Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
after Raymond McCall, Basic Logic (Barnes & Noble, 1967); symbolic apparatus
from Elementary Logic, by Benson Mates (Oxford, 1972)
Parts
A: a
E: a
I: a
O: a
of a syllogism:
universal affirmative proposition--All S is P [(x)(Sx -> Px)].
universal negative proposition--No S is P [(x)(Sx -> -Px)].
particular affirmative proposition--Some S is P [( x)(Sx & Px)].
particular negative proposition--Some S is not P [( x)(Sx & -Px)].
2nd
P M
S M
---S P
3rd
M P
M S
---S P
4th
P M
M S
---S P
All the possible moods, or kinds of propositions in the two premises (the
moods that turn out to be valid in some figure are in bold face):
Major Premise:
Minor Premise:
AAAA
AEIO
IIII
AEIO
EEEE
AEIO
OOOO
AEIO
II
EE
OOO
Minor Premise:
IO
EO
EIO
M P
S M
P M
S M
M P
M S
{1}
{2}
{3}
{3}
{3}
{3}
{3}
{2}
{3}
P, Premise
P / ( x)(Sx & -Px)
P
3 Q, Quantifier Exchange
4 R 42, De Morgan
5 R 29,Double Negation
6 R 53, Material Implication
2 US, Universal Specification
7 US
{2,3}
{2,3}
{3}
{2,3}
{2,3}
{1,2,3}
{1,2}
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Ma -> Pa
(x)(Mx -> Px)
-( x)-(Mx -> Px)
-( x)-(Mx -> --Px)
-( x)(Mx & -Px)
( x)(Sx & -Px)
-( x)(Sx & -Px) -> ( x)(Sx
{1,2}
This reductio ad absurdum proof also shows how proofs with an existential
premise and conclusion can be constructed without using the Existential
Specification rule.