MODULE I: THE BIRTH AND MEANING OF PHILOSOPHY

INTRODUCTION
According to Socrates, philosophy started from a simple process called “WONDERING”. The curious nature of the ancient
people of Greece has helped them to initiate studies and research to feed their doubting and perplexed minds with
philosophical ideas.

With the growing intensity to understand everything that they encountered and experienced in life, They gradually became
lovers of true wisdom.

THE BIRTH OF PHILOSOPHY

The beginning of formal philosophy is traced to Thales of the Greek colony on Miletus in the late sixth century B.C. early
thinkers up to Socrates were primitive scientists whose interests were focused on knowing nature and the world around
them. They came up with theories concerning the stuff with which the world was made. Some of them believed that the
world and everything therein are made of one or more of the Four Elements; air (Anaximenes), earth (Anaxagoras), fire
(Heraclitus) and water (Thales). Others thought that the basic elements of everything are special substances that the
human eye cannot see.

MEANING OF PHILOSOPHY
The word “philosophy” was coined by Pythagoras, an early Greek scholar. It was derived from two Greek words: philein
meaning “love of” or “friendship for,” and Sophia meaning “wisdom” (Thiroux, 1985). Thus Philosophy is the Love of Wisdom.

Philosophers are unlike the physical and the social scientists who are engaged in the pursuit of knowledge only; their aim
goes beyond acquiring knowledge because the ultimate goal of their Analytic inquiry is wisdom. At this point the distinction
between “knowledge” and “wisdom” is in order. It has been said that we can know many things but we cannot always be
wise.

Wisdom requires more than just knowledge. It involves understanding the implications of that knowledge and its uses for
oneself and others with some purpose or value in mind.

REAL DEFINITION OF PHILOSOPHY

●​ Broad: Way of Life; Principle in life.
●​ Strict: Search for meaning/reason.
●​ Scientific Real Definition of Philosophy:
○​ Subject Matter: God, Man and World (Beings)
○​ Objective: Ultimate causes, reasons and principles
○​ Method: Rational method/Human Reason
●​ Thus, Philosophy is a discipline that deals with the study of God, man and the world in their ultimate causes,
reasons and principles by the use of rational methods.

DEFINITION OF TERMS
●​ Being – refers to anything that exists.
●​ Causes – are those that produce the effect.
●​ Reasons – are those from which something is known or understood.
●​ Principles – are those from which something proceeds.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY

●​ Inquiry – Meaning and structure of beings. Directly face Reality.
●​ Liberation – Ignorance, Meaninglessness, Aimlessness, Indifference to the needs of others.
●​ Maturity – Critique, Analysis, Reflection

BRANCHES OF PHILOSOPHY

THEORETICAL BRANCHES PRACTICAL BRANCHES PRODUCTIVE BRANCHES

provide the principles, causes, and put into practice the principles, causes refers to the relationship of philosophy
reasons to serve as guides and reasons learned from theoretical to other disciplines
branches
 Branches – Subject Matter

Metaphysics – beings in general Logic – correct thinking Philosophy of Education – reason of

education

Theodicy – nature and existence of Aesthetics – appreciation of beings Philosophy of Religion – reason of
God belief

Cosmology – material universe Ethics – morality of human actions Legal Philosophy – reason of law

Epistemology – veracity of Axiology – values Social Philosophy – man and society

knowledge

Rational Psychology – reason for Semantics – linguistic forms

human behavior

THE BIRTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOGIC

Logic is one of the courses offered in colleges and universities with a long history. It was taught in schools of ancient
Greece, and in Western Europe it has been offered to students ever since the first universities were established some 800 or
900 years ago. (Barker, 1989).

Its birth is attributed to Aristotle who initiated the formal study of it among the Greeks in the 4th century B.C., thus, he was
generally credited with the title “Father of Logic.” His logic is known as syllogistic logic the fundamental elements of which
are terms.

Arguments are evaluated as good or bad on the basis of the arrangement of terms in the argument.

After the death of Aristotle, Chrysippus (279-206 B.C.), also a Greek philosopher and one of the founders of the Stoic
school, developed a logic in which the fundamental elements were whole propositions. To him every proposition is either
true or false; he developed rules on the bases of which the truth and falsity of the proposition is determined.

MEANING OF LOGIC
Zeno, the founder of the Stoic School (336-264 B.C.), introduced the word “logic.” He derived the word logic from the Greek
word “Logike” which means “systematized and intelligible.”

“Logike” is closely related to logos, the Greek word for thought, reason and discourse. Nominally then logic is a systematic
study of matters pertaining to thought and discourse (Ardales).

REAL DEFINITION OF LOGIC

●​ Broad: Logic is order and consistency.
●​ Strict: Logic is the science and Art of Correct Thinking.
●​ Scientific Real Definition
○​ Subject Matter: Laws, Methods and principles which the mind of man must follow in his/her thinking.
○​ Objective: To attain a secure and accurate truth.
○​ Method: Rational Method
●​ Thus, Logic is the branch of Philosophy that deals with the study of the Laws, Methods and principles which the
mind of man must follow in its thinking for a secure and accurate truth through human reason.

SYNONYM OF LOGIC
“Dialectics” is a term used to describe a method of philosophical argument that involves some sort of contradictory process
between opposing sides.

In the course of the dialogues, Socrates' interlocutors propose definitions of philosophical concepts or express views that
Socrates challenges or opposes.
DIALECTIC METHOD OF PHILOSOPHIZING
The term “dialectic” comes from the Greek word dialektike which means “the art of conversation.”
It is the act of talking back and forth, disagreeing with one another, and arguing about contentious issues.

In philosophy, it is a method of coming up with a conclusion from an exchange of contradicting logical arguments.

TYPES OF LOGIC

APPROACH: DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE VALIDITY: FORMAL AND MATERIAL

DEDUCTIVE LOGIC a system of reasoning FORMAL LOGIC when the basis of validity of
whereby a person argues reasoning is conformity with
from universal or general the structure, pattern or
truth to the particular, or arrangement of the
from the more to the less constituent parts of correct
universal (particular or reasoning
specific) by way of a middle
term

INDUCTIVE LOGIC is "bottom up," meaning that MATERIAL LOGIC when the basis of validity of
it takes specific reasoning is the
information and makes a thought content or the
broad generalization that is meaning and the truth of the
considered probable, statement involved in
allowing for the fact that the thinking and reasoning
conclusion may not be an argument is materially
accurate valid when the ideas therein
this type of reasoning conform to fact or reality
usually involves a rule being
established based on a
series of repeated
experiences

DIVISION OF LOGIC

Mental Processes Language Expression Linguistics

Apprehension, Idea Terms Parts of Speech

Judgement Proposition Sentences

Reasoning/Inference Syllogisms Paragraphs

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY OF LOGIC

-​ Logic teaches us to assign the proper term to the specific Idea.
-​ Logic teaches us to communicate better and properly.
-​ Logic helps us to reason out with confidence

WHAT IS LANGUAGE?
Language – is the system of signs and symbols used in communication.
Sign – movement, mark or indication to convey some meaning.
Symbol – something that represents something else.
 FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE

INFORMATIVE Language tends to give EXPRESSIVE Language solicits emotional

facts and data (Declarative responses from the listener
sentences) (Exclamatory sentences)

PRACTICAL Language tends to ask the LOGICAL Language solicits critical

listener to act what the thinking
the speaker says (Interrogative sentences)
(Imperative sentences)

PERFORMATIVE Language tends to let the CEREMONIAL Language tends to solicit

speaker act on what he/she social interaction Language
is saying (Subjunctive without logical value
sentences)

COMPLEX/MULTIPLE Language that combines two or more of the

previous functions

MODULE II: SIMPLE APPREHENSION

-​ the act by which the mind grasps the concept, or general meaning, of an object without affirming or denying
anything about it. thing tangible and material (for example, it has shape and color), a simple apprehension is the
grasping or understanding of something intangible and immaterial.

IDEOGENESIS (Simple Apprehension)

Input Process Output

1.​ Senses Sensation Sense Image

2.​ Sense Image Imagination Phantasm

3.​ Intellect Apprehension Idea

4.​ Vocal cords Speech Oral Terms

5.​ Hand, Pen, etc. Writing Written Terms

IDEA
-​ intellectual image of a thing or an object which is produced by the mind when ideas start by perception.

THE NATURE OF IDEA

1.​ It is immaterial: an intellectual image of the thing of the object. (abstract, cannot be touched but you can see it).
2.​ It is universal - an idea can be applied to a number of individuals.
3.​ It is nature constant - it does not change. (realities of life).

FOUR STEPS IDEAS ARE FORMED

1.​ Perceiving: perceiving the object (you make use of our senses).
2.​ Imagining: imagining the object (formed by the mind).
3.​ Differentiating: part of differentiating the individual object (phantasm).
4.​ Forming concept: formation of an idea of the perceived object (accidental elements). The intellectual image is the
idea of the thing or the object.

PROPERTIES OF IDEAS
●​ Comprehension – refers to the understanding by the person of a term on the basis of the nature, quality of an
idea. Connotation of an idea.
●​ Extension – refers to all the individuals or groups to which the term can be applied. The denotation of an Idea.
INVERSE RELATION OF COMPREHENSION AND THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN COMPREHENSION
EXTENSION AND THE EXTENSION OF TERMS
●​ Substance: Spirit, Mineral, Plant, Animals, Man ●​ Increasing Comprehension: Animal, Men,
●​ Bodily Substance: Mineral, Plant, Animals, Man Asian, Filipino, Pedro
●​ Living Bodily Substance: Plant, Animals, Man ●​ Increasing Extension: Pedro, Filipino, Asian,
●​ Sentient Living Bodily Substance: Animals, Man Men, Animal
●​ Rational Sentient Living Bodily Substance: Man ●​ Decreasing Comprehension: Pedro, Filipino,
●​ COMPREHENSION: EXTENSION Asian, Men, Animal
●​ Decreasing Extension: Animal, Men, Asian,
Filipino, Pedro

TERMS
We have learned that man invented language for communication purposes. He coined words, symbols, and terms by which
to express his ideas and thoughts.

Thought is invisible and imperceptible to the senses; we cannot take it and put it in someone's mind. 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 a language is the word. We call it–term, from the Latin word
terminus.

Definition: Term is the verbal expression of an idea.

It is an articulate sound which serves as a conventional sign of an idea. It may also be understood as an idea or group of
ideas expressed in words.

We form ideas from the things we perceive, and then we express or manifest our ideas to others by means of terms or
words.

Not all words, however, are terms; some words have no referents, such as if, from, by, and in. But all terms are words, for all
terms are articulate sounds signifying things.

KINDS OF TERMS
Terms may be classified according to quantity, incompatibility, definiteness of meaning, and the nature of referents.

1.​ As regards quantity

a.​ Singular Term – stands for a single individual or object.
b.​ Particular Term – stands for an indefinite number of individuals of a class.
c.​ Universal Term – stands not only for a class as a whole but for each member of the class.
✓ Example: All Students, Every Student, All Presidents, Each President.
d.​ Collective Term – refers to a group or collection of objects or individuals regarded as a unit.
✓ Example: Family, Team, Company, Battalion
Note: A collective term however can become a universal term (All Families) a particular term (Some
Families) a singular term (This Family).

2.​ As regards incompatibility

a.​ Contradictory Terms – those wherein one affirms what the other denies.
b.​ Contrary Terms – represent the two extremes among objects of a series belonging to the same class.
c.​ Private Terms – those wherein one signifies a perfection and the other denies perfection in a subject
which naturally ought to possess it.
d.​ Relative Terms – those wherein one cannot be understood without the other.

3.​ As regards definiteness of meaning

a.​ Univocal Term – predicated of two or more individuals or things in exactly the same sense; admits of
only one meaning.
b.​ Equivocal Term – predicated of many in an entirely different sense; admits of two or more meanings.
c.​ Analogous Term – predicated of two or more things that are partly the same and partly different sense.
 4.​ As regards the nature of referents
a.​ Concrete Terms – can be perceived by the senses; referent is tangible.
b.​ Abstract Term – can be understood only by mind; referent is intangible. It may denote the property of a
thing, which is considered an entity by itself. It denotes being, quality, quantity, or relationship.
c.​ Null or Empty Term – nothing actually existing to which it can be applied; no actual referents but only
imaginary ones.

JUDGEMENT
-​ The mental operation by which the mind judges or enunciates the agreement or disagreement of two ideas.

TWO TYPES OF JUDGEMENT

1.​ Affirmative
2.​ Negative

ELEMENTS OF JUDGMENT
1.​ Two Ideas in the mind;
2.​ Comparison of the two ideas; and
3.​ Predication or pronouncement by the mind on the agreement or the disagreement of the two ideas.

THE PROPOSITION
-​ It is the sensible expression of a judgement.
-​ It is a statement in which something is affirmed or denied.
Examples:
1.​ Every person is rational.
2.​ Covid-19 is life threatening sickness.
3.​ Some Businesses are legal.
4.​ Some X are Y.
-​ NOTE: A proposition must always be expressed in a declarative sentence, not those that command, exclaim,
doubt or wish.
-​ NOTE: All propositions are sentences but not all sentences are propositions.

KINDS OF PROPOSITIONS
There are four major kinds of propositions, namely, the categorical, the conditional, the disjunctive, and the conjunctive
propositions.

1.​ The Categorical Proposition: is that which either affirms or denies something without any qualification or
condition. Its truth or falsity is based on its own content, not on the content of any other statement. Its basic
structure is made up of three elements, namely: the subject-term which is stated first, followed by the copula, and
the predicate-term given last.

2.​ The Conditional Proposition: is a kind of proposition which makes an assertion but qualified by a condition.
Structurally, it is a compound proposition made up of two simple categorical propositions, so arranged that the first
component states the condition while the second states the consequence. The two components are so related that
the truth of consequence is dependent on the truth of its condition or its antecedent. (If Then statements).
✓ Examples: If it rains, then the ground is wet. | If today is Monday, then tomorrow will be Tuesday. | If I save
enough money, then I will go on vacation.

3.​ The Disjunctive Proposition: is the type of proposition which presents two or more alternatives one of which is
true. It is also known as the alternative proposition. In this proposition the alternatives are usually joined by the
conjunctions “either…or,” but not always, as the fourth of the following illustrations exemplifies.
✓ Examples: John is either asleep or awake. | Maria will take up either engineering, architecture or marketing. |
Either we have a national language or we do not. | It is not impossible that the orbits of the planets are both circles
and ellipses. | Jose is either in Canada, Malaysia or Japan.

4.​ The Conjunctive Proposition: is the kind of proposition which presents two alternatives which cannot be true
simultaneously or at the same time. For illustration the following will suffice.
 ✓ Examples: She cannot be single and married too. | Mothers cannot be caring and uncaring at the same time. | It
is impossible for a person to be generous and at the same time thrifty. | He cannot be in Manila and in Bacolod at
the same time. | It is not possible for a country to have both the presidential and the parliamentary systems of
governance.

THREE ELEMENTS OF A CATEGORICAL PROPOSITION

S – Subject
1.​ SUBJECT: a term which is denied or affirmed.
C – Copula
2.​ COPULA: normally appears in the present tense of the verb “TO BE.”: am, is, are. P – Predicate
3.​ PREDICATE: that which is affirmed or denied of the subject

✓ Examples: Albert is genius. | Students are studious. | I am healthy and happy.

Nota Bene: Some propositions are not in their standard form.

RULES OF CHANGING A NON-STANDARD FORM TO STANDARD FORM OF PROPOSITIONS

1.​ Copy the complete subject.
2.​ Give the correct copula.
3.​ Give the correct category of the subject.
4.​ Give the correct relative pronoun.
5.​ Copy the complete predicate

✓ Examples: Original Form: Michael loves little children.

Standard Form: Michael is a person who loves little children.
Original Form: Some Students were absent yesterday.
Standard Form: Some students are those who were absent yesterday.

QUANTITY OF A CATEGORICAL PROPOSITION

●​ The quantity of the proposition is determined by the quantity of the subject.
●​ If the subject is singular, the quantity of the proposition is also singular.
●​ If the subject is particular, the quantity of the proposition is also particular.
●​ If the subject is universal, the quantity of the proposition is also universal.

QUALITY OF A CATEGORICAL PROPOSITION

●​ Affirmative Proposition: if the subject and the predicate agree with each other.
●​ Negative Proposition: if the subject and the predicate do not agree with each other.

SYMBOLS OF THE PROPOSITIONS

Symbols of the propositions are based on quantity and quality, categorical propositions are represented by the symbols A, E,
I, and O. These vowels are lifted from the Latin words “affirmo” which means “ I affirm” and “nego” which means “I deny”.

A and I the first two vowels of “affirm” symbolize affirmative propositions: A – either singular or universal; I – particular.
E and O, the vowels of “nego” symbolize negative propositions: E – either singular or universal; O – particular.

4 TYPES OF CATEGORICAL PROPOSITION

A Universal / Singular (+) (All students are studious.)

E Universal / Singular (-) (No student is studious.)

I Particular (+) (Some Students are studious.)

O Particular (-) (Some Students are not studious.)

Note: They come from the Latin words: AffIrmo and nEgO
MODULE III: INFERENCE
Broad Meaning: “any process by which the mind proceeds from one or more propositions seen to be implied in the former.”

Strict Meaning: the operation by which the mind gets new knowledge by drawing out the implications of what it already
knows. (The mind knows something before it could reason out).

Real Meaning: “any series of propositions so arranged that the consequent flows from the antecedent.” The 3 essential
constituents of Inference must be all present. (Antecedent + Consequent + Sequence)

ANTECEDENT
The part of the inference from which the conclusion is drawn or deduced. The antecedent may also be referred to
as the premises. It is the starting point of reasoning.

CONSEQUENT
The part of the inference, which signifies the conclusion or the new knowledge, derived from the antecedent. The
consequent may also be referred to as the conclusion.

SEQUENCE
The necessary connection between the antecedent and the consequent.
Antecedent (Premises) → INFERENCE SEQUENCE → Consequent (Conclusion)

ARGUMENT
is “any group of propositions of which one is claimed to follow from the others, which are regarded as providing
support or grounds for the truth of that one.” The group of propositions becomes an argument if it follows a logical
structure. It must have a conclusion and a premise or premises.

For an inference to be valid there must be a logical sequence, i.e., a necessary connection must exist.

(Premise) Trees are green. (Premise) It is daytime. (Premise) Some men are rapists.
(Premise) Light is white. (Conclusion) therefore, the sun is (Premise) The President is a man.
(Conclusion) Therefore, I am a shining brightly. (Conclusion) so, the President is a
Lasallian. rapist.
In the given example, the
This inference is invalid because consequent does not flow from the Again, there is no sequence in this
there is no sequence. There is no antecedent. This inference is inference; hence, it is invalid.
reason how the consequent “I am invalid because even though it is Being a man does not necessarily
a Lasallian” can be inferred from daytime, it does not follow that the mean being a rapist.
the antecedent. sun is always shining brightly (for In each of the given examples,
instance, during a cloudy day). there is no sequence; hence, all of
them are invalid.

Below are the examples that follow and take note of the sequence that makes each inference valid.

1. All students are learners. 2. All Students are hard working 3. No businessman is illiterate.
But, Lasallians are students. persons. But, Some Filipinos are illiterate.
Therefore, Lasallians are learners. But, some hard working persons Therefore, Some Filipinos are not
are rich. businessman.
Therefore, Some rich persons are
students.

IDENTIFYING THE PREMISE AND THE CONCLUSION

●​ An entire argument may be presented as a single sentence, but often several sentences are used to present it. Its
conclusion may either precede or follow the premises, or it may come between two of them. The following are
examples of arguments presented as a simple sentence. Take note of the position of the underlined conclusions.
○​ He was absent because he was very ill.
○​ Since the weather is unfavorable, the picnic will be postponed.
○​ In view of the fact that her wallet was stolen, I conclude that she cannot promise to pay on time.
 ●​ The following are examples of arguments presented in multiple sentences. Take note of the position of the
underlined conclusions.
○​ Whatever is good is from God; but life is good; thus, life is from God.
○​ Several sophomores approached me to report errors in the checking of their papers. I may infer that
some students are honest. They even requested that points be deducted from their scores.
○​ Drigo is not a president. This is so because no infant is a president, and Drigo is an infant.
●​ Special terms functioning as premise-indicators or conclusion indicators are often one to identify and distinguish
the premises and the conclusions of an argument.
○​ Examples of Conclusion-Indicators: therefore, hence, thus, so, accordingly, in consequence,
consequently, as a result, for this reason, for these reasons, it follows that, we may infer, I conclude that,
which shows that, which means that, which entails that, which implies that, which allows us to infer that,
which points to the conclusion that, etc.
○​ Examples of Premise-Indicators: since, because, for, as, as indicated by, the reason is that, for the
reason that, may be inferred from, follows from, as shown by, may be derived from, may be deduced
from, in view of the fact that, etc.

SYLLOGISM
In the broadest sense, is “any argumentation in which from two propositions called the premises, we infer a third proposition
called the conclusion.”

A categorical syllogism is an argument consisting of exactly three categorical propositions (two premises and a conclusion)
in which there appear a total of exactly three categorical terms, each of which is used exactly twice.

BASIC STRUCTURE OF THE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM

●​ One of those terms must be used as the subject term of the conclusion of the syllogism, and we call it the minor
term of the syllogism as a whole.
●​ The major term of the syllogism is whatever is employed as the predicate term of its conclusion.
●​ The third term in the syllogism doesn't occur in the conclusion at all, but must be employed somewhere in each of
its premises; hence, we call it the middle term.
●​ Since one of the premises of the syllogism must be a categorical proposition that affirms some relation between its
middle and major terms, we call that the major premise of the syllogism.
●​ The other premise, which links the middle and minor terms, we call the minor premise.
○​ Consider, for example, the categorical syllogism:
No Nurses are animals.
Some nurses are responsible.
Therefore, Some responsible beings are not animals.
Clearly, "Some responsible beings are not animals" is the conclusion of this syllogism. The major term of
the syllogism is “animals" (the predicate term of its conclusion), so "No Nurses are animals" (the premise
in which “animals" appears) is its major premise. Similarly, the minor term of the syllogism is
“responsible," and "Some Nurses are responsible" is its minor premise. “Nurses" is the middle term of the
syllogism.

STANDARD FORM OF CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM

A categorical syllogism in standard form always begins with the premises, major first and then minor, and then finishes with
the conclusion. Thus, the example above is already in standard form. Although arguments in ordinary language may be
offered in a different arrangement, it is never difficult to restate them in standard form. Once we've identified the conclusion
which is to be placed in the final position, whichever premise contains its predicate term must be the major premise that
should be stated first.

1. All students are learners. 2. All Students are hard working persons.
But, Lasallians are students. But, some hard working persons are rich.
Therefore, Lasallians are learners. Therefore, Some rich persons are students.
LOGICAL CALISTHENICS ON CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
Determination of their validity, logicians have formulated eight (8) rules of syllogism. It must be noted that all of the 8 rules of
syllogism must be met or satisfied for the argument or syllogism to be valid. If at least one of the 8 rules of syllogism is
violated, then the argument or syllogism is invalid.

EIGHT RULES OF SYLLOGISM

Rule # 1: There should only be three terms in the syllogism, namely: the major term, the minor term, and the middle
term.
• All stars are heavenly bodies.
• But, Lea Salonga is a star.
• Therefore, Lea Salonga is a heavenly body.
If we analyze the syllogism above, it would appear that the argument is invalid because it violates rule #1. As we
can see, the syllogism above contains 4 terms because the meaning of the middle term “stars” in the first premise
is changed in the second premise. The term “stars” in the first premise refers to astronomical bodies or objects,
while the term “star” in the second premise refers to celebrities.
• Every healthcare professional is brave.
• But, Mike is a healthcare professional.
• Therefore, Mike is brave.
As we can see, the syllogism above contains only three terms. Hence, this syllogism is valid in the context of rule #
1.

Rule # 2: The major and the minor terms should only be universal in the conclusion if they are universal in the
premises.
• Every philosopher is brilliant.
• But, No terrorist is a philosopher.
• Therefore, No terrorist is brilliant.
As we can see, the minor term “terrorist” in the conclusion is universal because of the universal signifier “no”. And
since the minor term “terrorist” in the second premise is universal because of the universal signifier “no”, then the
syllogism above does not violate rule #2 in the context of the minor term. However, the major term “brilliant” in the
conclusion is universal because the proposition is negative; as we already know, the predicate terms of all negative
propositions are universal. But if we look at the major term in the first premise, it is particular because, as we
already know, the predicate terms of all affirmative propositions are particular. In the end, the syllogism above is
invalid because it violates rule #2. This is what logicians call the “fallacy of illicit major”.
• All artists are creative.
• But, all artists are weird people.
• Therefore, All weird people are creative. = ✔ Therefore, some weird people are creative.
Because the major term “creative” in the conclusion is particular, as it is a predicate term of an affirmative
proposition, then it does not violate rule #2 because the rule is not applicable here. As we can see, rule #2 is
applicable only to universal minor and major terms. But if we check the minor term “weird people” in the
conclusion, we learned that it is universal because of the universal signifier all. Since the minor term “weird people”
is universal in the conclusion, then it must also be universal in the second premise for this syllogism to be valid. If
we look at the minor term in the second premise, it is particular because it is a predicate term of an affirmative
proposition. Therefore, in the end, the syllogism above is invalid because it violates rule #2. This is what logicians
call the “fallacy of illicit minor”.
• No Lawyers are liars.
• But, Greg is a lawyer
• Therefore, Greg is not liar.
The syllogism above is valid in the context of rule #2 because rule #2 is not violated. As we can see, the minor
term “Greg” in the conclusion is particular; hence, rule #2 is not applicable. Of course, if a rule is not applicable,
then it cannot be violated; and if no rule or law is violated, then the argument is automatically valid. Now, if we look
at the major term “liar” in the conclusion, it is universal because it is a predicate term of a negative proposition. But
because the minor term “liar” is also universal in the first premise because, again, it is a predicate term of a
negative proposition, then this argument satisfies rule #2.

Rule # 3: The Middle term must be distributed universally at least once.

• All Filipinos are hospitable.
• But, Some Europeans are hospitable
 • Therefore, Some Europeans are Filipinos.
If the middle term is not distributed (Universal) at least once, it cannot serve as a medium that can either unite the
major and the minor terms in an affirmative syllogism or separate them in a negative syllogism. This is so because
it cannot mediate between the major and the minor terms in the premises.

Rule # 4: If the premises are affirmative the conclusion is also affirmative.

• All students are responsible.
• But, Some women are students.
• Therefore, Some women are responsible.
This is a valid syllogism since all the premises are affirmative, then the conclusion must be affirmative.

Rule # 5: If one of the premises is negative, the conclusion must be negative.

• All Filipinos are fiesta lovers.
• But, Zeb is not a fiesta lover.
• Therefore, Zeb is not a Filipino.
This is a valid syllogism since the minor premise is negative, then the conclusion must be negative.

Rule # 6: Two negative premises have no conclusion.

• No idiot is rational.
• But, Kurt is not an idiot.
• Therefore, Kurt is not rational.
The above syllogism is invalid because both premises are negative.

Rule # 7: One premise must be at least universal.

• Not All Rich nurses are successful.
• But, Some Filipinos are rich nurses.
• Therefore, Some Filipinos are successful.
This is an invalid syllogism since all the premises are particular.

Rule # 8: If one of the premises is particular the conclusion must be particular.

• All Students are generous.
• But, some women are students.
• Therefore, Some women are generous.
This is a valid syllogism since the minor premise is particular, then the conclusion must be particular.

FIGURE
-​ Refers to the classification of syllogisms according to the arrangement of the middle term, namely, the
term (subject or predicate of a proposition) that occurs in both premises but not in the conclusion.

MOOD
-​ The mood of a categorical syllogism is a series of three letters corresponding to the type of proposition
the major premise, the minor premise, and the conclusion are (A, E, I, or O).

THE VALID MOODS OF EACH FIGURE

●​ The First Figure – (Sub-Pre)
○​ Rules of the First Figure: (AAA, AII, EAE, and EIO)
○​ The major premise must be universal (A or E)
○​ The minor premise must be affirmative (A or I)
●​ The Second Figure – (Pre-Pre)
○​ Rules of the Second Figure: (AEE, AOO, EAE and EIO)
○​ The major premise must be universal (A or E)
○​ One premise must be negative (E or O)
●​ The Third Figure – (Sub-Sub)
○​ Rules of the Third Figure: (AAI, AII, EAO, EIO, IAI and OAO)
○​ The minor premise must be affirmative.
○​ The conclusion must be particular.
 ●​ The Fourth Figure – (Pre-Sub)
○​ Rules of the Fourth Figure: (AAI, AEE, EAO, EIO and IAI)
○​ If the major premise is affirmative, the minor premise must be universal.
○​ If the minor premise is affirmative, the conclusion must be particular.
○​ If a premise (and the conclusion) is negative, the major premise must be universal.

DEDUCTIVE LOGIC
A system of reasoning whereby a person argues from universal or general truth to the particular, or from the more to the less
universal(particular or specific) by way of a middle term. We might argue, for example, that “All men are rational beings, but
Filipinos are men,” and conclude that “Filipinos are rational beings” by way of the middle term “men.” We may go further and
argue that since “Jose Rizal is a Filipino,” he is also a rational being thereby arriving to a still less universal(in this case,
individual) way of the middle term “Filipino.”

DEDUCTIVE LOGIC: GENERAL TO SPECIFIC

1.​ All psychologists are caring . But, Maria is a psychologist. Therefore, Maria is caring.
2.​ All men are thinking beings. But, Students are men. Therefore, students are thinking beings.
3.​ Every animal is an irrational being. Dogs are animals. Ergo(therefore), dogs are irrational animals.

INDUCTIVE LOGIC
The direct opposite of deductive logic. Here reasoning starts from sufficiently enumerated individual or specific cases or
observations and moves to the universal or general truth. For example, one will argue that Ilonggos are courageous; so are
the Negrenses, Cebuanos, Tagalogs, Warays, Maranaos, Tausogs, and all other ethnic Filipinos. One will therefore conclude
that, based on observation of all ethnic Filipinos, all Filipinos are courageous.

INDUCTIVE LOGIC: SPECIFIC TO GENERAL

1.​ La Salle has a library. UP has a library. Ateneo has a library. Therefore, all of them have libraries.
2.​ John is a person. Zeb is a person. Jose is a person. Therefore, they are all persons.
3.​ Logic is a subject. French is a subject. Science is a subject. Ergo, all of them are subjects.