Logic Written Report

8/18/2019 Logic Written Report

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/logic-written-report 1/15

#1

Hypothetical Syllogisms, p.287

Got Logic?, Ivan Brian L. In!ctivo

"a, "rlie $ose G.

%he Hypothetical Syllogism is a syllogism &hose

ma'or ass!mption is a hypothetical area.%his

syllogism o not egin (rom an asol!te

statement o( a((irmation or enial o(

proposition..Given premises are connecte &ith

each other.It is a vali arg!ment (orm &hich is a

syllogism having a conitional statement (or one

or oth o( its premises. I( I o not &a)e !p, then I

cannot go to &or). I( I cannot go to &or), then I

&ill not get pai. %here(ore, i( I o not &a)e !p,

then I &ill not get pai.

#2

*+!ivalence, 11-12

LGI/0 %he "rt o( Living &ith $eason, epe San

ig!el 3mali

"B"LL", "leraham ".

" proposition may e e4presse in many i((erent

&ays !t those propositions may only convey

one meaning. Ho& it is e4presse incomm!nication, sometimes gives !s the i((ic!lty

to !nerstan its meaning. %his i((ic!lty happens

mostly in o!r o!r orinary comm!nication.

*+!ivalence is a )in o( process in e4pressing a

certain proposition into i((erent &ay &itho!t

changing its original meaning. %here are three

types o( e+!ivalance0 conversion, oversion an

contraposition.

#5

/ompo!n ropositions, 156-1

Logic &ith Intro!ction to hilosophy, /o, et al.

"BS"L, 9*$I/" :.

" comp!n proposition contains more than one

proposition as components. It is consist o( at

least t&o simple propositions that are

comine;'oine together in one propositions.

%he propositions are consist o( o( t&o or mor&

s!'ects as &ell as the preicates. <or e4ample,

=%he hilippines is a rep!lican co!ntry an it is

a thir &orl co!ntry too.= %he (irst proposition is

>%he hilippines is a rep!lican co!ntry>, an the

secon one is >It is a thir &orl co!ntry.>

#

%r!th <!nctions, pg. 12

Intro!ction to Logic y atric) . H!rley

"garap, "ngeli+!e .

%he tr!th val!e o( a compo!n proposition

e4presse in terms o( one or more logical

operators is sai to e a (!nction o( the tr!th

val!es o( its components. %his means that the

tr!th val!e o( the compo!n proposition is

completely etermine y the tr!th val!es o( its

components. I( the tr!th val!es o( the

components are )no&n, then the tr!th val!e o(

the compo!n proposition can e calc!late (rom

the e(initions o( the logical operators.

"ccoringly, a tr!th (!nction is any compo!n

proposition (rom a set o( tr!th val!es to tr!th

val!es. Its tr!th val!e is completely eterminey the tr!th val!es o( its components.

#@

/ontraictories, page 187

LGI/0 Lang!age, :e!ction an In!ction y

/arl /ohen an Irving /opi

"L":, ar) *lmore .

%&o propositions that cannot e tr!e an cannot

e (alse. %&o propositions are contraictories i(

one is the enial or negation o( the othersA that is

i( they cannot e tr!e an cannot e (alse. %&o

stanar-(orm categorical propositions having th

same s!'ect an preicate terms !t i((ering

(rom each other in oth +!ality an +!antity are

contraictories. In s!m0 " an propositions are

contraictories0 ="ll S are = is contraicte y



=Some S is not =. * an I propositions are also

contraictories0 =o S is = is contraicte y

=Some S is =.

#

$!les o( Syllogism,115

hilosophy an Logic0 " G!ie to /orrect

$easoning, ar) *&ar . "orot

""$, "G*LI/" ".

Li)e ilemma, syllogism also has r!les &hen it

comes to terms an propositions. Chen tal)ing

ao!t r!les o( syllogism on terms, there m!st e

only three terms &ith no greater e4tension in the

concl!sion. %he mile term m!st not appear inthe concl!sion, an m!st e !niversal at least

once. Chen tal)ing ao!t r!les o( syllogism on

propositions, t&o a((irmative premises yiel an

a((irmative concl!sion, t&o negative an oth

partic!lar premises yiel no concl!sion. Chen

one premise is partic!lar, its concl!sion m!st also

e partic!larA &hen one premise is negative, its

concl!sion m!st also e negative.

#7

In(erence Inicators, page 1

Logic an /ritical %hin)ing D2n eitionE, ayol

et.al.

"ratan, Hyacinth *.

In(erence inicators are special &ors, phrases,

or even &hole sentences that inicate or point

to&ar reasons or concl!sions. It is !se(!l inetermining a syllogism (rom a non-syllogism an

may lea a person to seeing the logical

connections o( statements. %hese &ors or

phrases may ma)e easy the tas) o( ienti(ying

statements &hich inicate proo(s or pieces o(

evience (rom statements that signi(y claims or

concl!sions. It has t&o categories &hich are the

=$eason inicators= li)e >eca!se, is ase on, is

sho&n y, since, an (or> an the =/oncl!sion=

inicators= li)e >there(ore, so, th!s, conse+!ently

an &hich leas to.>

"l&ays rememer that in(erence inicators o te

yo! that either a reason or a concl!sion is

coming ne4t.

>oreover, !nless, an, or, ho&ever, !t, i(, then

an in aition> are some o( the &ors that are

not in(erence inicators.

#8

%he "rg!ment, pg. 2-5

*lementary Logic D%hir *itionE y /laro .

/eniFa

"rnecilla, "lthea $.

%he s!'ect matter o( logic is the arg!ment. "n

arg!ment is a piece o( reasoning artic!late in&ors or symols. "n arg!ment has t&o parts0

premises an concl!sion. It is a set o( premises

an a concl!sion &here the premises an

concl!sion are separate y some trigger &or,

phrase or mar) )no&n as t!rnstile. Some o( them

are goo, some o( them are a.

#6<!nctions an !rposes o( :e(inition pg. 7

Logic (or <ilipinos, risciliano B!anFon

"!stria, "lani $.

"ccoring to /opi, e(initions serve (ive (!nction

an p!rposes &hich are sel(-e4planatory. %he

(irst one is to increase voca!lary. Secon is to

eliminate amig!ity. %hir is to re!ce

vag!eness. <o!rth is to e4plain theoritically an

the last one is to in(l!ence attit!es.

#1

%he 3ltimate %est o( %r!th, 76

Logic (or <ilipinos, riscillano Ba!Fon

Baron, aeFel arie B.



%he only criterion that also serves as the test o(

tr!th is the agreement o( '!gment &ith reality. It

is the congr!ence et&een &hat is in the min

an &hat lies in the o'ective &orl. Ce veri(y a

'!gment y comparing it &ith the reality it is

s!ppose to represent. *very '!gment given y

the h!man min implies an pres!pposes the

e4istence o( reality. %his implication o( e4istenceis )no&n as the e4istential import o( the '!gment

&hich is the very thing that gives it o'ective

val!e an tr!th.

#11

*vience, roo( an arg!ment, pg. 225

Logic (or <ilipinos 2n eition, risciliano %.

Ba!Fon

/anaooay, oni+!e "nne $.

*vience re(ers to anything that tens to prove or

isprove something. %o +!ali(y as an evience, it

m!st pass the parametero( acceptaility in regarto conviction an pers!asion.

roo( esignates anything &hich serves irectly

o( inirectly to convince the min o( the tr!th or

(alsity o( any proposition. %he &or proo( is !se

y logicians to mean presentation o( evience.

"rg!ment is a term !se to esignate the

process y &hich the arg!er in(ers the e4istence

o( other (acts )no&ing the e4istence o( one ormore (acts in orer to estalish the veracity o( a

point.

#12

Syllogism in relation to other collection o(

propositions

Logic an critical thin)ing, ayal at al

/atanghal, aileen 9

Syllogism is a set o( logically correcte

propositions. S!tantially, it is also an ar!g!men

Ho&ever, there are other set o( propositions

&hich may not have logical connection an

there(ore cannot signi(y an ar!g!ment. %h!s, an

amo!nt o( i((ic!lty in ienti(ying syllogism (rom

other mere collection o( propositions (or&are

thro!gh speeches. "n also it can e (or&are

thro!gh &ritten artic!lations.

#15 na Lei <rances Balmores /r!F

#1

*/*%I9* $SI%I

"n e4ceptive proposition is an occ!ltly compo!n

proposition in &hich the s!'ect term in restricte

in its application y &ors s!ch as =e4cept=,

=save=, =!t= an so on. otice that e4ceptive

propositions are o(ten e+!ivalent to e4cl!sive

propositions. %h!s, the e4ceptive proposition

=one, !t Dsave,e4ceptE citiFens are voters= ise+!ivalent to the e4cl!sive proposition =nly

citiFens are voters= an oth o( these

propositions are e4pose to =on-citiFens are no

voters=

%he proposition =one !t citiFens are voters= is

li)e &ise e+!ivalent to the " proposition ="ll

voters are citiFens=

#1@

%he S!'ect o( " roposition, @@

LGI/ %he hilosophical :iscipline o( /orrect

%hin)ing, *ie $. Baor

:ela /r!F, /atelyn /.

%he s!'ect o( a proposition is that ao!t &hich

something is enie or a((irme. In other &ors,

the s!'ect o( a proposition is the term &hich is

https://www.facebook.com/yna.lei.frances.cruz?fref=nf

https://www.facebook.com/yna.lei.frances.cruz?fref=nf



either enie or a((irme. Ce have to ear in

min, ho&ever, that the logical s!'ect o( a

proposition is not al&ays the same as the

grammatical s!'ect. <or e4ample, &e say, =Ce

hate corr!pt government o((icials.= Here, the

grammatical s!'ect is =&e=. B!t in logic the

s!'ect Dgrammatical s!'ectE is =those &e hate=,

i.e., corr!pt government o((icial. %he reason &hythe term =&e= cannot e ta)en (or logical s!'ect

is eca!se &e are neither a((irming nor negating

DenyingE ao!t =&e=

#1

%he La&s o( pposition, p.11

Logic (or <ilipinos 5r *ition, risciliano Ba!Fon

:omingo, ar'olica /.I( &e )no& that a given opposition is tr!e or (alse,

then &e can tell &hether any o( its opposites is

tr!e or (alse. %he (ollo&ing la&s o( opposition

m!st e applie in '!ging &hether oppositional

in(erences are correct or incorrect.

/ontraictories, means i( the one is tr!e, the

other is (alseA i( the one is (alse, the other is tr!e.

/ontraries means i( the one is tr!e, the other is

(alseA i( the one is (alse , the other is o!t(!l.

S!contraries means i( the one is tr!e, the otheris o!t(!lA i( the one is (alse, the other is tr!e

.Lastly, the S!alterns, it means, i( the !niversal

is tr!e, the partic!lar is tr!eA !t i( the !niversal is

(alse, the partic!lar is o!t(!lA i( the partic!lar is

tr!e, the !niversal is o!t(!lA !t i( the partic!lar

is (alse, the !niversal is (alse.

#17

%he three =la&s o( tho!ght= p. 5

Intro!ction to logic, Irving . /opi

*S/%*, ". /$IS%I"

Some early thin)ers, a(ter having e(ine logic as

=the science o( the la&s o( tho!ght,= &ent on to

assert that there are e4actly three asic la&s o(

tho!ght, la&s so (!namental that oeience to

them is oth the necessary an the s!((icicent

conition o( correct thin)ing. %hese three have

traitionally een calle0

%he principle o( ientity, this principle asserts

that i( any statement is tr!e, then it is tr!e.

%he principle o( noncontraiction, this principle

asserts that no statement can e oth tr!e an

(alse.

%he principle o( e4cl!e mile, this principleasserts that every statement is either tr!e or (als

#18

<ig!res, pp. 175

*ssential Logic, alitao, "rnel L.

*scote, aolo G.

%he (ig!re o( a syllogism, etermine y the

positions o( the mile term in its premisesA ther

are (o!r possile (ig!res. Chen &e !se the term

Jsyllogistic (ig!reK &e !nerstan the isposition

o( the mile term DE &ith respect to the ma'or

DE an minor terms DSE in the premises o( a

syllogism. %he minor term DSE is al&ays the

s!'ect an the ma'or term DE is al&ays the

preicate o( the concl!sion. Chatever variations

that can ta)e place in the relative position o( theterms among themselves m!st occ!r in the

premises. In the ma'or premise the mile term

compare &ith the ma'or e4treme. In the minor

premise the mile term is compare &ith the

minor e4treme.

#16

%he %erms o( the /ategorical Syllogism, pg 256-2

Intro!ction to Logic, /oraFon L. /r!F

<":*$G3", $I/" /H$IS%I* L.

/ategorical Syllogism is a comple4 logical !nit

mae !p o( terms an propositions an its three

propositions is a categorical proposition. It has

three termsA the ma'or term, the minor term an

the mile term. %he ma'or term is the preicate



o( the concl!sion an it is (o!n in the ma'or

premise. %he minor term is the s!'ect o( the

concl!sion an it is (o!n in the minor premise.

%he mile term is (o!n in the t&o premises !t

not in the concl!sion.

It is est that yo! arrange the propositions in their

(ormal se+!ence0 D1E the ma'or premise, D2E the

minor premise an D5E concl!sion. %his &ay yo!avoi mista)es.

#2

G/L*I" S$I%*S, pg 18

LGI/0 %H* "$% < $*"SIG Dth

*:I%IE, S"%I"G, "L" S"L9":$

<*LI/IL:", HC*LL $.

Goclenian sorites is an arige polysyllogism in

&hich the s!'ect o( the preceing premise

ecomes the preicate o( the (ollo&ing. In the

concl!sion, the s!'ect o( the last premise is

!nite &ithe the preicate o( the (irst.

%here is no essential i((erence et&een the

"ristotelian sorites an the Goclenian sorites

e4cept in the manner o( the arrangement o( the

premise. %o constr!ct the "ristotelian sorites (rom

Goclenian sorites an vice-versa, &e start &iththe last premise an en &ith the (irst. %he

concl!sion remains the same.

#21

egative DenialE roposition, p@7

Basics o( Logic, H!ala et al.

It is also calle enial proposition. egative orenial proposition is a proposition that !nites the

s!'ect an the preicate y means o( negative

cop!la0 =is not=. It enies the ientity o( =S= an

==. "n a((irmative proposition is i((erent (rom an

a((irmative statement an so is a negative

proposition (rom a negative statement. %here are

propositions &hich are consiere a((irmative !t

e+!ivalently, negative statements.

#22

<alse "nalogy, . 17

Logic D<o!nation o( /ritical %hin)ersE, B!raga e

al.

Garin, %risha /.

In a (alse analogy, one erroneo!sly pres!pposes

that eca!se t&o things are ali)e in one aspect,

they m!st e ali)e in others. "nalogy is saying >"

is li)e B> an is a po&er(!l &ay o( e4plaining one

thing in terms o( another. Chere it (alls o&n is

&hen " is ass!me to e li)e B in all respects

an any attri!te or characteristic o( B can e

!ne+!ivocally attri!te to ".

#25

"sol!te e4tension, pg 55

Intro!ction to Logic Dth eitionE, D/oraFon L.

/r!FE

G"9IL", $oel !nior S.

"sol!te is the s!m total o( all act!al or possile

inivi!al s!'ects signi(ie y the term. It is a

concept that mani(ests itsel( to the min as as!stance an as an inepenent reality. <or

e4ample, the asol!te e4tension o( =man=. In the

present time, all o( !s h!man eing living in the

&hole &ie &orl, in the past, all the ea in the

cemeteries an memorial par) are re(erre to as

=eamen= an in the (!t!re, all h!man eings

&ho &ill e orn an live !p to the en o( the

&orl. It oesn>t only incl!es (!t!re h!man

eings !t also the (ictional, li)e spierman,

onal !c), sno& &hite, atman. It &ill al&aysincl!es characters &ith h!man characters

#2 "aron ames B. Gellao

https://www.facebook.com/aarongellado?fref=nf

https://www.facebook.com/aarongellado?fref=nf



#2@

/%$"SI%I, pg. 85

Logic &ith Intro!ction to hilosophy, /o, et al.

G, :I"* *LISS* B.

/ontraposition is a comination o( t&o asic

e!ction &hich is the conversion an oversion.

/onversion is a process o( interchanging s!'ect

an preicate &itho!t changing the +!ality.version is a process o( restating propositions

changing its +!ality !t maintaining the s!'ect.

o&, in contraposition yo! change everything !t

not the meaning an the tr!th-val!e o( the

proposition. %here are three r!les to (ollo& in

contraposition an (irst is overt the given

proposition. Secon, /onvert the ne&ly (orme

proposition. Lastly, vert the converte

proposition.

#2

"rg!ment (rom "nteceent roaility, 1

Logic (or <ilipinos, risciliano %. B!aFon

Gorospe, $amilyne

"nteceent proaility>s arg!ment is an in(erence

moving (rom a )no&n ca!se o( an !n)no&n

e((ect. rior arg!ment is a type o( ag!ment thatpreicate !pon the principle o( cas!ality. %his

arg!ment says that every phenomenon has a

ca!se. %his means then that nothing happens

&itho!t a ca!se. It is sho&n that a certain )no&n

(act is o( s!ch a nat!re as to ring ao!t the

e4istence o( another (act.

#27%he logical in(erence or reasoning

Simpli(ie (!namental principles o( correct

thin)ing

B!ag et al.

G!nran, icole "shley $.

$easoning is the last an !ltimate act o( min in

the ivision o( logic. It is the highest act o( min.

It is also calle as LGI/"L I<*$*/*. Chich

see)s to con(orm to the stanar set y the

propositions in orer to estalish a (rame o(

logical re(erence to ne& ieas. Ho&ever, (rom

this e(inition &e may ta)e o!t the t&o asic

)ins o( logical in(erence, namely $*IS*S

an //L3SI.

#28

/onsistency, p. 11-12

Logic an hilosophy0 oern Intro!ctionA

%iman, Mahane

IB"B", H**L <.

=/onsistency=

Logic can e !se (or other p!rposes than the

evel!ation o( arg!ments. In partic!lar, logic can

e !se to etermine &hether a set o( statemenis consistent. " set o( statement is consistent i( it

is possile (or all the statements to e tr!e. I( it is

imposile (or them all to e tr!e, the set is

inconsistent.

#26

*nthymeme, p. 272-27

Got Logic, Ivan Brian L. In!ctivo"*$, *" S*" .

*nthymeme, (rom the Gree) &or =en thymos=

&hich means =in the min= is an incomplete or

arige syllogism &here the propositions are

not (!lly e4presse or presente. %his means tha

one o( the premises or the concl!sions is omitte

eca!se it is le(t in the min. *nthymeme o( the

<irst rer are syllogisms &ith the ma'or premis

o( an arg!ment are not e4presse. =Stealing is a

crime , there(ore stealing is p!nishale y la&= A

the ma'or premise =all crimes are p!nishale y

la&= is omitte. *nthymeme o( the Secon re

are syllogisms &ith the minor premise o( an

arg!ment are not e4presse A =all crimes are

p!nishale y la&, there(ore stealing is

p!nishale y la&= A the minor premise, =B!t

stealing is a crime= is omitte. *nthymeme o( the



%hir rer are syllogisms &ith the concl!sion o(

an arg!ment are not e4presse. ="ll crimes are

p!nishale y la&, !t stealing is a crime= A the

concl!sion =%here(ore, stealing is p!nishale y

la&= is omitte.

#5

S!pposition, 7

Intro!ction to Logic

/oraFon L. /r!F

"9*LS", $GI" G.

S!pposition is the property o( terms ac+!ire

(rom their !se in the proposition. =S!pposition= is

(!nctional Dthe &ay it is meant in the propositionE,

&hile =meaning= is roaer-it may stan (or thesigni(icance o( a &or o!tsie o( a proposition. It

is the cognitive process o( s!pposing or

s!pposal. S!pposition has i((erent )ins, &hich

o(ten overlap. %hey are material s!pposition an

(ormal s!pposition.

#51

%raitional an oern S+!are o( ppositions,pg. 161-162

"n Intro!ction to Syllogistic Logic, Boni(acio .

Bairan

ose, !lie "nn .

%he traitional s+!are o( opposition epens on

the "ristotelian interpretation o( categorical

propositions. %his interpretation ass!mes that

categorical propositions ma)e claims ao!t real

eings. Chenever a categorical proposition in(erssomething (rom a general principle ao!t act!al

o'ects or eings, the "ristotelian interpretation

applies an logical operations that epen on this

interpretation yiel correct res!lts. B!t i( &e

(orm!late categorical propositions ao!t eings

o( reason that o not e4ist, the "ristotelian

interpretation is not applicale. n the other

han, moern s+!are o( opposition is

contraictory pairs o( sentences that have

opposite tr!th val!es. ne is tr!e an the other i

(alse.

#52

%he S!preme reicaments, pg. @7-@8

<!namental Logic, <r. an!el %. ion

L$*%, "" "%$I/I" /.

"ristotle calle them /ategories, &hich is the

Gree) term (or reicaments. "ccoring to

"ristotle there are %&o S!preme reicaments,

the S!stance an "ccient. S!stance is eing

that carries e4istential act!ality y itsel(. "ccien

is a moi(ication o( a s!stance, or =eing=, an

oes not carry e4istential act!ality y itsel(, !t i

the s!stance o( &hich it is a moi(ication. %he

/ategories o( "ristotle have een associate &it

philosophical thin)ing since their (orm!lation, an

have even serve as asis (or ictionaries in the

istinction an classi(ication o( !niversal

concepts an nat!res.

#55

Chat is :e(inition, p.@

<!namental LGI/, an!el %. inon ..

L3"$I, /hristian ".

an &as create po&er(!l. So po&er(!l that he

&as given the po&er to e(ine the things aro!nhim, an this is the po&er o( :*<II%I.

*tymologically, e(inition means the

mani(estation o( something y laying o&n its

logical mar)ers. Ce may e(ine it as, the veral

mani(estation o( the concept!al (eat!res o( a ter

or iea. Ce call to the min that the term is

essentially a sign o( the iea, an the iea is the

(ormal sign o( the o'ect. Ce may also say that



e(inition is the logical mani(estation o( the

meaning o( a term or, o( an iea.

#5

3niversal N!anti(ier Dpp 1@7-1@6E

Intro!ction to Logic D<o!rth *itionE y /oraFon

L. /r!F

L!yo, 9iel .

%he !niversal +!anti(ier, coreesponing to the

traitional " proposition, is =D4E=, &hich is rea as

=each thing 4 is s!ch that=. "e to an open

sentence, it res!lts in a +!anti(ie statement. =DE

D4 is transitoryE= is e+!ivalent to =*verything is

s!ch that it is transitory= or =*verything is

transitory.=

"nother e4ample0 D4E D4 is a Fera A 4 is a (o!r

(oote an animalE O *ach thing 4 is s!ch that i( 4

is a Fera, then 4 is a (o!r (oote animal O "ll

Feras are (o!r (oote animals.

Ce have to pay attention to the +!anti(ier gain.

#5@

S!ppressing the <acts, pg. 557

Intro!cton to Logic D$evise *itionE, /oraFon

L. /r!F

acasie, amerto II S.

It is the error that occ!rs &hen only (avorale or

!n(avorale (acts are given. e4amples are lives o(

saints &hisch pict!re them as eings &ho never&ere men o( (lesh an looA also character o(

assassinations o( political oponnents.

#5

Basic *lements o( %he /ategorical roposition,

p.75

Intro!ction to Logic th *ition, /oraFon L. /r!

":*", "" "$I* L.

%he categorical or attri!tive proposition has a

s!'ect-preicate relationship0 its s!'ect is

a((irme or enie y the preicate. %here(ore, it

asic elements are the Js!'ectK, the one spo)en

o(A the JpreicateK, &hat is a((irme or enie o(

the s!'ectA the Jcop!laK, ver that a((irms orenies connecting the t&o. *4. J%he story

Ds!'ectE he tol yo! is Dcop!laE apocryphal

DpreicateEK. oreover, (or p!rposes o( Logic,

tenses are irrelevant li)e the cop!la JisK as &ell

as n!mers have no istinction in grammatical

sense. D*4. stories or storyE

#57n Statement <orms, 158-12

%asyo Says, $aym!no B. <a!stino

"$I", M**%H :.

Logic is concerne &ith arg!ments &hich contai

statements as their premises. Ce have negation

&hich enies the tr!th y asserting its negation

y !sing =not= in a sentence. In con'!nction, &e

!se =an= or =!t= to con'oin t&o sentences. <or

is'!nction, &e !se =neither...nor=. %o sho&

implication, &e !se =i(...then= to sho& a

conitional statement. <or e+!ivalence, &e !se

=i( an only i(= to otain a iconitional statemen

Chat is tr!e or (alse is not the concern, !t the

meaning or tho!ght e4presse y the statement

#58

9ariety o( Instances, 188

*ssential Logic, "rnel L. alitao

"SIG, M*% $" S.

In an arg!ment y analogy, the proaility>s

strength is estalishe thro!gh a variety o(

instances. It is a principle (or '!ging the merit o(

the proaility o( the arg!ment y analogy. It is

also important eca!se the merit o( its proailit



is consiere as the !ltimate so!rce (or '!ging

its strength. <or e4ample, is possile reactions to

a r!g. Li)e &hat other people sai, having this

variety &ill spice !p o!r li(e.

#56

N!ality, p. @6

Logic &ith Intro!ction to hilosophy, /o et al.

ealla, :ianne Icely .

N!ality is one o( the t&o important consierations

that &e m!st consier in analyFing categorical

proposition. N!ality is an element that is (o!n in

every categorical proposition an +!ality o( the

proposition provies the in(ormation as to

&hether the s!'ect is incl!e or e4cl!e in thepreicate. %he t&o types o( +!ality that

propositions can have is a((irmative an negative.

"n a((irmative proposition asserts that the class

o( the s!'ect term is incl!e &ithin the class o(

the preicate term an it enote the o'ective o(

the s!'ect anpreicate representing one an

the same s!'ect. In negative propositions, the

cop!la =is not= signi(ies the o'ect iversity o( the

terms. %he presence o( the &or =not= or any

&or o( its e+!ivalent, &hich (oll&s immeiatelya(ter the cop!la inicates that the proposition is

negative.

#

etho o( roo(, page 16-@

Logic, %he "rt o( :e(ining an $easoning, igel

L. /orne'o

*:P", H""**L 9.

%he constr!ction o( tr!th-tales provies a

reliale metho o( eval!ating the valiity o(

arg!ments in the propositional calc!l!s. "ltho!gh

this metho al&ays &or)s, it isn>t al&ays

convenient eca!se tr!th tales m!st have 2n

lines, &here n is the n!mer o( statement

variales involve.

<ort!nately, there is another, shorter &ay to

procee y constr!cting a (ormal proo( o( valiity

o( an arg!ment. Ce can emonstrate the valiity

o( an arg!ment y starting &ith it>s premises. %h

only limitation &e nee to impose on this

proce!re is that each o( o!r tiny steps m!st e

s!stit!tion-instance o( some vali arg!ment

(orm.

#1

%he at!re o( Lang!age, page 6

Logic, !an ose Sang!ineti

:*S%",/H" "* G.

Lang!age has t&o main p!rpose, the e4pressive

(!nction an the comm!nicative (!nction. It allo&

men to interact &ith one another an live togetheas a comm!nity, !sing meaning(!l e4pressions.

re(lects not only tge acts o( intellect, !t also

those o( the &ill D esire, commans, etc. E.

Lang!age can e translate into &ritten &ors.

Speech is, there(ore the mani(estation o( the

interior &or conceive in the min D the e4terna

e4pression o( concepts.

#2

%he $!le o( at!ral :e!ction, p.15@

Logic, %he Basics o( /orrect $easoning,

"galpen et.al.

, atricia Lo!ise :G.

%his is to emonstrate or estalish the valiity o(

arg!ments in a simpler manner in vie& o( the

i((ic!lty o( constr!cting a tr!th tale test (or

comple4 arg!ments. %heoretically, all tr!th

(!nctional arg!ments can e prove vali or

invali y the tr!th tale. B!t, it is impractical (or

every complicate arg!ments involving more

than (ive variales.



%here are t&o types o( r!les !ner this, the $!le

o( In(erence an the $!le o( $eplacement. %he

r!le o( in(erence are vali arg!ment (orms !se

in the constr!ction or erivation o( the arg!ments

as a (ormal proo( o( its valiity. Chile, the r!le o(

replacement provies that logically e+!ivalent

arg!ments can replace one another

#5 $"L*S, "lec4anra

#

Statement 9ariales an /onstants page.2

*ssential o( Logic, "rnel L. alitao

o4sir, Sittie or(atimah .

%rans(orming any statement &hether simple or

compo!n,necessitates the !se o( small letters

=p= an =+=.%hese small letters are calle

statement variales.%he &or >variales>

connotes the iea that these t&o can e

interchange y other small letters ta)en (rom the

alphaet (rom a to F.Statement variales can also

e consiere as place mar)ers eca!se theypoint to the act!al spot &here a certain statement

constant &ill e place later on.o& constants

are &ritten normally in capital letters.%hese

capital letters &ill event!ally represent the

statements per se.I( thi &ill happen then they can

no& e calle as statement constants.Hence,y

the &or itsel( they can never e interchange y

another capital letters anymore.

#@

"voi !sing metaphors an other (ig!res o(

speech pg.

Logic &ith Intro!ction to hilosophy, /o et al.

"L, *LL" "* /.

%he p!rpose o( e(inition in logic is to ma)e the

meaning o( the &or clearly an !nertanale

y the min. <ig!res o( speech s!ch as

metaphors only m!le the intene meaning o(

the &or y appropriating other &ors &hich

have no logical nor real earing to the &or

e(ine. %hey are only e((ective as literary evice

in poetry !t not as ling!istic clari(ication

instr!ment in logic.

#

%H* :IS%$IB3%I < %H* $*:I/"%*

%*$, pg. 85

Logic <or <ilipinos 2n *ition, risciliano %.

Ba!Fon

*S, M*% H"$L* $.

Chen &e spea) o( the istri!tion o( the

preicate term, &e mean the e4tension or+!antity o( the preicate possesses on acco!nt o

its relation to the s!'ect in a certain proposition

%he preicate may e ta)en !niversally

Distri!teE or partic!larly D!nistri!teE. %he

'!sti(ication o( the r!le o( th!m ecomes clear

once &e consier ho& the s!'ect an preicate

are relate to a((irmative an negative

propositions. In a((irmative statement, &hat is

(ormally asserte is that is in the

comprehension o( S, an that S is containe inthe e4tension o( . In the proposition, ="ll

anoos are <ilipinos=, the preicate term

=<ilipinos= is a partic!lar term, that is, only a

certain portion o( the e4tension o( =<ilipinos= is

ienti(ie &ith the s!'ect =anoos=.

#7

%he criteria (or Goo "rg!ments, 17-18

%he Logic0 %he "rt o( :e(ining an $easoning,

By0 /orne'o, igel L.

$G, "L :.

" goo e!ctive arg!ment is etermine y its

(orm, not y the content o( the arg!ment. %he

(allacy here is sometimes calle egging the

+!estion an yo! may alreay e (amiliar &ith it

%he tr!th o( the premises o( an in!ctive



arg!ment &e ne4t consier the relative strength

that the premises provie to s!pport the

concl!sion. %he stronger the s!pport o( the

premises Dass!ming them to e tr!eE the more

proale the concl!sion is tr!e.

#8

LII%*: :IS3/%I9* $SI%I, pg. 1@

In :e(ense o( Logic, aao Q Hapa

acheco, "l ohn .

" philosophical prininciple that states t&o or more

alternatives &here one is tr!e an one is not. It is

calle limite eca!se only one alternative is

possile.

*4amples0

%he victim is either ea or alive.

%he st!ent is either attentive or noisy.

It has only one right ans&er an one is (alse. %he

choices there(ore are limite.

#6

recising e(inition, pg. 76

Logic an critical thin)ing,

astor, athaniel .

It is a e(inition that comines the t&o techni+!e0

le4ical an stip!lative e(inition. %his is the &ay

y &hich the vag!eness o( a term is re!ce.

%his type o( e(inition starts &ith the le4ical

e(inition to chec) an correct the alreay

estalish meaning o( termDhere the term is not

completely ne& as regare in stip!lative

e(initionE. %hen to re!ce the vag!eness o( the

term, it moves to the stip!lative e(inition y

appropriating narro& limit on the term !se.

#@

Ignoratio *lenchi, pg 177

Logic0 Simpli(ie <!namental, B!ag, *t. al.

ing!l, "llyssa

It>s a (allacy that comes (rom t&o Latin &orsA

Ignoratio DignoranceE an *lenchi D re(!tationsE.

In a nominal e(inition y etymology, it means

ignorance o( re(!tations. Its is there(ore a (allacy

&herein something is totally irrelevant to the

iss!e that eing isc!sse.

#@1

<ig!re an oo o( /ategorical Syllogism, p. 1

Basics o( Logic, Bama et. al.

IP"$$"S, /H"$L%%* <.

In categorical syllogism, (ig!re is the

arrangement o( the mile term in the premises.

oo re(ers to the classi(ication o( the t&o

premises as the !niversal a((irmative ", the

!niversal negative *, the partic!lar a((irmative I,

an the partic!lar negative . nce a categorica

syllogism is in stanar (orm, &e can thenetermine its moo an (ig!re. %he (orm o( the

syllogism is name y listing the moo (irst, then

the (ig!re. <ig!res are !se in con'!nction &ith

the moo to classi(y vali an invali categorica

syllogisms.

#@2

%he at!re;Str!ct!re o( the roposition pgs. 85-

8

Some otes on Logic, /orne'o, *t.al

L"%,L"3$* IMH"L B.

!gements, the agreement or isagreements

et&een ieas, are e4presse in sentences &e

call =propositions=. %hree elements enter into

constr!ction o( a proposition0 the s!'ect, the



preicate, an the cop!la. %he s!'ect is term

esignating the iea ao!t &hich the

prono!ncement is mae. %he preicate is the

term esignating the iea &hich is a((irme or

enie o( the s!'ect. %he cop!la is the term

e4pressing the mental act &hich prono!nces the

agreement or isagreement et&een s!'ect an

preicate. %he cop!la is !s!ally e4presse &ith aterm s!ch as =is= or =is not=. It sho!l e note

that the cop!la al&ays e4presses the present act

o( the min an &ill al&ays e represente y the

present tense o( the ver =to e=.

#@5

:IL*", pg. 51Got Logic, Ivan Brian In!ctivo

$*"LI, $*I" $S* B.

%he &or :ilemma comes (rom the Gree) is

&hich means =t&ice= an lemma &hich means

=ass!mption=. :ilemma posits t&o apparent

choices ho&ever these choices o not rener any

sol!tion at all, &orse, oth lea to complications

or traps. %hat is &hy ilemmas are also )no&n as

horne arg!ments. :ilemma is a (orm o(arg!ment &hose ma'or premise consists o( a

compo!n is'!nctive or conitional proposition.

It>s minor premise alternatively posits the

anteceentsDconstr!ctive ilemmaE, or s!lates

the conse+!entsDestr!ctive ilemmaE &hich

sho&s that &hichever alternative the opponent

chooses, is concl!sively against him;her. %he

/onstr!ctive :ilemma is a ilemma that starts

&ith is'!nctive propositions (ollo&e y

conitional premises. %he :estr!ctive :ilemma is

a ilemma that starts &ith a conitional

proposition (ollo&e y is'!nctive premises.

#@

reicales ,22

Intro!ction to logic , "nre& H. Bachh!er , S.

$igo , ichelle 9.

%he preicales are classi(ication o( re(le4

!niversals ase on the (ive &ays in &hich they

e4press the nat!re o( s!'ects o( &hich they are

preicte . %hey are liste as species , gen!s ,

speci(ic i((erence ,logical property an logical

accient .%hese names primarily signi(y the

relationship o( !niversal to their in(eriors , or the(ive &ays in &hich they are !se as preicatesA

!t these names also signi(y the !niversals

themselves .%h!s , &e not only say that =man= is

preicate o( 'ohn as his species, !t also that

=man= is his species

#@@

hilosophy0 Its relationship &ith other isciplines

page

Intro!ction to hilosophy, "male G. %!ieo

$ivera, *vira ae %.

an nees philosophy to teach him ho& to live

&ellA he nees science to )no& an to control th

e4ternal &orl (or his physical s!rvivalA he nees

the arts to e4press his longing (or ea!ty, an he

nees religion to provie him &ith a sense o(p!rpose an meaning in li(e.

hilosophy, as man>s attempt to !nerstan =the

mystery o( li(e=, an =the rile o( the !niverse=

has no +!arrel &ith science, religion, an art. n

the contrary, philosophy &o!l e greatly

enriche i( it &elcomes scienti(ic investigation

an iscoveryA i( it (ins 'oy in the creation an

e4pression o( ea!tyA an i( it is open to a

transcenence eyon time an space. In shortthe interrelationship et&een philosophy an

science, art an religion is so harmonio!s that it

&o!l e shortsighte to co!nterpose them

against each other.

#@



N!antity or *4tension o( the roposition, pg.77

Intro!ction to Logic, /oraFon L. /r!F

$BL*S, **L ".

%he +!antity o( the proposition is e+!ivalent to

the +!antity o( it>s s!'ect. eaning, i( the s!'ect

stans (or a single e(inite inivi!al or gro!p, it

is sing!lar. It the s!'ect esignates an ine(inite

part o( it>s total e4tension, it is partic!lar. I( the

s!'ect can apply to every portion signi(ie( y the

term, it is !niversal. *very, each, all, some,

several, many, etc., are calle +!anti(iers an

play a signi(icant role.

#@7

/ategorical ropositions

Basics o( Logic y %helma N. eer

$/H","3LI .

" /ategorical roposition is an attri!te

proposition that has s!'ect-preicate

relationship. Its s!'ect is either a((irme orenie y the preicate . It has asic elements,

the s!'ect, preicate an cap!la. " categorical

proposition 'oins together e4actly t&o categorical

terms an asserts that some relationship hols

et&een the classes they esignate. D<or o!r

o&n convenience, &e>ll call the term that occ!rs

(irst in each categorical proposition its s!'ect

term an other its preicate term.E %h!s, (or

e4ample, ="ll co&s are mammals= an =Some

philosophy teachers are yo!ng mothers= arecategorical propositions &hose s!'ect terms are

=co&s= an =philosophy teachers= an &hose

preicate terms are =mammals= an =yo!ng

mothers= respectively.

#@8

"rg!ement <orms an <allacies, pg. 156

Intro!ction to Logic, atric) H!rley

any o( the arg!ements that occ!r in

propositional logic have (orms that ear speci(ic

names an can e immeiately recogniFe as

either vali or invali. Ce can present some o(

the more common ones an e4plains ho& they

are recogniFe. Ce can also isc!sses &ays o(re(!ting t&o o( these (orms, constr!ctive an

estr!ctive illemas. "nother is it present &or o

ca!tion relating to invali (orms. "n (inally &e

&ill going to isc!ss the application o( some

principles that &as state on this topic.



#@6 Saria, *!nice

#$*:3LI/"%I9* $SI%I, page 261

Intro!ction to Logic, "nre& H. Bachh!er S..

%$$*S, MH$SS *S%L* /.

" re!plicative proposition is an occ!ltly

compo!n proposition that e4presses the specia

aspect o( the s!'ect. %his is y reason o( &hich

the preicate elongs to it. It oes this y &ors

s!ch as =as=, =as m!ch=, =in so (ar as=, =in as

m!ch as= an so on. " re!plicative proposition

is tr!e i( the proposition &o!l e tr!e &itho!t thre!plication. "n i(, esies that, the

re!plicate (ormality is the reason &hy the

preicate elongs to the s!'ect.

#1 9"L*$"



#2

Intrinsic analogy an *4trinsic analogy, p 27

Basics o( Logic, Bama r., et al.

P"$", :"$LL* $.

It is also important to isting!ish an intrinsic

analogy (rom e4trinsic analogy. "n analogy o(

proportionality (rom an analogy o( attri!tion.

Intrinsic analogy, an analogy terms are intrinsic i(

the concept they signi(y is realiFe in all its

analog!es. *4trinsic analogy, analogo!s terms

are e4trinsic i( the concept they signi(y are

realiFe only in their primary analog!es. %he

seconary analog!es are relate only in some

other &ays to the primary ones. most common

instances are metaphorical e4pressions.

Documents

Logic Written Report