REASONING

(3 Mental Operation)
rd

Reasoning:
Definition: a mental operation through which the agreement or disagreement of two ideas is inferred
from their known relation to a common third idea.
Expressed through inference, hence, when referring to reasoning, inference is implied and vice-versa.
Inference has its distinct meanings (compared to reasoning), but since inference is the manner through
which reasoning is expressed it would take these two terms as correlative existence and having
synonymous meaning.
METHODS OF REASONING
Induction (inductive reasoning) proceed from an individual or particular data to a general or universal
conclusion.

e.g.

Enrique is a man.
Enrique is mortal.
All men are mortal.

Deduction (deductive reasoning) proceeds from a universal data to a particular or individual

conclusion.

e.g.

All government employees are mortal.

All honest persons are government employees.
Every honest person is mortal.

INFERENCE (Symbol is )
Definition: - any process through which the mind proceeds from one or more propositions to other
propositions whose meanings are already implied in the former.
o

e.g.

All men are mortal.

P-noy is a man.
P-noy is mortal.
Daniel Padilla is a man.
Daniel Padilla is mortal.

KINDS OF INFERENCE (Immediate, Mediate)

IMMEDIATE (education; logical opposition) process of reasoning through which the mind passes
directly from one proposition to a new proposition, which is nothing else but a reformulation (partial or
complete) of the very exact meaning or truth expressed in the original proposition. Explicitly, no new truth or
meaning is achieved in an immediate inference. Thus, it doesnt offer any advancement of knowledge. It
suggests that immediate inference contains only two terms, i.e. subject term and predicate term. It doesnt
use a third term called the middle term.
e.g.

No Muslims are Christians.

No Christians are Muslims.

Types of Immediate Inference: (Education & Logical Opposition)

Education (Conversion; Obversion; Contraposition; Inversion) a kind of immediate inference where new
proposition is formulated either by interchanging the subject and predicate terms of the original
proposition or by the use or removal of negatives.
i.

Conversion refers to the formulation of a new proposition by way of interchanging the subject
and the predicate terms of an original proposition, with the quality of the original proposition
retained.
a. Two parts:
Convertend (the original proposition)
Converse (the new proposition)
e.g.

No Male is a Female. (Convertend)

(S)
(P)
No Female is a Male. (Converse)
(S)
(P)

The meaning of the convertend is retained in the converse.

Two kinds of conversion:

o Simple conversion (for E & I propositions only) the quantity of the convertend
is retained in the converse. (Convertend = universal = Converse; Convertend =
particular = Converse)
e.g.

Note: A & O cannot be reformulated because of their predicate terms.

e.g.

All dogs are animals (A) (Su Pp)

All animals are dogs. (A) (Su Pp)
Some birds are not animals. (O) (Sp Pu)
Some animals are not birds. (O) (Sp Pu)

Partial conversion (only for A & E) the quantity of the convertend is reduced from
universal to particular.
e.g.

ii.

No men aren not mortals. (E)

No mortals are not men. (E)
Some mortals are men (I)
Some men are mortals. (I)

All computers are gadgets. (A) (Su Pp) into

Some gadgets are computers. (I) (Sp Pp)
No computers are robots. (E) (Su Pu) into
Some robots are not computers. (O) (Sp Pu)

Obversion (applicable to A, E, I, O propositions) a kind of education in which a new

proposition is formulated by retaining the positions of the subject and predicate terms and
the quantity of the original proposition; however, the quality of the original proposition is
changed and the predicate term is replaced by its contradictory. A new proposition
(obverse) is formulated as follows:
a. Retain the position of the subject and predicate terms and the quantity of the original
proposition (obvertend)
b. Change the quality of the original proposition (from affirmative to negative or from
negative to affirmative) in the obverse;
c. Change the predicate of the original proposition to its contradictory in the obverse
1.
2.
3.
4.

Obvertend
All men are mortal. (A)
(Su)
(Pp)
No men are mortal. (E)
(Su)
(Pu)
Some men are mortal. (I)
(Sp)
(Pp)
Some men are not mortal. (O)
(Sp)
(Pu)

Obverse
No men are non-mortal. (E)
(Su)
(Pu)
All men are non-mortal. (A)
(Su)
(Pu)
Some men are not non-mortal (O)
(Sp)
(Pu)
Some men are non-mortal. (I)
(Sp)
(Pu)

iii.

Contraposition a kind of education which results from a formulation of a new proposition

whose subject term is the contradictory of the predicate term in the original proposition. In
principle, contraposition is a product of both conversion and obversion.

Types of Contraposition:
a. Partial or simple contraposition involves the formulation of a new proposition (contraposit) as
follows:
i.
Its (contraposit) subject is the contradictory of the predicate term of the original proposition
(contraponend);
ii.
The quality of the contraponend is changed in the contraposit
iii.
The predicate term in the contraposit is the subject term in the contraponend.
A is changed to E; E is changed to I; and an O to I.
e.g.
1.

(Contraponend)
(Contraposit)

2.

(Contraponend)
(Contraposit)

(Contraponend)
(Contraposit)

All whales are

Su
No-non mammals
Su
No fishes are
Su
Some non-dogs
Sp
Some students are
Sp
Some non-studious
Sp

mammals. (A)
Pp
are whales. (E)
Pu
dogs. (E)
Pu
are fishes. (I)
Pp
not studious. (O)
Pu
are students (I)
Pp

Note: I propositions do not have contraposit; obversion of I propositions are O propositions; after
obversion is conversion but O cannot be converted. Therefore, I propositions cannot be
subjected to contraposition.
b. Complete contraposition a new proposition (contraposit) is formulated according to the following
conditions:
i.
The subject term in the contraposit is the contradictory of the predicate term in the
contraponend
ii.
The quality of the contraponend is not changed in the contraposit
iii.
The predicate term in the contraposit is the contradictory of the subject term in the
contraponend.
In complete contraposition, an A is changed to A, then E to O and O to O.
e.g.
1. (Contraponend) All whales are mammals. (A) to (Contraposit)
All non-mammals are non-whales. (A)
2. (Contraponend) No fish is a dog. (E) to (Contraposit) Some non-dog is not a non-fish. (O)
3. (Contraponend) Some students are not studious. (O) to (Contraposit)
Some non-studious are not non-students. (O)

Inversion(only for A proposition) this is a method of education in which the mind, through
obversion and conversion, finally arrives at a judgment (inverse) whose subject and predicate terms are
contradictories of the subject and predicate terms in the original proposition (invertend)
e.g.

(Invertend) All terrorists are criminals.(A) to

(Obverse) No terrorists are non-criminals. (E) to
(Converse:Simple) No non-criminals are terrorists. (E) to
(Obverse) All non-criminals are non-terrorists. (A) to
(Converse:Partial) Some non-terrorists are non-criminals. (I) to
(Inverse) Some non-terrorists are non-criminals. (I)

Logical Opposition (Contradictory; Contrary; Subcontrary; Subaltern)

o Exists between two propositions with the same subject and predicate terms but differ from each other
in quantity, quality or both.
o Types of Opposition (Contradictory, Contrary, Subcontrary, Subaltern)

Contradictory opposition opposition that exists between two propositions with the same
subject and predicate terms but different in quantity and quality. [differ in quantity and quality]
Contrary opposition opposition that exists between two universal propositions having the
same subject and predicate terms but differ in quantity. [differ in quantity]
Subcontrary opposition opposition that exists between two particular propositions with the
same subject and predicate terms but different in quality.[differ in quality]
Subaltern opposition opposition that exists between two propositions with the same
subject and predicate terms but different in quantity.[differ in quantity]
o For purposes of distinction: A & E propositions are called subalternant (superior) while I & O
are called subalternate (subaltern)
The Square of Opposition
(with Venn/Euler Diagram)

Rules Governing Logical Opposition:

1.
Contradictory Opposition
a.
If one of the two contradictories is true, the other is false and vice versa.
b.
Contradictories cannot be simultaneously true or false.
c.
The following conclusions can be drawn:
1.
If A is true O is false
2.
If E is true, I is false
3.
If I is true, E is false
4.
If O is true, A is false
2.
Contrary Opposition
a.
If one of the contraries is true, the other is false.
b.
If one of the contraries is false, the other is doubtful.
c.
The following conclusions can be drawn:
1.
If A is true, E is false
2.
If E is true, A is false
3.
If A is false, E is doubtful
4.
If E is false, A is doubtful
3.
Subcontrary Opposition
a.
If one of the subcontraries is true, the other is doubtful
b.
If one of the subcontraries is false, the other is true.
1.
If I is true, O is doubtful
2.
If O is true, I is doubtful
3.
If I is false, O is true
4.
If O is false, I is true
4.
Subaltern Opposition
a.
If the universal is true, the particular is true. This means that the truth of
the universal involves the truth of the particular.
b.
If the universal is false, the particular is doubtful. This means that the
falsity of the universal does not involve the falsity of the particular.
c.
If the particular is true, the universal is doubtful. This means that the truth
of the particular does not involve the truth of the universal.
d.
If the particular is false, the universal is false. This means that the falsity
of the particular involves the falsity of the universal.
e.
The following conclusions can be drawn:
1.
If A is true, I is true.
2.
If A is false, I is doubtful
3.
If E is true, O is true
4.
If E is false, O is doubtful
5.
If I is true, A is doubtful
6.
If I is false, A is false
7.
If O is true, E is doubtful

8.

If O is false, E is false

MEDIATE INFERENCE (Categorical Syllogism)

Comparison between Immediate & Mediate Inference:
Immediate
Mediate
Mind reasons out by passing from two
Mind reasons out by passing directly from one
proposition to a new proposition
propositions to a new proposition with the help
of a medium
Mind draws a conclusion immediately
Mind draws a conclusion through a medium
without recourse to a medium
Three terms are necessary namely, the subject
term, the predicate term and the middle term
Only two terms are necessary namely the
A new truth is attained as the mind draws a
subject term and the predicate term
conclusion by comparing the truth of two
propositions with the aid of a medium or a
Since only two terms are used, no new truths is
middle term.
established or achieved

Definition:
A process of reasoning in which from one proposition, with the aid of another proposition (or the third
term) called medium, the mind infers not only a new proposition but also a new truth.
o The new truth must be distinct from the previously asserted ones, but must necessarily follow
from them.
o Mediate inference clearly requires three propositions
Syllogism:
Remember:
o Term = verbal expression of an idea
o Proposition = verbal expression of a judgment
o Inference = verbal expression of reasoning
If immediate = only two propositions are needed
If mediate = needs three propositions which is called syllogism.
Definition:
o An argument ( or a series of statements connected to each other in order to establish a definite
proposition) consisting of three propositions which are so related that when the first two
propositions are posited as true, the third proposition must also be true.
o Parts or elements of Syllogism:
The first two propositions are called premises.
Premises are divided into major premise and minor premise.
o Major premise contains the major term
o Minor premise contains the minor term
Conclusion is the third proposition whose meaning and truth is implied in (or drawn
from) the premises.
Expresses the relationship of the minor term to the major term whether they are in agreement or
disagreement with each other.
o It uses three terms namely: major term, middle term, minor term.

KINDS OF SYLLOGISM (Categorical & Hypothetical)

CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM (Simple, Compound)
Simple Categorical Syllogism its first premise usually appears as the major premise, while the minor
premise appears as the second premise (though not the absolute rule in logic because sometimes the
major premise may appear on the second premise and the minor appears on the first premise.)
e.g.

(major premise)
(minor premise)
(conclusion)

All men are mortal.

All Filipinos are men.
All Filipinos are mortal.

Simple uses 3 propositions and 3 terms

o Major term is the predicate of the conclusion of simple categorical syllogism and must also
occur in the major premise (either as subject or predicate) letter T is designated to refer to major
term.
o Minor term is the subject of the conclusion. It appears in the minor premise either as subject
or predicate. t is designated to refer to minor ter.

Middle term occurs only in the two premises (major and minor) either as subject or predicate
but never in the conclusion. It serves to unify the major and minor terms in affirmative syllogism
and separating these terms in negative syllogism. M is referred to the middle term.

e.g.
(major premise)
(minor premise)
(conclusion)

All men are

(M)
All Filipinos are
(t)
All Filipinos are
(t)

Mortal.
(T)
men.
(M)
mortal.
(T)

Guidelines to analyze syllogisms:

i.
Go directly to the conclusion and pick out the subject (t) and predicate (T)
ii.
Look for the premise where the minor term(t) occurs this is the minor premise which contains not only
the minor term(t) but also the middle term(M).
iii.
Look for the premise where the major term(T) occurs this is the major premise which contains not
only the major term(t) but also the middle term(M).
Principles of categorical syllogism (4 principles)
(also called: supreme principles of knowledge or supreme metaphysical principles of knowledge)
Indispensable to determine the truth and validity in syllogism so as to arrive at correct thinking.
Hence: syllogism is valid if it conforms to the rules of logic.
o Conforms to facts and false if it does not
o Logical validity does not depend on the content but on the form of argument
Hence there can be a true but invalid argument
There can also be valid but false argument
e.g. Some animals are two legged.
All people are animals.
All people are two legged.
The argument is true but invalid because it violates rule#3.
1.

The Principle of Identity: Everything is what it is.(That which is, cannot be not
what it is.) things are what they are in themselves.
e.g. circles, square, carabaos, stars, moon, horses, house, man

2.

The Principle of Contradiction: A thing cannot be and not be in the same

respect. (if a thing is, it cannot be not is)
e.g. one cannot be dead and alive at the same time; or cannot be a square and a triangle at the same time.

3.

The Principle of the Identifying Third: Two things that are identical with the
same third thing are identical with one another.
e.g. A is B; B is C; A is C

4.

The Principle of the Separating Third: Two things of which the one is identical
with the same third thing but the other of which is not are not identical with one another.
e.g.

All angels are spiritual beings.

No corrupt government officials are angels.
No corrupt government officials are spiritual beings.
The term angels is the separating third because through this term, the terms corrupt government officials and
spiritual beings are distinguished or separated.

Note: any argument that violates at least one of these rules is invalid (not a syllogism). Specific violations
are called fallacies.

Rules of Categorical Syllogism:

1. Every categorical syllogism must contain only three categorical propositions.
e.g.

All gold is metal.

All jewelry is gold.
All jewelry is metal

2. Every categorical syllogism must contain only three univocal terms, each of which occurs twice, but not
in the same proposition. e.g.

Invalid:
Valid:
Lapu-lapu is the killer of Magellan.
All flowers are
beautiful
Lapu-lapu is a fish.
Sampaguita is a
flower.
3. The middle term must be distributed(Qty-u, & univocal), at least once. e.g.
Valid
All trees are plants.
A
(Mu)
(T)
All kamagongs are trees. A
(t)
(M p)
All kamagongs are plants.
(t)
(T)

Mu + Tp
tu + Mp
A

tu + Tp

Invalid
All lions are animals.
(Tu)
(Mp)
All men are animals.
(tu)
(Mp)
All men are lions.
(tu)
(Tp)
(Fallacy of undistributed

middle)
4. If the term is distributed in the conclusion, then such term must be distributed in a premise. e.g.
Invalid
Invalid
Some scientific gadgets are cellular phones I
Mp + Tp
Some lawyers
are holy.
I Tp + Mp
(Mp)
(Tp)
(T
(Mp)
All robots are scientific gadgets.
A
tu + Mp
No criminals are holy.
E tu + M u
(tu)
(Mp)
(t)
(M u)
All robots are cellular phones.
A
tu + Tp
No criminals are
lawyers. E tu + Tu
(tu)
(Tp)
(t)
(T)
(Fallacy of illicit major)

5. There must be no two particular premises; one premise must be universal.

Invalid
Some priests are holy
(T) (M)
Some nuns are holy.
(t)
(M)
Some nuns are priests.
(t)
(T)

I Tp + Mp
I tp + Mp
I

tp + Tp

6. If one premise is particular, the conclusion must be particular. e.g.

Invalid
All lawyers are professionals
Mp
(T)
(M)
Some criminals are professionals.
Mp
(t)
(M)
Some criminals are lawyers.
Tp
(t)
(T)
(Violates rule #3)

Tu +

tp +

tp +

7. If the conclusion is negative, only one premise must be negative (or if one premise is negative, the
conclusion must be negative, or the minor and major premises must not be both negative.)

Valid
All lawyers are professionals
A
Tu + Mp
(T)
(M)
Some criminals are not professionals. O
tp - Mu
(t)
(M)
Some criminals are not lawyers.
O
tp - Tu
(t)
(T)
(Violation will result to the fallacy of illicit
exclusion)

8. If the conclusion is affirmative, then both premises must be affirmative.

Invalid
(middle term is not distributed)
All senators are legislators
A tu + M p
A tu + M p
(T)
(M)
Some legislators are millionaires.
I Mp + T p
A Mu + Tp
(t)
(M)
Some senators are millionaires.
I tp + Tp
millionaires. A tu + Tp
(t)
(T)
(Violation will result to the fallacy of illicit inclusion)

Valid
All legislators are senators.
tu
Mp
All senators are millionaires.
Mu
Tp
All legislators are
tu

Tp

Figures and Moods of Categorical Syllogism refers to the logical form of syllogism from the standpoint of
the arrangement of the terms (major term, minor term, and middle term) and the arrangement of the
propositions (major, minor premises) according to quantity and quality.
1.

Figures of categorical syllogism (syllogistic figure) the proper

arrangement of the middle term in relation to the major and minor terms in the premises (or simply the
arrangement of terms in the premises)
Kinds of syllogistic figure:
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
(sub-pre)
(pre-pre)
(sub-sub)
(pre-sub)
M
T
T
M
M
T
T
M
t
M
t
M
M
t
M
t
t
t
t
t
T
T
T
T

2.

Moods of categorical syllogism (syllogistic mood) refers to the

disposition or the proper or orderly arrangement of the premises according to quantity and quality.
MOODS
Premises
Major Premise
Minor Premise

A
A

A
E

A
I

A
O

E
A

E
E

E
I

E
O

I
A

1
0
I
E

1
1
I
I

1
2
I
O

1
3
O
A

1
4
O
E

1
5
O
I

1
6
O
O

The rules of categorical syllogism dictate that only 8 of these arrangements are valid, namely: (the others are
all invalid)
Premises
Major Premise
Minor Premise

3.

A
A

A
E

A
I

A
O

E
A

E
I

I
A

1
3
O
A

Rules of the valid moods of each figure.

Rules of figure 1:
the major premise must be universal ( A or E)
the minor premise must be affirmative (A or I)
Rules of figure 2:
the major premise must be universal (A or E)
one of the premises (and conclusion) must be negative (E or O)
Rules of figure 3:
the minor premise must be affirmative (A or I)
the conclusion must be particular (I or O)
Rules of figure 4:

4.

if the major premise is affirmative (A or I), the minor premise must be universal (A or E)
if the minor premise is affirmative (A or I), the conclusion must be particular (I or O)
if one of the premises (and the conclusion) is negative (E or O), the major premise must be
universal.

Memory aid for MOODS of each FIGURE:

Figure 1: [ AlAgA;ng sEnAtE ang dAlIrI ni sErgIO ]
Figure 2: [ sa sEnAtE may bAlEtE, si sErgIO may AdObO ]
Figure 3: [ sa mAkAtI hInAtI ang dAlIrI nina rEnAtO, dOnAtO at sErgIO ]
Figure 4: [ sa mAkAtI may bAlEtE na hInAtI sina rEnAtO at sErgIO ]

Varieties of Categorical Syllogism:

Enthymeme from Gk. Words en = in and thymos = mind. an abridged (shortened or
condensed, incomplete) syllogism wherein one of the premises, either major or minor, or the
conclusion is omitted or not expressed, but is left in the mind in a form of presupposition.
Nevertheless, it is easy to detect the missing or presupposed part of the enthymeme.
o Rules:
Determine what the given or expressed parts of the syllogism are missing
Be able to supply the proper mood as you supplement the missing or unexpressed
part of the syllogism
Test the validity of the completed enthymeme by applying the rules of categorical
syllogism and the rules of valid figures and moods.
Epichereme Gk epi cheir = on hand. a kind of categorical syllogism in which a reason or proof
is added to the major premise, minor premise or both of them. If a reason is added to only one
premise (either minor or major), the syllogism is called simple epichereme. If reason is added to
both the major and minor premises, the syllogism is called compound epichereme.
o Rules:
Check the correctness of the epichereme by applying the syllogistic rules and the
rules of valid figures and moods.
Check the correctness of the premise/s that bear/s the added or supplied reason.
Keep in mind that any premise that contains an added reason is an enthymeme,
hence, steps in completing an enthymeme must be followed.
Draw a valid epichereme by reconstructing the given syllogism, just like what had
been done with the enthymemes, i.e., by applying the rules of a full-blown syllogism.
Polysyllogism Gk poly = many also called chain argument or chain of reasoning.
Generally defined as: an argument consisting of two or more syllogisms that are logically connected
with each other so that the conclusion of the preceding syllogism becomes the premise of the
succeeding one.
Sorites (Plural: soriteses) Gk soros = heap, pile. logicians call it heaped up syllogism. It is
composed of many syllogism composed of many syllogism. Def. an abridged (shortened,
condensed) polysyllogism consisting of three or more premises where the succeeding premise, and
the conclusion consists of the subject of the first premise and the predicate of the last premise.
Divided into: Aristotelian and Goclenian.
o e.g. Aristotelian : A=B, B=C, C=D, D=E, A=E
o Goclenian (Rudolphus Goclenius 1598: pioneered in modifying the Aristotelian sorites.)
this is an abridged (abbreviated, shortened) polysyllogism where the subject of the previous
premise becomes the predicate of the succeeding premise, and the conclusion consists of
the subject of the last premise and the predicate of the first premise.
e.g. D=E, C=D, B=C, A=B, A=E
o Rules governing sorites:
First Rule:
Only one premise may be particular. This premise must be that premise
which contains the minor term(t)..
Only one premise may be negative. This premise must be that premise
which contains the major term (T).
Second Rule:
In Aristotelian sorites, it is the last premise that should function as the
negative premise, or that premise that contains the major term (T) or
predicate of the conclusion.
In the case of Goclenian sorites, it is the first premise that functions as the
negative premise the one that contains the major term(T) or the predicate
of the conclusion
PARAGRAPH REDUCTION TO SIMPLE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM