collective concept signifies a group or collection but not
members’ of such groups such as, family, class, army, corporation,
society, etcetera.
A collective concept may be considered a singular concept
when it refers to a specific group, such as when we speak of this
family” or the san Miguel PBA team”. It can also be treated as a
universal or particular as in all “teams” ore some teams”.
5. Univocal concept signifies a feature which is shared by
different individuals or subject in exactly the same way. The concept
Filipino is univocal when applied to each one of the natives of the
Philippines.
 6. Analogous concept signifies a feature which applies to
several individuals or subject in a partly the same and partly
different manner. The concept Filipino is analogous when applied to
a person and to a sport. The similarity comes from the fact that both
the person and the sport trace their origin in the Philippines. The
difference is precisely the distinction between a person and a person
a sport.
CONCEPTS ACCORDING TO ORIGIN
1. Real or Arbitrary concept.- A real concept is that which
is derived from factual reality such as, women laborer, lawyer,
etcetera. An arbitrary concept is that which is derived from the
imagination as mental fabrication or fiction such as, mermaid,
Superman, Darna, dog, etcetera.
2. Immediate or mediate concept.- an immediate concept
is that which is derived from direct perception of things such as,
myself, you , this table, doctor, garden, earth, etcetera. A mediate
concept is that which is derived from other concepts such as god,
supreme creator, devil, lawful action, etcetera.
CONCEPTS ACCORDING TO RELATION
Concepts may be related to one another in different ways.
Accordingly, concepts may be:
1. Identical concepts are those4 having the same
comprehension and extension, such as man and rational animal, god
and Supreme being, lawyer and attorney.
2. Similar concepts are those having the same extension
but different comprehension such as, writer and journalist, man and
moral animal, teacher and professor.
3. Compatible concepts are those expressing features
which may be present simultaneously in one individual or subject
such as, rich and humble, intelligent and beautiful, tall and dark,
happy and lazy.
4. Incomplete concepts are those expressing features
which cannot be present together and simultaneously in one
individual or subject such as, sick and healthy, wise and stupid, rich
and poor, beautiful and ugly.
5. Relative concepts are those that express a feature of a
thing which cannot be thought of without implying another such as,
slave and masters, husband and wife, parents and children, subject
and rule. Relative concepts are also called correlatives.
6. Privative concepts are those which express a the
absence or lack of perfection in an individual or subject such as,
blindness death, ignorance, immoral.
7. Contradictory concepts are those so related that one is
the simple negation of the other, such as a man and non-man mortal
and immortal, something and nothing, child and non- child.
8. Contrary concepts are those that express the extreme
opposites in a given category or series of the same class such as,
expensive and cheap, first and left and right, empty and full.
Contrary and Contradictory Concepts play a significant role
in immediate inference. We need to remember these laws:
A. LAWS OF CONTRADICTORY CONCEPTS
If one is true, the other is necessarily false. Both cannot be
true of the same thing time. Time if one is false, the other is
necessarily true. Both cannot be false of the same thing at the same
time.
A girl is either beautiful, or not beautiful. If she is beautiful,
then she is not non-beautiful. On the other hand, if she is non-
beautiful, then she is not a man.
Many English words expressing positive quality have
negative equivalents such as, honor and dishonor, holy and unholy,
definite and indefinite, logical and illogical. When no negative
equivalent is available, the prefix “non” is used such as, non-flower,
non-student.
B. LAWS OF CONTRARY CONCEPTS
Both cannot be true; but both can be false. Accordingly , if
one is true, then the other is false. But if one is false, then the other
is either true or false. Contrary concepts imply the presence of
middle alternates between the extremes of a given series. In a
spatial series, the opposite extremes of left and right imply the
center, left- center and right center.
If a car is at the right lane, then it is not at the left lane. But if the car
is not at the right lane, it is possible that it is situated at the left or at
the center lane. Thus, if one of the contraries is false, then the other
is doubtful.
TERMS AS VERBAL CONCEPTS
This chapter discusses the term or word as the verbal sign
expressing a concept.
Thought is invisible and imperceptible to the senses. We
cannot take it and put it in someone’s mind in the manner we may
drop a coin in piggy bank. We won’t know what somebody has in
mind unless we understand his gestures or signs.
Speech is the primary means by which we communicate
with one another. The language we use is a body of symbols with
which we articulate our feelings and ideas. The basic unit of
language is the word we call it- term, from the Latin terminus.
THE DEFINITION OF THE TERM
A term is the sensible conventional sign of a concept. For
Bachhuber, it is primarily an oral sign and he defines it as “an
articulate sound that servers as a conventional or arbitrary sign of a
concept”. Written language, according to him, directly signifies oral
language and, this, in turn, signifies thought. In this study, we take
the term to mean both the oral and the written word.
a) Term is sensible, because, being material, it is
perceptible to the senses, such as, our sense of hearing or sight. As
verbal symbol, a term is made up of the letters of the alphabet,
arranged in a manner that we can reproduce in guttural sound.
b) A term is sign because it is a sort of “name” or “label”
coined by men and its usage convention or tradition. For this reason,
terms are not constant or unchanging like the concept, they present.
Some terms are rendered obsolete and are dropped as they are no
longer “fashionable.”
c) A terms is a sign because it represent a concept and,
though the concept and, it represents reality what constitutes a
term as such is its meaning. The meaning of a given term is the
concept to back it up is literally “meaningless”. But such term has a
function in a language and is not entirely useless.
TERMS AS VERBAL CONCEPTS
When we ask for the meaning of a word or term, we are
asking, in fact, for the concept, it represents. The meaning of
a word is the same as the comprehension of the concepts.
We realize this whenever we consult the dictionary. What the
dictionary gives us is the sum total of the term. Therefore, the term
and the concept are convertible are they differ, however, in this: a
term is material and sensible, whereas a concept is immaterial and
intelligible.
In communication we communicate the meaning of our
words, not their spelling or pronunciation. Correct spelling and
pronunciation leads to miscommunication. And, of course,
miscommunication causes misunderstanding. Speaking, is a term.
This is because not every word in a language stands for something.
Some words do not express a meaning or concept. These words are
called co-significant or syncategorematic terms.
Co-significant or syncategorematic words do not express a
concept, but they are used in conjunction with (syn) another word
or words to express a definite meaning. The prepositions, for
example do not have meaning. But they add a new conceptual
aspect to another word such as “house” observe how the concept
house acquires a new meaning with different prepositions, such as:
in the house, on the house, under the house.
Our main interest is on the significant or categorematic
terms. These are the terms which express a meaning because they
stand for something, either a nature or attribute of nature. In
English grammar, we learn how nouns, adjective and verbs stand for
individual nature or qualities of individual natures.
Significant or categorematic terms are not necessarily
single words. Sometimes they are expressed as compound words. At
other times they are expressed as compound words. At other times,
they, are expressed as group of words or phrases. The following are
categorematic terms expressed in various grammatical forms.
a) philosopher
b) my philosopher friend
c) my philosopher friend studying history
Each of the above example signifies one person. But each word
group signifies a different aspect of that same person.
TERMS AS DEFINITIONS
A definition is a statement that gives the meaning of a
term. The word definition is derived from the Latin word, “definire”
which means “to enclose within limits”. In defining we set the
“limits” how a term is to be taken as meaning something and not
something else besides. Definition then marks off the thing defined
and differentiates it from another. Through definition a, term is
made definite as to its precise meaning.
A definition is not a sentence, like “man is a rational
animal”. A definition is usually a group of words, a complex term.
The definition of man consists in this word phrase- “rational animal”.
It may occur that a definition is the predicate of a sentence, but it
cannot be the entire sentence.
What the comprehension is to the concept, the definition
is to the term. And since the term is but an expression of a concept,
the definition of a term is but an expression of a concept, the
definition of a term is a term is but the comprehension of the
concept represented by that term.
TYPES OF DEFINITION
We distinguish between a nominal and a real definition.
1. A nominal definition-merely points out what the term
stands for, without explaining what it is in itself as symbol.
A nominal definition is either by etymology, by synonym,
by description, or by example.
a) Etymological definition states the origin or root word of
a symbol. We may say, for example, that philosophy comes from the
Greek
“Philo” (love) “Sophia” (wisdom), so that, Philosophy is
“love of wisdom”.
b) Definition by synonym present another word, more
popular or easily recognizable, to clarify term. For
example, instead of saying “proprietor, we say “owner”;
instead of “magistrate”, we say “judge”; instead of “lad”,
we say “boy”. Translating a word to its vernacular
equivalent is a form of definition by synonym.
c) Definition by description provides a description of the
thing as to its physical appearance. We may, for example,
describe a tree as “living being having roots, a single trunk,
several branches and leaves”.
d) Definition by example offers a sample, facsimile, or
picture of the thing referred. To prove the “taste” of a new
biscuit, a manufacturer may opt to offer sample of such
biscuits to customers in a supermarket. Illustrations,
diagrams, graphs- are methods of presenting a definition
by example.
2. A real definition not only declares what thing is signified
but explains what is its nature.
A real definition explains what a thing is and how it is different from
another. A real definition is a complex term, expressing the note
that a thing has in common with similar types and also the note that
differentiates that thing from another.
A real definition gives the proximate genus, the nearest class to
which a thing is classified, and the specific difference, or that aspect
which differentiates a thing from another belonging to the same
class. The proximate genus of man is “animal”; the specific
difference is “rational”. Thus, the real definition of man is “rational
animal”.
TYPES OF QUASI REAL DEFINITIONS
When a real definition is difficult or impossible to formulate, any
one of the following may be used to an advantage:
1. Definition by property gives the attributes of a thing
instead of its true specific difference. A property is a quality which is
rooted on the nature of a thing. Thus, if something has this definite
nature, it has also this definite property or attribute as “an animal
capable of speech “, or, “ an animal with religious sentiments”.
2. Definition by logical accident gives an attribute of a
thing which may or may not be present in that thing, but which we
may expect nonetheless owing to the nature of that thing we define
man by logical property when we say he is “capable of education”,
or capable of wise decision”.
3. Definition by cause gives the factors that contributes to
the constitute of a thing as such. There are four causes final,
efficient, material, and formal cause.
a) Definition by cause final cause states the purpose of a
thing. For example, a thermometer as “an instrument for measuring
body temperature; a watch as “a mechanical device for telling time’.
b) Definition by efficient cause states the origin or factor
that produced the thing. For example, man “creature made by god”;
a chair as “an artifact made by a carpenter’.
c) Definition by material cause states the stuff or material
form which the thing is made. For example, a nipa hut as “a
structure made of nipa and bamboo”; a pencil as “writing
instrument made of lead or charcoal enclosed in a slender piece of
wood”.
d) Definition by formal cause states that form or constitute
element which makes thing to be what it is. For example, a man “an
animal with a rational soul”; a car as “a motorized vehicle for
transport
RULES OF GOOD DEFINITION
1. A definition must be brief. It should include only those
features which explain a thing as it is. Brevity aids clarity.
Verbosity leads to confusion. Thus, a definition must be
short, unless it is extremely necessary to provide details to
sufficiently explain a thing.
2. A definition must be clear. The purpose of a definition is to
explain a thing or a concept. A definition, therefore ,
should unravel the nature of a thing and should not
obscure it.
3. A definition must be positive. A definition should tell us
what a thing is and not what it is not. To say for example,
that logic is “not psychology” does not give us any
information about logic.
However, negative concepts may be defined negatively. Thus, we
say ignorance is “the absence of knowledge”, or blindness is “the
lack of sight”. Because our knowledge of immaterial objects is not
direct, we may also define them negatively. Thus, we may define a
spirit as “a being without physical body”.
4. A definition must be adequate. This means that the
definition states exactly the nature of the thing defined so
that, in effect, they are convertible or co-extensive. For
example, it is not adequate to say that man is “an animal”,
because the animal aspect is merely a part of man’s nature
and does not constitute its entirely. The same result is
achieved if we say that man is “rational” for the same
obvious reason. The adequate definition of man is
“rational animal”. Thus, the same idea is conveyed
whether we say “man is a rational animal”, or, “A rational
animal is man”.
5. A definition must not contain the term or feature defined.
This is obvious, because we cannot define a term a term
by itself. This results in a tautologous definition which is an
error. We cannot for example, say that logic is “a
knowledge pertaining to logic”, or, that a man is “a man
that reasons well”.
At times, however, we are simply interested in pointing out a
characteristic of a thing and, in this case, we may include the term
defined in the definition. Thus, we may say that a concrete is a
“concept” which signifies the nature or quality inherent in an
individual or subject.
TYPES OF TERMS
Since terms are simply the verbal symbols of concepts, the
classification of concepts also apply to them. However, term insofar
as they are sign on their own right, have certain peculiarities which
merit a closer look.
A. TERMS ACCORDING TO COMPREHENSION
It is possible to use one verbal symbol for several
concepts. It is also possible to have several terms representing only
one concept. Accordingly, we may classify terms on the basis their
comprehension as:
1. Univocal term is a term having one fixed meaning or
comprehension, such as: photosynthesis, anthropology,
protozoa, atom etcetera. Univocal terms are limited in
number and these include the so called “technical terms”.
2. Equivocal term is a term having two or several unrelated
meanings. For example, the word pitcher may mean either
a baseball player, a jar, or container for holding a liquid.
There are many equivocal terms in the English language. When using
an equivocal term in a sentence or paragraph, we should assign to it
one and the same meaning. Changing the meaning attached to a
given word constitutes an error called equivocation. Therefore, we
should use words univocally, not equivocally.
3. Analogous term is a term whose meaning is applied to
several objects in a partly similar and partly different
sense. The word head refers primarily to that part of our
human anatomy which encloses the brain. We also call
“head”- the chief of a department, the leader of group, or
the mastermind of plan or project.
TYPES OF ANALOGY
In order to understand better the function of analogous
terms in our language, we shall examine the various types of analogy
and their foundation.
An analogous term applies to several individuals, called
inferior, in a partly the same and partly different sense.
The inferior to which an analogous term applies primarily
and principally called primary analogue. The inferior to which is
called secondary analogue. The term” healthy”, for example, applies
primarily to a living organism as its primary analogue. Only a living
organism can be described properly as “healthy”. But the word may
also be applied to food, sport, environment, thought, complexion, or
complexion, or conversations-as to its secondary analogues.
Analogy is divided into (1) intrinsic and extrinsic analogy,
and (2) analogy by proportionality and analogy by attribution.
1. Intrinsic and extrinsic Analogy. An analogy is intrinsic when
the attribute signified by the concept or term is account of
their similarity. The adjective “intelligent” is analogous by
intrinsic analogy when applied to Dan, Doc, Noemi, and
Pilar who are each intelligent in their own special way. In
other words, the perfection signified by the term
“intelligent” is realized in all the analogues intrinsically.
An analogy is extrinsic when an attribute applies principally to a
primary analogue and only secondary to another on account of its
similarity to the primary analogue. The adjective “golden” applies
primarily and principally to gold. It is applied to a statue, a talent, an
event, a person extrinsically and as to its secondary analogues.
Likewise, the base of a mountain is not a “foot” intrinsically. It is a
“foot” by extrinsic analogy and by reason to its similarity to the feet
of man which support his weight. The metaphors, such as smiling
sun, murmuring brook, or sighing branches-are example of extrinsic
analogy.
2. Analogy of proportionality is based on the similarity of
functions between two things. It is analogy of
proportionality that we apply the word “father” to a man
who begets a child and to a priest. Just as the father
provides for the physical life of people. There is similarity
of functions between the two. Likewise, we refer to Christ
a “shepherd” because he cares for the soul of men in the
same way that a shepherd cares for the flock of animals.
Analogy of attribution is based on the similarity of a secondary to a
primary analogue. For example, Jose Rizal alluded to the similarity of
death to inactivity or rest when he wrote-“to die is to rest”. Consider
this example from Shakespeare:
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, so do our
minutes hasten to their end; each changing place with that which
goes before in sequent toil all forwards to contend.
B. TERMS ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
1. A singular term applies only to one specific individual such
as, the chief justice, the eldest son of Juan de la Cruz, the
scientist who invented the telephone, etcetera.
2. A particular term applies to a part or portion of a totality,
such as, some ladies, a few meters, several doves, a
number of boys, ten books, etcetera. A particular term is
signified by the quantifiers-some, few, several a number
of, majority and their equivalents
3. A universal term applies to all the individuals comprising a
whole, such as all dancers, every window, each speaker,
etcetera. The quantifiers for universal terms are all, every,
each and others.
THE SUPPOSITION OF TERMS
The supposition of a term refers to the exact meaning it
has in relation to the other words in a given sentence. While a
dictionary may give us several meanings for a word, in a sentence, a
word can only have one meaning.
The meaning of a word in a sentence may be gathered
from different points of view. Accordingly supposition may be based
on the following:
A. ON THE BASIS OF THE THING SIGNIFIED
1. Real supposition is present when the term stand for a
thing which exist a physical object in the realm of realities.
Example: My classmate is a scholar.
2. Logical supposition is present when the term expresses an
aspect of a concepts itself as it exist only in the mind.
Example: Man is the subject matter of Ethics.
3. Imaginary supposition is present when the term signifies
something which can be true only by analogy to another.
Darna saved the people from monsters.
4. Metaphorical supposition is present when term signifies
something which can be true only by analogy to another.
Example: money is the root of all evils.
5. Symbolic supposition is present when a term signifies
something which is true only from agreement of a group
of men. Example: The Jaguars defeated the Eagles in the
championship.
6. Material supposition is present when the term stands for
itself insofar as it is a verbal symbol. Example: Man is a
three lettered word.
B. ON THE BASIS OF THE EXTENSION.
1. Individual supposition is present when the term stands for
an individual person or thing. Example: The present
chairman of the board of Trustees.
2. Universal supposition is prevent when the term stands for
all the individuals of a given whole. Example: All the
students of PSBA.
3. Particular supposition is present when a term stands for a
portion of a given whole or totality. Example: some
women are Number are corporate managers.
4. Indefinite supposition is present when a term stands for
unspecific number of individuals. Example: Filipinos are
hospitable.
DETERMINING SUPPOSITION
Since a term may be used in a sentence with any of the
supposition mentioned above, it becomes necessary to formulate a
method for determining the supposition of a term in a proposition.
Given that a sentence is “S is P;” we may determine the supposition
of the subject-term, by asking the following questions:
1. Is the “S” something which exist in the real world? If this is
so, the supposition is real.
2. IS the “S” aspect of the concept which is present only in
the mind? If this is so, the supposition is imaginary.
3. Is the “S” something which exists only in the imagination?
If this is so, the supposition is imaginary.
4. Is the “S” something by analogy to another? If so, the
supposition is analogous, or metaphorical.
5. Is the “S” the term itself as material symbol? If so, the
supposition is material.
6. Is the “P” applicable to all the individuals represented by
“S”? If this is so the supposition is universal.
7. Is the “P” applicable to only to a portion of individuals
represented by the “S” if this is so, the supposition is
particular.
8. IS the “P” applicable to only one definite individual
referred to by “S” if so, the supposition is singular or
individual.
9. Is the “P” applicable to an unspecified individual
represented by the “S”? If so, the supposition is indefinite.
5. THE PROPOSITION
Language is symbol. Take two or three letters of the
alphabet and you have a word. Take two or three words and you
have a sentence. Such is the power of a sentence that it expresses
the loftiest concept of life, such as truth, righteousness, and love.
In this chapter, we shall discuss a special type of sentence
the proposition. For the ancient thinkers, proposition. For the
ancient thinkers, proposition is the enunciation of truth or falsity.
We may say that the “launching pad” of an argument is a
proposition expressing a simple truth.
THE MENTAL ACT OF JUDGMENT
Judgment, which is the second mental operation, is
defined as the mental act of affirming or denying the relationship
between two concepts or enunciations.
While the act of simple apprehension confines itself to
grasping the essence of a thing, the act of judgment takes two
concepts or two enunciations and “decides” mentally on their
agreement or disagreement, on their identity or non-identity, with
each other. Judgment, then involves either one of these acts (a) that
of affirming, or (b) that of judgment as “the act by which the
intellect unites by affirmation, or separates by negation.
The verbal expression of mental judgment is the
proposition. A simple proposition is made up of the two concepts
being affirmed or denied and of the copula which stands for the act
of affirmation or negation. The two concepts constitute the matter
of judgment. the copula, or the linking verb, constitutes the form of
judgment.
It is the combination of matter and form which gives us a
proposition, such as:
a) Logic is essay.
b) The movie is interesting.
c) His father is not a lawyer.
THE MATERIAL STRUCTURE OF PROPOSITION
The position is the verbal expression of the mental
judgment, affirming or denying the identity or non-identity of two
concepts. It also known as enunciation, or statement, or sentence.
From the structural point law, a proposition is composed
of the subject, the copula, and the predicate. It follows this pattern:
S-C-P
The subject stands for the thing under consideration; the
predicate for what is affirmed or denied of the subject; and the
copula for the act of affirmed or denied of the subject; and the
copula for the act of affirmation or negation. This is expressed by
the present tense of the linking verb: “is” or “is not “.
THE THOUGHT- CONTENT OF PROPOSITION
Materially, a proposition is the combination of subject,
predicate, and cupola. But what formally constitutes a proposition
as judgment is its thought-content. The act of affirmation or
negation constitute a declaration of a fact, or a declaration of falsity.
Thus, a proposition is “a sentence or statement which expresses
truth or falsity.”
A logical proposition is a declarative sentence. Obviously,
not every sentence is a logical proposition, expressive of a judgment.
KINDS OF PROPOSITIONS
 Fundamental in logic is the distinction between a
categorical and a hypothetical proposition.
1. Categorical: A categorical proposition unites or separates
two concepts by means of the linking verb “to be”.
Example:
a) Some sharks are man-eaters.
b) No crime is justifiable.
c) Every good action is meritorious.
2. Hypothetical: A hypothetical proposition unites or
separates, not two concepts, but two enunciations by
means of a non-verb copula often, a conjunction is used
instead, such as: “if” “either-or”. Examples:
The kind of cupola being employed is not the only distinction
between the categorical and the hypothetical propositions. A
categorical proposition expresses a positive, or a negative judgment,
in an absolute manner, without any conditionality. On the other
hand, a hypothetical proposition expresses a judgment which is
qualified by a certain conditionality.
Again, the truth expressed by a categorical propositions is
verifiable by its conformity or not with reality, while that of the
hypothetical depends upon the correct formulation of the
hypothetical proposition itself and only by indirect reference to
reality. Notice the difference between these examples:
a) Categorical: A Filipino is a native of the Philippines. (The
statement is a direct declaration of a fact which can be
verified as true or false by reference to objective reality.)
b) Hypothetical: if he is a native of the Philippines, he is a
Filipino. (Notice how the truth of “he is a Filipino” depends
upon the truth of the conditionality “if he is a native of the
Philippines”.)
The hypothetical proposition shall be discussed in detail in another
chapter. For this chapter, we shall focus our attention on the
categorical proposition.
TYPES OF CATEGORICAL PROPOSITIONS
A. ACCORDING TO THE EXTENSION OF THE SUBJECT
1. Singular Proposition. This is a proposition whose subject is
a singular concept, that is, it refers to one specific
individual. Examples
a) Rey Christopher is the valedictorian of the class
b) This book is very interesting.
c) The head of the science department is my teachers.
The grammatical singular subject stands for numerical one. In logic,
a singular concept or term stands for one specific individual. From
the grammatical point of view, the subject in this sentence “A boy is
crying”-is singular. It could be any “boy” who is crying.
2. Particular Proposition- is a proposition whose subject
stands for a particular concept, that is to portion or part of
a given totality. Examples:
a) Some guests arrived early.
b) Several items are missing from the room.
c) A number of students volunteered for a job.
3. Universal Proposition- is a proposition whose subject
stands for a universal concept, that is, to all the inferiors or
individuals of the extension of such concept. Examples:
a) All men are mortal.
b) Every father is proud of his child.
c) Each scholar was given a citation.
4. Indefinite Proposition- is a proposition whose subject
stands for an indefinite number of individuals. It is so
designated precisely because it does not any quantifying
particle to signify its extension. Examples:
a) Filipinos are deeply religious.
b) The children are playing in the yard.
c) Politicians are corrupt.
B. According to the Quality of the Copula.
1. Affirmative: This is a categorical proposition which affirms
the existing relationship between the subject and the
predicate. Examples:
a) My son is a student of Marist School.
b) Some drivers are reckless.
2. Negative: This is a categorical proposition that denies the
relationship between subject and predicate. Examples:
a) Some flowers are not red.
b) The teacher is not strict.
C. According to the Matter Affirmed or Denied.
1. Simple: This is a categorical proposition which unites or
separates only two concepts or terms. Examples:
a) Drug addiction is a menace to society.
b) AIDS is incurable.
c) Eva is a good mother.
2. Compound: This is a categorical proposition which
expresses as a single enunciation of two or more
propositions. Examples:
a) He is an intelligent, dashing fellow.
b) Mr. Umali is a loyal friend and a good teacher.
c) Some students are diligent, but others are not.
Manuel Piňon classifies compound proposition into copulated,
relative, adversative, and casual propositions. It is not necessary to dwell on
them for purposes of our present study. Suffice to say that all compound
propositions are reductible to simple proposition by breaking them into their
components.
D. According to its Thought- Content.
1. True: A categorical proposition whose thought-content
agrees with objective realy is said to be factual or true.
Examples:
a) Man is a rational animal.
b) A triangle has three sides.
c) Marriage is a state of life.
2. False: A categorical proposition whose thought-content
does not agree with objective reality is false. Examples:
a) A building is a living thing.
b) Amorsolo is an American painter.
The truth expressed by a proposition can either be
necessary or contingent. Truth is necessary when it expresses
something which is and cannot be otherwise. Truth is contingent
when it expresses something which is but can be otherwise.
Accordingly, we have two kinds of truthful propositions:
a) Necessary Proposition- states not merely a fact
but a truth which can be other than what it is.
Examples:
a. Man is rational animal.
b. A tree is not a carabao.
c. A society is a community of persons.
b) Contingent Proposition- states a mere fact, that
is, it declares something which is, but which
could be, or could have been, other than what it
is. Examples:
a. Manny is a doctor.
b. The streets of Manila are flooded.
c. The President of the country is a lady.
Every proposition whose predicate is a logical accident or
quality of the subject is a contingent proposition. On the other hand,
all propositions whose predicate is a genus, specific difference, or
essential attribute of the subject is a necessary.
E. The Subject and the Quality of the Copula, Taken Together.
1. Singular Affirmative:
Example; That man is my cousin.
2. Singular Negative:
Example: Mr. Antonio is not an accountant.
3. Universal Affirmative:
Example: All men are equal.
4. Universal Negative:
Example: No stone is a living thing.
5. Particular Affirmative:
Example: Some workers are women.
6. Particular Negative:
Example: Some fruits are not sweet.
7. Indefinite Affirmative:
Example: A law is a directive of action.
8. Indefinite Negative:
Example: Filipinos are not industrious.
The Logical Form of A Categorical Proposition
The logical form is the structural pattern which shows the
material relationship of subject, predicate, and copula. The logical
form of categorical proposition follows this pattern:
S-C-P (Subject-Copula-Predicate)
Our manner of speech does not always follow this pattern.
It is not usual to speak in sentences such as “man thinks”, “the dog
runs fast”, or “the guests arrived early”. In logic, all sentences of this
sort are reductible to logical form by changing the main verb to the
linking verb. This becomes necessary in order to render explicit the
subject and the predicate which are affirmed or denied. We may
change a sentence into its logical form by choosing any of these
methods:
1. Change the verb to present tense progressive. Thus,
“Man thinks” becomes “Man is thinking”.
 2. Incorporate the verb in a phrase. Thus, “Man thinks”
becomes “Man is a thinking animal”.
3. Change the verb into a noun. Thus, “Man thinks”
becomes “Man is a thinker”.
4. Change the verb into a relative clause. Thus, “Man
thinks” becomes “Man is an animal that thinks”.
Whichever method you choose must retain the exact
meaning of the original. Otherwise, the resulting logical
form may as will be a different proposition. Logic is not so
much concerned elegant speech as with the clarity of
expression. Knowledge with the logical form will be handy
when we study immediate inference.
The Quantifiers of Terms:
Certain syncategorematic words, such as “every”, “no”,
“some”, “this”, and “all” are called quantifiers or quantifying
particles. They indicate the extension of a term used in a
proposition.
Certain quantifiers are permanent signs of a given quantity
or extension. Others may be for a different quantity under different
circumstances. For example, the quantifier “every” signifies a
universal extension in “every man”, but a particular extension in
“Not every man.” McCall gives us this graph:
Quantity Permanent Signs
Changing Signs
Universal No
Every, All, Each, The
Particular Some, Certain, Few, Several
Every, Each, All, A, One
Singular This, That, Proper Noun
The, A, One
THE FOUR CATEGORICALS
The categorical proposition is the basic unit of an
argument. In its simplest form, it consists of subject term, copula,
and predicate term. It is a verbal expression of something which is
perceived as true.
In the previous chapter, we saw how the combination of
the quantity of the subject and the quality of the copula resulted in
the formulation of 8 propositions. In this chapter, we see the
reduction of this proposition into four fundamental types.
Reduction of Singular and Indefinite Propositions
Basically, the subject-term is either universal or particular.
A universal subject includes the singular subject of the singular
proposition. It also includes the indefinite subject of an indefinite
proposition.
The subject-term of an indefinite proposition is taken as a
universal, when the predicate of such proposition signifies the
genus, the specific difference, or an essential attribute applicable to
all the inferiors of the subject. Otherwise, such subject is treated as
a particular and the proposition itself is considered a particular.
To illustrate: The predicate “human” in the indefinite
proposition “Filipinos are human”, is an essential attribute
applicable to “each and every Filipino”; thus, the subject-term
“Filipinos” is considered a universal term. Accordingly, the whole
proposition is classified as a universal proposition.
On the other hand, the predicate “industrious” in the
indefinite proposition “Filipinos are industrious” does not apply to
“each and every Filipino”, thus, the subject “Filipinos” is taken as a
particular term and the proposition itself is classified as a particular.
Therefore, a universal proposition is one which has either
a) a universal subject-term, or b) a singular subject-term, or c) an
indefinite subject-term which is potentially a universal proposition.
A particular proposition is one which has either a) a
particular subject-term, or b) an indefinite subject-term which is
potentially a particular term.
On the basis of the quantity of the subject, a proposition
can only be either a universal or particular proposition. Each of them
has two opposing formulations on the basis of the copula which can
either be affirmative or negative. Thus, we have only four
categoricals, namely:
1. Universal Affirmative
2. Universal Negative
3. Particular Affirmative
4. Particular Negative
The Symbols of Categoricals
The four categoricals are identified by their respective
symbols. These are the symbols: “A”, “E”, “I”, “O.”
The letters “A” and “I” are derived from the vowels of the
Latin word “afirmo” which means “I affirm”. Both letters stands for
affirmative propositions. “A” stands for universal affirmative. “I”
stands for particular affirmative propositions.
The letters “E” and “O” are derived from the vowels of the
Latin word “nego” which means “I deny”. Both letters stand negative
propositions. “E” stands for universal affirmative. “O” stands for
particular negative propositions.
1. The “A” Proposition:
The “A” proposition is an affirmative proposition
with a universal or potentially universal subject. Its logical
form is; “All S is P”. Examples:
a. All children are duty bound to respect their
parents.
b. Every right is limited.
c. (All) voters are citizens without legal
impediment.
2. The “E” Proposition
The “E” proposition is a negative proposition
with a universal or potentially universal subject. Its logical
form is: “No S is P”. Examples:
a. No man is perfect.
b. No dog is rational.
c. No cheating is allowed.
The above logical form is the only correct
pattern for “E” proposition. The article “No”, while is
placed before the subject, qualifies the copula. Placing it
before the subject indicates that the subject is universal:
“No man”, “none”, or “nobody”.
3. The “I” Proposition
The “I” proposition is an affirmative proposition
with a particular or indefinite subject. Its logical form is:
“Some S is P”. Examples:
a. Some graduates are teenagers.
b. Few students are in the Dean’s List.
c. A man is brave. (indefinite particular)
4. The “O” Proposition
The “O” proposition is a negative proposition
with a particular or indefinite subject. Its logical form is:
Some S is not P.” Examples:
a. Some doctors are not rich.
b. The boys are not happy (indefinite particular).
c. Cars are not essential to life. (indefinite
particular)
In its particular usage, the quantifier “some” is
taken to mean “only some”. Thus, a declaration such as
“Some men are rational” is interpreted as falsity, or an
error in speech. In logic, “some” means “at least some” so
that any affirmation or negation with respect to this
“some” or portion does not necessarily reflect on the
totality.
Note also that the quantifiers “all” and “every”
when preceded by the particle “Not” do not signify
universality, but particularity. Thus, the following are “O”
propositions:
a. Not every student is dull.
b. Not all prisoners are guilty.
c. Not all women are mothers.
As a rule, when the copula is negative, “every”,
“each”, and “all” denotes particularity as in the following:
a. Every cat is not black.
b. All good works are not rewarded.
c. Each student is not a scholar.
The Quantity of a Predicate-Term
The quantity or extension of the predicate-term is
important in understanding the relationship between subject and
predicate. Bachhuber gives us the following rules governing the
quantity of the predicate.
1. The predicate is singular when it stands for one definite
individual or group, as in this examples:
a. Sampaguita is our national flower.
b. Mrs. Mona Macalipay is the chief librarian.
c. Mario is the eldest son of Don Jose.
2. The predicate of an affirmative proposition is particular,
unless it is singular, as in these examples:
a. Florante is a Filipino.
b. All cows are herbivorous.
c. Some books are expensive.
In affirmative proposition, the subject stands for
an indeterminate portion of the extension of the
predicate. This means that the subject is just one of the
inferiors denoted by the predicate. Thus, the subject
“Florante” in “Florante is a Filipino” is simply “one of the
Filipinos”. It would never be correct to think of the
predicate “Filipino” as a universal, since this would mean
that “every Filipino is Florante”.
3. The predicate of a negative proposition is universal,
unless it is singular, as in these examples:
a. No man is an angel.
b. Some stones are not edible.
c. Her boyfriend is not an engineer.
In a negative proposition, the subject is totally
excluded from the extension of the predicate. To make
this exclusion complete and total, the predicate should
always be taken as a universal. This means that none of
the inferiors signified by the predicate is the subject. Thus,
“No man is an angel” precisely means that the concept
“angel” totally exclude the concept “man”.
The Logical Diagram of Propositions
Leonard Euler, a Swiss Mathematician
introduced the use of logical diagram to illustrate the
relationship of the Subject and the Predicate on the basis
of their respective extension. In this presentation a full
circle suggests a universal extension, a partial circle
suggests a particular extension, and a circle with broken
lines indicate a singular extension.
1. Diagram of the “A” Proposition
Example: All men are rational.
The subject-term “man”, being a
universal term, is drawn as full circle inside the
circle indicating the predicate “rational”. The
drawing shows how “each and every” man is
“rational”. That the circle representing the
predicate is not completely filled up by the
subject-term indicates that “rational is taken as a
particular. Theoretically, it means that there are
other beings which are rational but are not men.
Note: Diagram
2. Diagram of the “E” Proposition
Example: No man is an angel.
The circle are drawn fully and
separately to indicate that the Subject and the
Predicate have nothing in common with each
other. The subject-term, all the individuals it
signifies, can never be within the extension the
predicate-term.
Note: Diagram
3. Diagram of the “I” Proposition
Example: Some men are rational.
The shaded portion shows which
“some” of the subject-term is identified with the
“some” of the predicate. It shows “the men who
are rational”. Take note how this drawing may
mislead us into thinking that there are men who
are not rational. This is precisely why Bachhuber
cautions us about the limitation of a quantitative
presentation. Nonetheless, this limitation may
be overcome by keeping in mind that, in logic, to
speak of “some is” does not necessarily imply
that “some is not”.
Note: Diagram
4. Diagram of the “O” Proposition
` Example: Some men are not angels.
The shaded portion shows which
“some” of the subject is excluded from the
extension of the predicate. Again, take note of
the meaning of “some” in logic.
Note: Diagram
5. Diagram of “A” Proposition with Singular
Subject
Example: Jose Rizal is our national
hero.
The subject-term “Jose Rizal” is
illustrated in broken lines, coinciding perfectly
with the circle indicating the predicate. This
means that the subject and the predicate are
convertible with each other.
Note: Diagram
7. OPPOSITION
In this chapter, and in the next, we shall discuss
immediate inference. Inference, strictly speaking, is
drawing a conclusion from one or more propositions
assumed as premise or premises. These assumed premises
serve as the “medium” or bridge by which a conclusion is
derived. Thus, inference is mediate.
An inference that does not employ a medium is
called immediate inference. It renders explicit that which
is implicit in a given proposition. There are several
methods of immediate inference. We shall deal, for the
same being, with the opposition of categoricals, and in the
next chapter, with equipollence.
Opposition
The categorical proposition has two absolute
properties: the quantity and the quality. The former refers
to the extension of the subject-term, whether it is
universal or particular, while the latter refers to the
copula, whether it is affirmative or negative. On the basis
of the quantity and quality, the categorical proposition is
distinguished as an A, E, I, and O propositions.
This four categoricals relate to each other as
opposites. Propositions are opposites either because the
truth of one excludes the truth of the other, or the falsity
of one excludes the falsity of the other. “The impossibility”
according to Bachhuber, “of being simultaneously true, or
false, or either true or false, is the essential note of logical
opposition.
To oppose propositions is to affirm or deny the
same predicate on the same subject. The process of
oppositional inference begins by assuming a proposition to
be either true or false and, on this basis, goes on to
conclude on the truth or falsity of any of its opposites.
Types of Oppositions
There are four types of opposites:
contradictories, contraries, subcontraries, and subalterns.
The relative position of each one is illustrated in the
square of opposition.
Note: Diagram
1. Contradictory
Contradictories are two propositions differing in
quantity of subject-term and in quality of the copula. Such
propositions are A and the O, and the E and the I. Both
propositions cannot be true or false at the same time.
The Rules of Contradictories are stated as
follows:
1. If one is true the other is false.
2. If one is false the other is true.
Example of Rule 1.
a. A-O: If “Every Filipino is Asian” is true, then
“Some Filipino are not Asians” is false.
b. E-I: If “No man is an angel” is true, then “Some
men are angels” is false.
Examples of Rule 2.
c. I-E: If “Some cows are writers” is false, then
“No cow is a writer” is true.
d. O-A: If “Some cats are not animals” is false,
then “All cats are animals” is true.
 2. Contrary
Contraries are two propositions with the same
quantity but different quality. Such propositions are the A
and the E, and vice versa. Both cannot be true
simultaneously but can be false simultaneously. This
means that the truth of one excludes the truth of the
other, but the falsity of one does not exclude the falsity of
the other.
The Rules of Contraries are stated as follows:
1. If one is true the other one is false.
2. If one is false the other one is doubtful.
3. Both can be false at the same time, but never true at
the same time.
Examples of Rule 1.
a. A-E: If “Every fish is aquatic” is true, then “No
fish is aquatic” is false.
b. E-A: If “No stone is edible” is true, the “All
stones are edible” is false.
Examples of Rule 2.
c. E-A: If “No cat is black” is false, then “All cats
are black” is doubtful, that is, either true or false.
d. A-E: If “All XY is WX” is false, then “No XY is
WX” is doubtful.
Note that in example c), “All cats are black” is, of
course, not doubtful but false. It is false, not because it is
contrary of the false, “No cat is black”, but because our
experience tells.
Tells that it is so. Bachhuber cautions that such
result is doubtful “only in the form or structure”, but not in
thought-content. This means that, on the basis of contrary
relation, it is presumptuous to assume that since one is
false, the other is, either true or false.
We recall contrary concepts are such that they
denote the extremes of a given series or category without
excluding the middle alternates or gradations between
those extremes. Thus, in between the color extremes of
black and white-are the other colors of the spectrum.
Thus, if it is false that “No cat is black”, we cannot
presume that the opposites “All cats are black” is true or
false; precisely, because some cats are neither black or
white but some other color. Thus, the opposite of a false
contrary proposition is doubtful in form. Look at the
example d) and note how the rule fits well as abstract or
value-less propositions, precisely because our experience
of things do not intrude.
On the basis of the above explanation, we see how both
contraries can be false at the same time as in this example.
If “All flowers are sweet” is false, then “No
flower is sweet” is also false.
On the other hand, in the example below a false proposit
gets a true opposite:
If “All men are angels” is false, then “No man is
an angel” is true.
These two examples further show how a false
contrary proposit or starting point does not necessarily
imply that the other is true or false. Thus, the rule: if one is
false, the other one is doubtful in form. Materially, it could
be either true or false.
3. Subcontrary
Subcontraries are two propositions
with the same quantity but different quality. Such
propositions are the I and the O, and vice versa. Both
cannot be false simultaneously but can be true
simultaneously. Both can be true “in form”.
The Rules of Subcontraries are stated as follows:
1. If one is false, the other is true.
2. If one is true, the other is doubtful.
Example of Rule 1.
a. I-O: If “Some Catholics are protestants” is
false, then “Some Catholics are not protestants”
is true.
b. O-I: If “Some men are not human” is false,
then “Some men are human” is true.
Example of Rule 2.
c. I-O: If “Some prisoners are guilty” is true, then
“Some prisoners are not guilty” is doubtful (in
form).
d. O-I: If “Some DY is not CNY” is true, then
“Some DY is CNY” is doubtful.
4. Subalterns
The subalterns are two affirmative and
two negative propositions which differ in
quantity such as the A and the I, and the E and
the O.
Subalterns are not real opposites.
Their relationships is that of a superior to an
inferior, vice versa. The superior proposition is
the universal (E or A) and is called superaltern.
The inferior proposition is the particular (I or O)
and is called subaltern. Both can be either true
or false at the same time.
The Rules of Subalterns are stated as follows:
1. If the universal is true, the particular is true;
but if the universal is false, the particular is
doubtful.
2. If the particular is true, the universal is
doubtful; but if the particular is false, the
universal is false.
Examples of Rule 1.
a. A-I: Since “All voters are citizens” is true, then
“Some voters are citizens” is true.
b. E-O: Since “No accountant is lawyer” is false,
then “Some accountants are not lawyers” is
doubtful (in form only).
Examples of Rule 2.
c. I-A: Since “Some fruits are chico” is true, then
“All fruits are chico” is doubtful (in form only).
d. O-E: Since “Doves are not bird” is false, then
“No dove is a bird” is false.
In example b) “Some accountants are
not lawyers” is said to be doubtful in form only,
Materially as to its thought-content, it is true. It
is doubtful in the sense that no certainty of
either truth or falsity is possible on the basis of a
false proposit. A false proposit on this category
implies nothing, except that it is false in itself.
The least that could be done is to infer a
doubtful opposite from it.
In example c) “All fruits are chico” is
also doubtful in form, because it is
presumptuous to conclude the truth or falsity of
a universal proposition on the basis of a “few” or
limited instances as that expressed in a
particular proposition.
5. Oppositional Inference
Irving M. Copi gives us a list of
possibilities of an immediate inference based on
the square of opposition. There is no need for
the student to memorize and understand the
laws of the opposition. He may use the list below
for checking the accuracy of his inference:
Given A as true: E is false, I is true, O is
false.
Given E as true: A is false, I is false, O is
true.
Given I as true: E is false, A and O are
doubtful.
Given O as true: A is false, E and I are
doubtful.
Given A as false: O is true, E and I are
doubtful.
Given E as false: I is true, A and O are
doubtful.
Given I as false: A is false, E is true, O is
true.
Given O as false: A is true, E is false, I is
true.
8. EDUCTION
No two persons speak exactly the
same way. A declaration may be worded
differently but may mean exactly the same.
Equipollence or equivalence is a method of
rendering in another way like the truth or falsity
expressed in a given proposition. This method of
immediate inference is commonly known as
eduction.
As described by Bachhuber, eduction
“is the formulation of the new proposition by the
interchange of the subject and the predicate of
an original proposition and/or by the use or
removal of negatives.
There are four methods of eduction:
conversion, obversion, contraposition, and
inversion.
A. Conversion
Conversion is the rephrasing of the
truth of a given proposition by interchanging the
subject and the predicate, without over-
extending the quantity of either terms. A term is
said to be over-extended when its quantity is
raised from particular to universal. However, a
term which is reduced from universal to
particular is not considered “over-extended”.
The original proposition is called
convertend. The new formulation derived from
the convertend is called converse.
Procedure:
1. Interchange S and P without over-extending
the quantity.
2. Retain the quality of the copula of the
convertend, that is, the affirmative remains
affirmative and the negative remains negative.
Examples:
a. Convertend: “Every man is an animal”,
becomes
(U) (P)
Converse: “Some animals are man”.
(P)
(P)
b. Convertend: “No bird is a machine”, becomes
Converse: “No machine is a bird”.
Observe how in example a) “Every
man” which is a universal subject becomes a
particular predicate in the converse, since the
predicate of an affirmative proposition, as
defined by the rule on the quantity of predicate,
is supposed to be particular.
Since the predicate “animal” in the
convertend is particular, in the converse it
remains particular; otherwise, it will be an over-
extended term if it were change to a universal
term.
Types of Conversion
1. Single conversion takes place when the
quantity of the converse is the same as that of
the convertend. This happens only with E and I
propositions, since in these propositions both S
and P have the same quantity.
Examples:
a) E Proposition: “No dog is a cat”,
becomes
“No cat is a
dog”.
b. I Proposition: “Some men are
teachers”, becomes
“Some teachers
are men”.
2. Partial or accidental conversion takes place
when the quantity of the converse is different
from that of the convertend. This is possible with
the A proposition.
Example:
A Proposition: “Every cow is a brute”,
becomes
“Some brute is a
cow”.
Take note how the converse
necessarily has to change quantity, since in the
convertend the term “brute” is particular as the
predicate of an affirmative proposition. This
particularity must be preserved in order not to
over-extend such term.
The O proposition is never converted.
This is because the particular subject of an O
proposition will become universal when it takes
the proposition of the predicate of the converse.
Note this error in the example below:
“Some cats are not red”, becomes
(P)
“Some red (things) are not cat”.
(U)
B. Obversion
Obversion is the method of rephrasing
the truth of a given proposition by
changing the q2uality of the copula. The original
proposition is called obvertend and the new
formulation is called obverse.
Procedure:
1. Change the quality of the obvertend.
2. Change the quality of the predicate from
positive to negative and vice versa.
3. Retain the quantity of the overtend.
All the four categorical propositions
may be obverted. Thus, the A is obverted to E,
the E to A, the I to O, and the O to I. Note in the
examples below how the quality of the
predicate-term is changed to negative by the
particle “non”.
Examples:
a. A-E: “Every man is rational”, becomes
“No man is non-rational”.
b. E-A: “No goat is carnivorous”, becomes
“All goats are non-carnivorous”.
c. I-O: “Some men are monks”, becomes
“Some men are non-monks”.
d. O-I: “Some insects are not pests”, becomes
“Some insects are non-pests”.
C. Contraposition
Contraposition is the method of
rephrasing the truth of a given proposition by
combining the processes of obversion and
conversion. The original proposition is called
contraponend and the new formulation is called
contraposit.
Contraposition is either partial or
complete.
1. Partial Contraposition is possible
when the contraponend is either the A, the E, or
the O propositions. The I proposition has no
contraposit, because the obverse is an O, and O
has no conversion.
Procedure:
1. Obvert the original proposition.
2. Convert the obverse.
Example:
a. Contraposition of A to E:
Contraponend: “All men are
rational”.
Step 1: (Obversion)
“No man is non-
rational”
Step2: (Conversion)
“No non-rational
(being) is man”.
b. Contraposition of E to I:
Contraponend: “No stone is bread”.
Step 1: (Obversion)
“All stones are
non-bread”.
Step 2: (Conversion)
 “Some non-bread Step 2: Change the quantity of the
are stones”. proposition.
c. Contraposition of O to I: Step 3: Retain the quality of the
Contraponend: “Some toys are not copula.
mechanical”. Step 4: Change the predicate to its
Step 1: (Obversion) contradiction.
“Some toys are
non-mechanical”. Examples:
Step 2: (Conversion) a. Inversion of A to I:
“Some non- Invertend: “Every man is rational,”
mechanical (thing) are toys.” becomes
2. Complete contraposition makes Inverse: “Some non-man
possible the changing of the A to A, of the E to O, are non-rational.”
and of the O to O. b. Inversion of E to O:
Procedure: Invertend: “No man is a cow,”
1. Obvert. becomes
2. Convert the obverse. Inverse: “Some non-man
3. Obvert the converse. are non-cow.”

Examples: 9. THE SYLLOGISM

a. Contraposition of A to A. We now venture into the main topic of our
Contraponend: “Every man is study---- the deductive reasoning. By this method, man
mortal.” expands his knowledge, enabling him to discover new
Step 1: (Obversion) truths from what is known. The verbal expression of a
“No man is non- deductive reasoning or inference is the syllogism. By
mortal.” studying the structure of the syllogism, we shall
Step 2: (Conversion) understand better the meaning of “correct thinking” as
“No non-mortal is defined in the first chapter of this book.
man.”
Step 3: (Obversion) The Act of Reasoning
“Every non-mortal Reasoning is inferential thinking. It is the mental
is non-man.” process of drawing out a conclusion from a given data. The
b. Contraposition of E to O: act is similar to that of a judge who, accepting certain
Contraponend: “No dog is a cat.” evidences as true and credible, pronounces a decision or
Step 1: (Obversion) conclusion on either the innocence or guilt of the accused.
“Every dog is n0n- In reasoning, the mind makes a conclusion which is
cat.” consistent with certain assumed data.
Step 2: (Conversion) Strictly speaking, reasoning is the mental process
“Some non-cats are of comparing two concepts with a common third concept
dogs.” for the purpose of establishing their agreement or
Step 3: (Obversion) disagreement with each other. The use of a common third
“Some non-cats are term for the purpose of establishing the agreement or
non-dogs.” disagreement between two concepts makes reasoning a
mediate inference as opposed to immediate inference.
D. Inversion
Inference
Inversion is another method of Given that “A” is B, and given too that “X” is “A”
formulating a new proposition called inverse, then we conclude – “X” is B. This is inference. Expressed
from a given proposition called invertend. The formally it would follow this pattern of thought:
value of this method consist in helping us to be Every A is B,
alert to the quantity and quality of the subject, But every X is A,
and to the quality of the copula. There are two Therefore, every X is B.
types of inversion: the simple and the complete. Expressed on verbal symbols, we may have:
1. Simple Inversion applies only to A Every man is mortal,
and E propositions. But every Filipino is a man,
Therefore, every Filipino is mortal.
Procedure:
Step 1: Change the subject of the Irving M. Copi defines inference as “a process by which
invertend to its contradiction. one proposition is arrived at and affirmed (or denied) on the basis of
Example: rational=non-rational. one or more proposition accepted as the starting point of the
Step 2: Change the quantity of the process. Inference is the result of the act of reasoning in the same
invertend. way that the concept is the product of simple apprehension and the
Step 3: Change the quality of the proposition that of judgment.
copula. Not every group or collection of propositions constitutes
Step 4: Retain the original predicate. as inference. Propositions must have sequential relation with each
other in order to formally constitute an inference. Sequential
Examples: relation refers to the interdependence of the propositions upon
a. Inversion of A to O: each other. In the example below no such sequence exists.
Invertend: “Every man is rational,” Every goat is herbivorous,
becomes But every dog is carnivorous,
“Some non-man is Therefore, every dog is not a goat.
not rational.” Taken singly, the propositions above are true. They do not,
b. Inversion of E to I: however, relate to one another. There is no sequential relation
Invertend: “No man is a cow,” among them. Thus, the conclusion “Every dog is not a goat” is not
becomes proven by the two previous propositions, assumed as the premises.
“Some non-man is On the other hand, in the previous example, the conclusion “Every
a cow.” Filipino is mortal” comes naturally and necessarily from the
premises.
2. Complete Inversion likewise applies Therefore, the sequence is the form of an inference. It is
to A and E propositions. what it constitutes it to be an inference. Without it, an inference is
faulty and, strictly speaking, is not an inference.
Procedure:
Step 1: Change the subject to its The Syllogism: Its Form and Matter
contradiction.
 Just as a concept is expressed outwardly by means of the
word, inference finds expression in the syllogism. Thus, a syllogism is
“an oral or written discourse showing the agreement or
disagreement between two terms on the basis of their respective
relation to a common third term.
The syllogism is the verbal symbol of an inference. As such,
it is usually made up of three propositions, two of which are called
the premises and the other is called the conclusion. The premises
stand for the assumed truths (antecedent) and are said to support
the conclusion. The conclusion (consequent) is the new truth
derived from the premises.
The propositions are made up of terms. These are
identified as: the minor term, the major term, and the middle term.
1. The Minor Term is the subject of the Conclusion.
2. The Major Term is the predicate of the Conclusion.
3. The Middle Term is the term which appears in both
premises but not in the conclusion. It serves as the
“common third term” which determines the agreement or
disagreement of the Minor and the Major terms.