LOGIC: THE SCIENCE AND ART OF CRITICAL ANALYSIS

(IN INTERACTIVE FORMAT)

SIMEON C. BERNADOS, JR
2010

INTRODUCTION

That man is a rational being, and a creation higher than the rest of the animals in the animal kingdom are just some of the common notions about him. However, when it comes to his physical prowess, he is weaker than the rest of the animals. He does not have the strength of an elephant, the bravery of a lion, keenness of the eyes of a cat to see in the dark, and the wings of birds to migrate. When he is still a baby, he is entirely helpless, and his helplessness is shown through his dependence to the other older members of the family for survival. For instance, in the first chapter of Genesis, man was given the dominion over the rest of all creatures (v.28). He is the apex of creation for which all things in the world are at his disposal (v. 28-29). In other words, he is created to be special. Man is special because he has the ability to think and reason. He is endowed with intellect. With his intellect, he discovered the way to science and developed himself through the technology he discovered. With his intellect, man thinks. Everyday, we are surrounded with many issues affecting our lives. These issues span many topics ranging from economics, politics, and religion to education. Because of these issues, our ideas are molded or may be influenced by the prevailing opinions in society. However, what may prevail may not be right. We have to weigh the evidences, the form the arguments as presented and the worthiness of the ideas advanced. In other words, these ideas have to be evaluated. evaluation. Arguments are presented in so many ways. There can be direct presentation while some are implied in the course of discussion. and can judge their validity. As experienced by the authors in teaching this course, students usually comment on the relevance of the study of Logic in their chosen career. The most common notion in the mind of students is that logic is only for students intending to major in Philosophy or planning to take up Law. Although this comment is real, nevertheless the comment demonstrated that Logic really needs to be studied. Students are proposing something thus, they are arguing or wanting to discuss an idea. The need to discuss an idea only ensures the necessity to study Logic. How does one know that his/her discussions are strongly supported? While it can be claimed that the study of Logic can be done outside the classroom and logical analysis is not a monopoly of those who have studied Logic, yet the formal study of the discipline can greatly help the learners evaluate the quality of the arguments presented. The trained mind can easily recognize the arguments Nothing should be accepted unless it has passed the rigid mental

To demonstrate the discussion above, let us take a look at the two statements below: 1. Romantic love is a natural part of human experience, and is therefore found in all societies, in close connection with marriage.* 2. In all societies, some people will be unhappy or depressed; therefore, rates of suicide will tend to be the same throughout the world.* Both statements are false. As in the case of the first statement, romantic love is not a requirement for marriage. For some early Filipino families or even among the contemporary ones, pre-arranged marriages are practiced; the proliferation of the mail-order bride is just an example of the absence of romantic love on marriages. For the second statement, on the other hand, human emotion is universal i.e. each society has its own way of expressing grief, bliss, anger, hatred, and love, yet the degree to bear pain, disillusionment, discouragement, and despair is not equal or to be at the same rate with other culture. Thus, it cannot be said that the rates of suicide tend to be at the same rate throughout the world. The two examples we have discussed above demonstrate that not only the study of Logic is important but it is also vital for mans existence. Much more, the study of Logic is essential for the development of the human mind. If man cannot think clearly and reason succinctly and with precision, how is he different from other species in the animal kingdom? Without the intellect, man would be devoid of morality or even in the sense of it; without the intellect, man would just be a plain animal. With his intellect, precisely man is specifically called an homo sapiens. At the end of this course, the students are expected to: define Logic and its importance in human affairs evaluate issues using the logical method identify arguments and be able to assess their validity, and finally be able to assess his own thinking

METHODOLOGY This course is designed to be in modular format covering the following modules, to wit: MODULE 1 PROBING THE TRUTH OF ARGUMENTS IN THE PROPOSITION MODULE 2 - PROBING THE TRUTH OF ARGUMENTS IN REASONING MODULE 3 - PROBING THE TRUTH OF ARGUMENTS THROUGH THE MATERIAL FALLACIES

* *

Giddens, A. 1989. Sociology: Problems and Perspectives. In: Sociology. Cambridge and Oxford: Polity. p.14 ibid. 2

Aside from its being in modular form, the course is meant to be in the interactive mode in which discussion - activity processes will be integrated in the text for the students to perform. At the end of every topic, an evaluation of students learning is undertaken. MODULE 1. PROBING THE TRUTH OF ARGUMENTS IN THE PROPOSITION Everyday, we heard arguments that oftentimes shape our opinions in certain matters concerning our utmost attention. Either we are in favor or against an issue. We react to them, debated on them, and if possible spread our position about them. Being a talking being, we cannot help but always engage ourselves in some forms of discussion. When we discuss ideas, we use arguments. Aside from using argument, we also believe in the truth of our beliefs. Simply put, arguments are either true or false. As defined in dictionary, an argument is 1) a reason put forward, 2) a chain of reasoning, and 3) a discussion or a debate. These definitions carry some implications to wit: P1. An arguer must prove his own assertion. As the Latin proverb goes, Asserentis est probare --- He who asserts must prove his own assertion. One of the common practices in proving an assertion is to use the opinion or ideas of somebody to prove ones contention. For instance, we are faced with the question of proving Gods existence. Instead to prove our belief, we use the Bible to prove our point. This method may not be wrong, but it is not appropriate. The writers of the Bible have proven the existence of God through revelation, direct intervention in mans activities, through the personality of Jesus Christ, and His passion, death and resurrection. Yet, the question remains unanswered: How would you prove that God exists. P2. Reasons imply reasons. This implication only demonstrates the limitation of the human mind. Since the human mind cannot know everything at once, man has to proceed to higher steps in order to know the truth. In doing so, the arguer has to establish himself a chain of reasoning. For instance, in an effort to prove that God does exists , man has establish reason after reason, proof after proof just to demonstrate what he/she believes in. Reasoning is only mans tool. As Leo Tolstoy said: Man has received direct from God only the instrument wherewith to know himself and to know his relation to the universe- he has no other- and that instrument is reasoning. Hence in this light, Alexander Hamilton said: Man is reasoning rather than a reasonable animal. P3. An argument is a discussion, an exchange of ideas. Since it is an exchange of ideas, communication is not a one-way process. Follow Up 1. What must be proven by an arguer? 3

P1. _________________________________________________________________________________. 2. State in your own words the principle stated in P1. _____________________________________________________________________________________. 3. What does Alexander Hamilton say regarding reasoning? P2. _________________________________________________________________________________. 4. State in your own terms the principle stated in P2. _____________________________________________________________________________________. 5. What does P3 say about arguments? _____________________________________________________________________________________. 6. Is communication a one-way process? Yes or No and why? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ In philosophy, arguments are not just mere verbal squabbles. They are the judgments of two ideas compared together to examine whether the ideas in question are compatible or incompatible (Bittle, 1950). When one say The apple is red, he compares the two ideas, apple and redness. P4. In the comparison of ideas, the mind must follow three essential factors. First, the mind must have an understanding of the ideas in question. What is a melamine? Is it a drug? How about cyanide? Unless the mind knows the ideas in question, it cannot make judgment. P5. Knowledge of ideas is a fundamental requirement in its analysis, for the absence of it will lead to misrepresentation. The knowledge of ideas may consists of its definition and difference with other ideas, its possible extension, differentiating notes or characteristics and other variables that will make an idea stand out. When an idea is predicated to another idea e.g. Virtue is good, we are proposing an identical relationship between two different ideas, virtue and good. P6. Secondly, the mind must compare the two ideas in question. The comprehension of each idea, their identity and non-identity, must be recognized first by the mind before it pronounces their compatibility or incompatibility. P7. Lastly, the mind must express mentally the agreement or disagreement of the ideas in question. The mental pronouncement is precisely the essence of judgment (Bittle, 1950). Follow Up 7. As stated in P4, what is the first factor essential in the comparison of ideas? 4

_____________________________________________________________________________________. 8. What is the fundamental requirement in the analysis of ideas? What does it consist of? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 9. What is the second factor in the comparison of ideas? Read P6 as your reference. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________

10. What is the third factor essential in the comparison of ideas? Read P7 for your reference. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________

Arguments are always found in conversation, since man is a communicative animal. Thus, it is worth noting to discuss the acceptable arguments from the non-acceptable ones. Recognizing acceptable arguments from the non-acceptable ones is just a matter of thinking, analysis, and evaluation. An individual has to reflect on matters to be decided on. The term to reflect is the basis of these three processes namely, thinking, analysis and evaluation. Furthermore, the knowledge of ideas is an essential procedure in establishing the acceptability of arguments. For example, Cyclops are four-eyed monsters will lead us to the conclusion that the argument is not acceptable, for the simple reason that the Cyclops are one -eyed monsters. Without my knowledge that Cyclops are one-eyed monsters, I will be led to believe that they are four-eyed. Various definitions of Logic P8. Logic is the science and the art of right thinking. Unlike the physical sciences, logic does not concern itself with reality but only with the operation of thinking itself. Logic is not a part of philosophy but it is a study for preparation towards the study of philosophy. For this reason, the ancients especially Aristotle called logic as Organon (McCall, 1952). P9. Furthermore, logic is the science of principles, laws, and methods which the mind of man in its thinking must follow for the accurate and secure attainment of truth (Bittle, 1950). The principles such as, the Principle of Causality, the Principle of Identity, the Principle of Contradiction, the Principle of Contrariety, etc. are developed by philosophy through the years of study. Moreover, Bittle further explained that the science of logic is not a parade ground for mental gymnastics where the mind can disport itself in quibbles and subtle distinction in order to 5

squirm out some disagreeable conclusion of fact or theory; rather, logic has the purpose to assist the mind honestly in discovering and attaining truth wherever it can be found (Bittle,1950). The definition does not imply that only students of logic can distinguish between valid reasoning from invalid ones (Copi, 1970). Rather, the study of logic can facilitate in the distinction between the valid and invalid reasoning. Follow Up 11. What is Logic (P8 )and what is its main concern? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 12. How does Aristotle call Logic? _____________________________________________________________________________________ 13. How does Bittle define Logic in P9. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 14. P9. Enumerate the principles mentioned by Bittle in P9. a.___________________________________________________________________________________ b. __________________________________________________________________________________ d. __________________________________________________________________________________ 15. According to Bittle, what are the purposes of Logic? The purpose of logic is to assist the mind in ________________ and _______________ truth. Logic is both a science and an art. It is a science for it has a body of knowledge which has been verified and systematized. A mere collection of facts does not make a science. On the other hand, logic as an art, aims to develop the mastery and skill in reasoning. It does not only provide the knowledge or tools; it also seeks to develop skills through constant use and training as well as the facility to use such tools. Art, too, is developed in this manner. Hence, in this unit the learners are expected to do the exercises found in every end of the unit. In this manner, learners will gain mastery. Through constant practice, the study of logic tends to increase proficiency in reasoning.

Formal and Material Logic: Distinguished P10. Thinking and /or reasoning, which is the object of any inquiry, can be viewed from two standpoints: MATTER and FORM. The former refers to the thought-object of reasoning (Material Logic) while the latter (Formal Logic) refers more to the rules in attaining the truth. 6

P11. Material Logic, then, refers to the trustworthiness, truth, and certainty of the statements involved in thinking, particularly of the conclusions arrived at by reasoning; whereas, the Formal Logic refers to the structure and the form of the argument regardless of whether or not the elements of this reasoning conform with nature. Example # 1: Every cat is an animal; Every tiger is an animal; Therefore, every tiger is cat. The contents of the propositions, materially taken, are true. It is true that cats and tigers are animals. Much more, it is also true that every tiger is cat considering that the cats and tigers are of the same feline family. But it does not follow that both cat and tiger are the same animal. A horse is an animal too, yet it is neither a tiger nor a cat. Obviously, we cannot argue: Example #2 Every cat is animal Every pig is animal Therefore, every pig is cat. Example # 3: Every animal is vertebrate; Every cabbage is an animal; Ergo, every cabbage is vertebrate. Based on the third example, it is clear that both the minor premise (Every cabbage is animal) and the conclusion (Every cabbage is vertebrate) are false statements, but formally taken, the whole syllogism is valid. If we only assume that all animals are vertebrates and all cabbages are animals is to conclude that all cabbages are vertebrates. It is very clear in the example that the conclusion does follow from the premises. P12. In this case, it is clear that the formal logic is concerned only on the form or the structure of reasoning rather than on the correctness of the facts. Material logic, on the other hand, concerns itself with the facts of reasoning rather than its form, as reflected in Example # 1. As a conclusion, it is not enough to pursue that an argument must be materially correct but formally invalid nor formally valid but materially incorrect, for the arguments would lack foundation. Any argument therefore, must be valid and true: valid, i.e. in accordance with the rules; true, i.e. the statements composing the argument conform with facts or reality. In other words, an argument to serve its purpose must show validity and truth.

Name:____________________________________________________ Course/Year/ Section:__________ Class Schedule:___________________________ Activity 1. What do you think of the arguments below? Do you agree or disagree on them. Explain briefly your answer and write your explanation on the space provided. 1. I believe that there is God because the Bible says so. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 2. Doctors say that exercise is good; therefore, we must all exercise. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 3. TV advertisements endorse Biogesic as safe and potent drug for headaches. Then, Biogesic is good for me. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 4. Pedros mother is a witch. I am sure, Pedro is also a witch. After all, no fruit tree will be bear fruit not of its own kind. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 5. I believe that nothing is impossible with God. Therefore, God can tell a lie. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 8 Date:___________ Score:____________

Lesson 1. THE TRUTHS IN PROPOSITIONS: THE DETERMINATE AND INDETERMINATE TRUTHS Learning Outcome After this lesson, the students will be able to: define the terms associated with this lesson differentiate the determinate truths from the indeterminate truths To facilitate the discussion for this lesson, answer the short test below. Lets Do It Activity 1. Among the sentences given below, identify those which can be answered by either True or False. Mark those sentences with a check mark on the space provided. _______1. No men are plants. _______2. Some soldiers are gays. _______3. A signage in the library: DO NOT SHELVE BACK THE BOOKS. _______4. Please, open the door. _______5. What is your name? _______6. This is rose is red. _______7. It is not necessary for saints to be martyrs. _______8. All men are mortal beings. _______9. Some plants are not vines. _______ 10. Anybody who passes this door must bring a black book.

What we learn from the activity is that not all sentences can be answered by the Truth/False method. Of all the sentences we learned from the English grammar classes, only the declarative sentences can be answered through the Truth/False method. Other sentence types such as exclamatory, interrogative, exhortatory (requests/ commands/ instructions) are in no way can be answered by the true /false method. Follow Up 1. Based on the items, list down on the space provided the non-declarative sentences? a._____________________________________________________________________________________ b._____________________________________________________________________________________ c._____________________________________________________________________________________ d._____________________________________________________________________________________ 9

2. Write five (5) examples of declarative sentences. a._____________________________________________________________________________________ b._____________________________________________________________________________________ c._____________________________________________________________________________________ d._____________________________________________________________________________________ e._____________________________________________________________________________________ By definition, a statement can be considered determinately truth or false if its value is known immediately. This means that the knower immediately understands or has immediate knowledge about the truth/falsity of the sentence in question. This immediate knowledge

becomes the knowers basis for accepting the truth of an argument. For instance,

Corazon C. Aquino is the first woman president of the Philippines.

Those who are familiar with the contemporary history of the Philippine political affairs can immediately infer that the sentence above is true. In this sense, the argument has a determinate value of true. On the other hand, arguments whose truth-falsity value is not immediately known are said to have indeterminate value. Usually, arguments having indeterminate value are expressed in the future tense or in any manner which connotes mediacy. For example: Water will boil at 100o C. Planets may collide with each other. In summary, sentences that are answerable with either true or false are called arguments and/or propositions. Hence, the other types of sentences e.g. interrogative, exclamatory, and imperative sentences are not considered as arguments or propositions, for they can neither be true or false.

10

Name:_____________________________________________________ Course/Year/ Section:__________ Class Schedule:________________________________ Date:_________________ Score: _____________ Activity 3. Classify the truths-falsity value of the propositions as either Determinate or Indeterminate. By using the X mark, write your answers on the space provided. TRUTH-FALSITY VALUE PROPOSITIONS
DETERMINATE INDETERMINATE

1. Ferdinand Magellan conquered Philippines on March 16, 1521. 2. With the coming of the Spaniards to the Philippines, it signaled the exposition of the country to globalization. 3. Computers will later on invade all aspects of our lives from simple business functions to space travels. 4. Acts of non-violence are good devices to use for social and political changes. 5. It is necessary for politicians to enact laws for the betterment of the country. 6. With the clamor of the youth and for the sake of being relevant, Congress will soon sponsor a bill making Andres Bonifacio as the national hero to replace Rizal. 7. The president will soon step down and will turn over the government to the military junta. 8. Temptations are good indicators of a persons spiritual strength. 9. Filipinos are still politically immature for they still adhere to turncoating as the rule of their game. 10. With the value of liberalism and individualism, the family is now threatened with extreme humanism. 11. The economic performance of a country will be conditioned the peoples mobility. 12. With the effects brought about the works of Dan Brown, the church will be divided as either pro or against Dan Brown. 13. Progress is one of our common aspirations as a people. 14. An absolute being, to perfect itself, must exist. 15. To classify human beings, the concept of race is not an

acceptable device. 16. Man is always doomed to peril and nobody can refute this truth.

11

Lesson 2. CLASSIFICATION OF CATEGORICAL PROPOSITIONS: THE SIMPLE CATEGORICAL AND THE MODAL PROPOSITIONS Learning Outcome After this lesson, the learners are expected to: define the different concepts related to this lesson recognize the different types of propositions typify propositions Discussions, discourses, homilies, lectures and other communication avenues use some forms of generalizations, conclusions or inferences. Some propositions or arguments are stated in the (a) categorical sense, (b) others in the hypothetical way while (c) some are in the manner of their existence. These classes of assertions correspond to the three classes of propositions, to wit: a) categorical, b) hypothetical and c) modal. These three classes we are going to discuss in this lesson. Read the text below taken from the book of James 2: 14-26 What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, Go, I wish you well, keep warm and well fed, but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith, by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. x x x x x. As the body without the Spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

A. THE CATEGORICAL PROPOSITIONS When we say that All men are created by God, or that No men are immortal beings, these assertions advanced a truth that is neither qualified nor limited to something. The assertions did not imply a condition that could modify the truth-falsity value of the said propositions. The same when I say Some men are created by God or Some men are not immortal. what we mean by categorical propositions. S1. By definition, propositions when not compounded with other statements are called categorical propositions. Furthermore, they have subject and predicate terms, and assert that either some or all of the classes in the subject are either included or excluded from the classes designated by the predicate term (Hinacay, and Hinacay, 2004:52). For example, All students in the SUCs are government scholars. No imported cars are tax exempt. Some grapes sold in the Philippines are seedless fruits. Some dogs are not imported animals. This is

B. The Types of Categorical Proposition 12

B.1. Propositions According to Quantity S2. Categorical proposition can be further classified into a) Quantity and b) Quality. The former is taken in consideration of its extension, either Universally extended or Particularly extended. By the quantity of the subject terms, propositions in questions are accordingly

designated as Universal propositions, Particular propositions, Singular propositions and Indefinite propositions. To illustrate the types according to quantity, take time to study the pattern or structure of the propositions below: Universal Proposition Every man is mortal. All men are fallible. No dog is fish. (All dogs is not fish.) Particular Proposition Some men are selfish beings. Some men are not cowards. Singular Proposition This man is a liar. Paul is an apostle of Jesus Christ. Indefinite Proposition Men are selfish Beauty is truth. S3. Excluding the indefinite propositions, most of the examples above have quantifiers such as all, every, some, and this. The quantifiers designate the extent of distribution of the subject term, i.e. whether the subject terms are wholly or partly distributed or extended. The indefinite propositions, since they do not have quantifiers, are oftentimes designated as universal propositions. The designation as universal propositions is mainly on the reason of intent of the argument. For instance, the statement, He, who looks at a woman with lust commits adultery in his heart although singular, but by reason of intent, is designated as a universal proposition. The examples below 1. Man is a rational animal. 2. Virtue is desirable. are universal propositions. But 1. Peter is an apostle of Jesus Christ. 2. Charity is a virtue. are particular propositions. B.2. Propositions According to Quality S4. Propositions in this classification are evaluated according to the quality of the copula whether the subject term is either affirmed or denied of its predicate. In other words, the quality

13

of the copula is either AFFIRMATIVE or NEGATIVE. The diagram below shows the structure of an/a affirmative/ negative proposition.

S is P
Affirmative copula

S is not P
Negative Copula Examples a. Some politicians are lawyers. b. Some lawyers are not lawyers. c. No men are angles (All men are not angels). d. All triangles are not equilateral plane figures. Based from this discussion, it can be deduced that the copula determines the quality of the proposition. In this way, propositions can either be AFFIRMATIVE or NEGATIVE. S6. Based on our discussion, we can come up with four (4) types of propositions, to wit: universal affirmative proposition, universal negative proposition, particular affirmative

proposition, and particular negative proposition. As shorthand, the following letters are used to symbolize the proposition we have mentioned: A is used for the universal proposition, E, for universal negative, I, for the particular affirmative, O, for particular negative propositions. These letters come from the words AffIrmo (I affirm ) and nEgO (I deny). Examples: Universal Affirmative (A) 1. All angels are spiritual beings. 2. Every being is a substance. 3. Men are mortal. Universal Negative (E) 1. No angels are men. 2. No students are professionals. Particular Affirmative (I) 1. Some athletes are women. 2. A few men are intelligent. 3. Saul is a king. Particular Negative (O) 1. Some cars are not expensive. 2. A few books are not worth reading materials. 14

3. Paul is not a communist. Follow Up Q1. Based on your understanding of S1, define briefly the term categorical propositions. _______________________________________________________________________________________ Q2. What are the two main parts of a categorical proposition? a .__________________________________________________________________________________ b. _________________________________________________________________________________ Q3. Give four (4) examples of categorical propositions. Refer to the examples above for your reference. a .___________________________________________________________________________________ b. ___________________________________________________________________________________ c .___________________________________________________________________________________ d. ___________________________________________________________________________________ Q4. Based on S2, how do we know that a proposition is either particular or universal? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Q5. Give one (2) examples of Universal and Particular propositions. a. ________________________________________________________________________(Universal) b. ________________________________________________________________________(Universal) c. ________________________________________________________________________(Particular) d. ________________________________________________________________________(Particular) Q6. With the statements below, underline the quantifiers. If a statement has no quantifier, write X on the space provided. a. All Doberman dogs are ferocious animals. b. Some knives are rusty. c. No traditional politicians are statesmen. d. Some students are not government scholars. e. All newspapers are tabloid papers. f. Honesty is a virtue. Q7. What part of the proposition that is indicative of its quality? ________________________________________________________________________________________ Q8. Give your own examples of two (2) affirmative and negative propositions. a. (affirmative)_______________________________________________________________________ b. (affirmative)_______________________________________________________________________ c. (negative)_________________________________________________________________________ d. (negative)_________________________________________________________________________ 15 __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________

Q9. Enumerate the four types of propositions. a. _________________________________________________________________________________ b. _________________________________________________________________________________ c. _________________________________________________________________________________ d. _________________________________________________________________________________

Q10. Give two (2) examples each of the four types of propositions. a. (A)________________________________________________________________________________ b. (A) ________________________________________________________________________________ c. (E) ________________________________________________________________________________ d. (E) ________________________________________________________________________________ e. (I) ________________________________________________________________________________ f. (I) ________________________________________________________________________________ g. (O) ________________________________________________________________________________ h. (O) ________________________________________________________________________________

THE MODAL PROPOSITIONS The modal categorical propositions are actually special types of propositions. The modal propositions is a composite single sentence in which the copula is so manifested as to express the manner or mode in which the predicate terms belongs to the subject terms. The

qualification does not affect the subject and the predicate but the copula itself, namely it stated whether the objective connection between the subject and predicate as expressed by the copula is necessary, impossible, possible or contingent or not necessary (Bachjhuber, 1954). In this point, we can come up with four types of modal propositions: 1. S7. necessary mode: The necessary proposition is expressed with the use of the verb must, have to, is necessary and other verbs which imply necessity. For instance, Man must be rational animals It is necessary for man to be rational animals. Men have to be rational animals. Some brand new cars must be expensive. All brand new cars must be expensive. A brand new car must be expensive. A brand new Toyota must be expensive.

16

In the second set of the examples given above, you can notice that there is a change of the quantity of the subject term from particular to universal quantity. With the use of the verb listed above, we can infer that these propositions still belong to the necessary mode regardless of the quantity of the subject terms. 2. S8. impossible mode: The impossible mode states that the predicate cannot and does not belong to the subject. In other words, there is no way for the predicate to be included or part of the extension of the subject terms. Thus, the impossible mode is expressed in the verbs cannot, can never, is impossible, etc. For instance, It is impossible for square to be round. Squares cannot be triangles. Round can never be circular. You cannot pass my course without studying. 3. S9. possible mode: The possible proposition enunciates that the predicate is not actually found in the subject but, it might be such as It is possible for brand new cars to be expensive Freshmen students can be accelerated to higher levels. Women can be presidents. 4. S10. contingent mode: The contingent proposition states that the predicate belongs to the subject, but it need not be. It is expressed in the verb is not necessary, need not, etc. For instance, It is not necessary for Filipinos to render military service to the state. Students need not pay their tuition fees before taking the final exams. It is contingent for politicians to be lawyers. Politicians need not be lawyers. However, it is very important for us to note that modal propositions presuppose a former judgment; thus, the statement It is impossible for God to be unjust presuppose a former judgment that God is just. S11. With reference to the classification of propositions according to quantity and quality, the necessary mode is classified as A proposition; impossible mode, E; possible mode, I, and finally, contingent mode, O. Necessary Mode (A) 1. An absolute being must exist. 2. It is necessary for cats to pur. Impossible Mode (E) 1. Angels cannot be mortals. 17

2. It is impossible for squares to be circulars. Possible Mode (I) 1. This car can run 200 miles per hour. 2. It is possible for believer to become saints. Contingent Mode (O) 1. It is not necessary for God to be a creator just to become a God. 2. It is contingent for tables to have four legs.

Again, it has to be emphasized that only the verb determines the classification of the modal propositions into their respective classes. Hence, regardless the number or quantity of the subject term, the type of the verb used overrule the quantity of the subject term Follow Up Q11. Define necessary mode and give at least two (2) examples of modal categorical propositions. Definition:___________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ Examples: 1:____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ 2:____________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ Q12. What is an impossible mode and what does it imply? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Q13. Give at least two (2) propositions belonging to the impossible mode. 1:___________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2:___________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Q14. What is an possible mode and what does it imply? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Q15. Give at least two (2) propositions belonging to the possible mode. 18

1:___________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2:___________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

Q16. What is a contingent mode and what does it imply? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Q17. Give at least two (2) propositions belonging to the contingent mode. 1:___________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2:___________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Q18. True or False. The quantity of the subject term is the sole determinant on the classification of the modal propositions. Answer: ____________________________

19

Name:_____________________________________________________ Course/Year/ Section:__________ Class Schedule:_________________________________ Date:___________ Score:______________ Activity 4. Classify the propositions below into their proper class. Write A, E, I, O on the space provided 1. Some saints are martyrs. 2. All patriots welcome martyrdom. 3. Few good men oppose tyranny. 4. No skeptics believe that truth exists. 5. Some men are not morally sensitive. 6. Books are good sources of information. 7. All computers are educational tools. 8. This nation is bereft of moral integrity. 9. No politicians are lawyers. 10. Some lawyers are not politicians. 11. Some politicians are lawyers. 12. All trees are fruit-bearing plants. 13. Some trees are not fruit-bearing plants. 14. Some animals are vertebrate. 15. No animals are vertebrate. 16. Negative propositions are either E or O propositions. 17. All buildings are skyscrapers. 18. Some tables are not four-legged.. 19. No web pages are educational sites. 20. Some web pages are artistically created. 21. Some technologies are Filipino inventions. 22. Some technologies are not Filipino inventions. 23. No Filipina women are domestic helpers abroad. 24. Some OFWs are Filipinos. 25. All OFWs are the new heroes of the country. ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________

20

Lesson 3: THE RULES OF IMMEDIATE INFERENCE Learning Outcome After this lesson, the learners are expected to: answer the activities in this lesson apply the rules of logical inference The lessons we have learned from the previous lesson (Lesson 2) have shown the types of propositions, e.g. A, E, I, and O. if we are going to compare each one of them retaining their subject and predicate terms differing only on the quality of the copula -- either affirmative or negative -- a relation can be deduced and an inference can be derived from such relation. For instance, if we assume the proposition All athletes are players to be true, what can we say about the following proposition. Let your answers be either True or False. a. Some athletes are players. b. No athletes are players. c. Some athletes are not players. ________ ________ ________

If you have answered False for item letters B and C and T for item letter A, then you got it right. Thus, if we assume to be true that All athletes are players, then it follows that Some athletes are players. This method of inference accepts that the truth of the universal In other words, whatever is held

proposition is also the truth of the particular proposition.

universally is also held particularly. In illustrating this concept, if all my students are present, then I can say that Juan, being my student, is also present. In order to know the truth value of propositions, it is imperative for us to study the principles covering the logical oppositional relation. By opposition here, we mean the

difference between the quality and quantity of the propositions although the subject and predicate terms are similar. These principles are: the Principle of Contradiction, the Principle of Contrary, the Principle of Subcontrary, and the Principle of Subalternation. Principle of Contradiction S7. This principle can be simply stated that nothing can be true and at the same time false. In other words, if the first proposition is true, the second proposition is false. On the other hand, if one of the propositions is false, the other proposition is true. In other words, the

contradicting proposition outrightly negates the other proposition for it is impossible for propositions to be both true and false at the same time. S8. In connection with this principle, we have the principle of the Excluded Third. This principle demands that there is no middle ground between the two contradictories. Hence, a

21

proposition cannot be true at the same time false. The relation between A and O, E and I falls under the principle of contradiction Example: All men are mortal beings. (A) Some men are not mortal beings. (O) No men are mortal beings. (E) Some men are mortal beings. (I) All textbooks are classroom materials. (A) Some textbooks are not classroom materials. (O) No birds are two-legged fowl. (E) Some birds are two-legged (I) The Principle of Contrariety S8. This principle states that the relation between two universal propositions wherein the first proposition is assumed to be true, the other universal proposition is assumed to be false. For instance, the proposition All animals are mammals is assumed to be true, then the value of the proposition No animals are mammals necessarily is false. On the other hand, the relation between the two universal propositions wherein the value of the first proposition is assumed to be false, the value of the second universal proposition becomes indeterminate. Just for the sake of illustration, let us examine the statement Alice is older than Betty. If the statement Alice is older than Betty is true, the statement Betty is older than Alice is false. On the other hand, if the statement Alice is older than Betty is false, does it necessarily follow that Betty is older than Alice? Good judgment requires that it is not so. The statement Betty is older than Alice becomes false if both Alice and Betty are of the same age. Example: All idolaters are sinful people .(A) -- T No idolaters are sinful people. (E) -- F If A is true, then E becomes false. All metals melt under high pressure (A). -- F No metals melt under high pressure (E) -- Doubtful If proposition A is assumed to be false, the proposition E becomes doubtful.

22

Lets Practice Instruction: By using the principles of logical opposition (Principle of Contradiction and Principle of Contrariety), state the truth-falsity of value of the remaining proposition? 1. All stars are heavenly bodies a. Some stars are not heavenly bodies. b. No stars are heavenly bodies. 2. No plants are perennial trees. -a. All plants are perennial trees. b. Some plants are perennial trees. 3. Some imported cars are luxury cars. a. No imported cars are luxury cars. 4. Some dogs are not imported animals. a. All dogs are imported animals. T ___________ ___________ T ___________ ___________ T ___________ T ___________

The Principle of Subcontrariety S9. The principle of subcontrariety involves the relation between the two particular propositions e.g. I and O proposition. The principles states that if one of the particular

proposition is false, necessarily the remaining proposition become false. Hence, if I is false, then O becomes true. Thus, if we argue that Some dogs are imported animals is false, then the proposition Some dogs are not imported animals is true. propositions is true? What if one of the particular

If one of the particular propositions, e. g., I is true, the O proposition

becomes doubtful or indeterminate. For instance Some Filipinos are overseas workers. (I) Some Filipinos are not overseas workers. (O) If we assume I to be true, then O becomes indeterminate or doubtful. We have to noted, however, that the validity of the subcontraries cannot be claimed if the propositions in question materially contain necessary truths. The truth of this principle can be applied validly to propositions containing only contingent truths. Thus, the propositions, Some squares are circles. -- I Some squares are not circles -- (O) is not tenable for the propositions to be compared contain necessary truths. This is the violation of the existential import for the propositions contain contradictions in themselves. Thus if we deny the I proposition, then we have to admit the O proposition.

23

The Principle the Subalternation S10. The principle of Subalternation states the truth of the universal propositions is also the truth of their subsequent particular propositions for the whole cannot be considered as such unless their whole possible extension would be part of the whole. I cannot infer that all of my

students are present in the class if one of them is absent. By simple enumeration, everybody during my roll call, everybody is present thus I concluded that all my students are present. This is called inference by simple enumeration. S11. The other application of this principle is inference by class. The inference by class does not involve enumeration rather taking the possible extension as a class or category of being. For instance, the proposition All men are rational animals indicates that the class of men is a class of rational animals. I do not have to go through individual investigation or enumeration just to know whether all men are rational animals. The fact that I am a man, therefore I am a rational animal. Example: All carabaos are black (A) -- T. Some carabaos are black (I) -- T. From the example, it is clearly evident that the truth of the universal proposition is also the truth of the particular propositions. Thus, if A is true, then I is also true; if E is true, then O is also true. However, it has to be noted that the truth of the particular proposition cannot be the truth of the universal propositions. For instance, Some carabaos are black (I) -- T. All carabaos are black (A) -- ? Analyzing the example above, if the proposition Some carabaos are black is true, to infer that All carabaos are black does not necessarily follow. S12. The other side of the principle of Subalternation concerns the falsity values. The principle states that the falsity of the universal proposition does not constitute the falsity of the particular proposition rather the falsity of the particular proposition makes the universal proposition false.

Some students are diligent -- (I) - F All students are diligent -- (A) - F Follow Up Q19. Define the Principle of Contradiction. _____________________________________________________________________________________ 24

Q20. What are propositions whose relation fell under the principle of contradiction? _____________________________________________________________________________________ Q21. Restate in your terms the principle of the Excluded Third. _____________________________________________________________________________________

Q22. State in your own words, the principle of Contrariety. ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Q23. In your own words, simplify the principle of subcontrariety. a. ___________________________________________________________________________________ b. ___________________________________________________________________________________ Q24. Enumerate the propositions covered by the principle of Subalternation. a. ___________________________________________________________________________________ b. ___________________________________________________________________________________ Q25. State in your own words, the principle of Subalternation. a. ___________________________________________________________________________________ b. ___________________________________________________________________________________ Q26. Enumerate the propositions covered by the principle of subcontrariety. a. ___________________________________________________________________________________ b. ___________________________________________________________________________________ Q27. Evaluate whether the inference is Valid or Invalid. Put your answer in the space provided and explain very briefly. a. If Pedro is absent from the class is true, then to conclude that all students are present becomes false. Answer: _____________________________________________________________________________ Reason: _____________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ b. All Filipino presidents must be natural born citizens. Therefore, Gloria MacapagalArroyo is a natural born citizen. Answer: _____________________________________________________________________________ Reason: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ c. I am certain that all soldiers are trained warriors. Hence it will false to argue that some soldiers are not trained warriors. Answer: _____________________________________________________________________________ Reason: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ 25

d. All judges are liars therefore, some judges are not liars. Answer: _____________________________________________________________________________ Reason: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Q28. Complete the diagram below and give the truth-falsity value of each proposition if we assume to the first to be true.

E-T

26

Name: _____________________________________________________ Course/Year/ Section:__________ Class Schedule:________________________________________ Date:___________ Activity 5. Change the given propositions into their opposites and identify the truth value of their corresponding relation. 1. No terrorists are patriots. (True) 1.1. Contradiction:________________________________________ 1.2. Contrary:___________________________________________ 1.3. Subalternation.:______________________________________ 2. All mayoralty candidates are professionals. (False) 2.1. Contradiction:________________________________________ 2.2. Contrary:___________________________________________ 2.3. Subalternation.:______________________________________ 3. Some quotations are words of wisdom. (False) 3.1. Contradiction:________________________________________ 3.2. Subcontrary:________________________________________ 3.3. Superalternation.:____________________________________ 4. No Christians are Muslims. (True) 4.1. Contradiction:________________________________________ 4.2. Contrary:___________________________________________ 4.3. Subalternation.:______________________________________ 5. Some cabinet members are career professionals. (True) 5.1. Contradiction:_______________________________________ 5.2. Subcontrary:________________________________________ 5.3. Superalternation.:____________________________________ 6. Some families are convention delegates. (False) 6.1. Contradiction:________________________________________ 6.2. Subcontrary:________________________________________ 6.3. Superalternation.:____________________________________ 7. No animal rights are human rights. (True) 7.1. Contradiction:________________________________________ 7.2. Contrary:___________________________________________ 7.3. Subalternation.:______________________________________ 8 .Some professionals cannot be illiterates (False) 8.1. Contradiction:________________________________________ 8.2. Subcontrary:________________________________________ 8.3. Superalternation.:____________________________________ 9. All hospitals must be medical institutions. (True) 9.1. Contradiction:________________________________________ 9.2. Contrary:___________________________________________ 9.3. Subalternation.:_______________________________________ T/F _____ _____ _____

_____ _____ _____

_____ _____ _____

_____ _____ _____

_____ _____ _____

_____ _____ _____

_____ _____ _____

_____ _____ _____

_____ _____ _____

27

10. Some candidates need not be professionals. (False) 10.1. Contradiction:________________________________________ 10.2. Subcontrary:_________________________________________ 10.3. Superalternation:_____________________________________

_____ _____ _____

B. Evaluate whether the inference is valid or invalid. Put your answer in the space provided. 1. It is certain that no text messages are censored communications. Hence, if we conclude that there are some text messages being censored is doubtful. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________

2. It is true that some voters are poll watchers. But to say that all voters must be poll watchers is false. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________ 3. It is certain that oil producing countries are rich countries. Therefore, Kuwait is rich. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________ 4. If all medicines are therapeutic preparation is true, then BIOGESIC is a medicine. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________ 5. It is certain that some tourist sites are historical sites. But to say that no tourist sites are historical sites is false. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________ 6. That all saints must be virtuous is true. Whether some saints need not be virtuous is doubtful. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________ 7. It is true that some philanthropists are generous. Whether all philanthropists must be generous is doubtful. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________

8. It is true that all brand new cars are expensive. Whether brand new cars must be expensive is doubtful. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________ 9. It is certain that some politicians are lawyers. Therefore, all politicians are lawyers. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________ 10. It is certain that all presidents are citizens. Hence it is false to conclude that some presidents need not be citizens. Answer: __________________________________________________________________________________ 28

LESSON 4: THE EDUCTIVE REASONING Learning Outcome: After this lesson, the learners are expected to learn: a. define the different types of eductive arguments b. form the eductive equivalent of the simple categorical propositions

The four types of simple categorical propositions (A, E, I, O) that we study also implied an equivalent relation or an immediate inference. Immediate inference is a process of deriving a conclusion or assumption from an original argument whereby retaining the truth value of the original proposition. What is implied by the statement: All men are bipeds? This proposition All men are bipeds implies that those who do not belong to the class of bipeds are not men. Thus we can deduce that No men are no-bipedss. If we assume as true that All men are bipeds, then it follows to assume that No men are non-bipeds. S1. This type of argument or propositional derivation is called eduction. By definition, eduction is a process of immediate inference, whereby, from any proposition taken as true, we derive others implied in it, though differing from the first in subject or predicate or both (Bittle, 1950:155). There are three main forms of eduction: obversion, conversion, and contraposition.

OBVERSION Obversion (L., Ob, before, towards, and vertere, tu turn) is a process of immediate inference in which the inferred judgment, while retaining the original subject, has far its predicate the complementary class of the original predicate. By complementary class, we mean the excluded members or assertions of the predicate class. For the sake of illustration, in the proposition, All men are mortal beings, the predicate term mortal beings has a complementary class of non-mortal beings. In the same way, the proposition, Some scholars are genius, has a complementary class of non-genius. To simplify the procedure, the

complementary class of any term is the affixing of the term non to any term in question. IN Obversion, the process of eduction involves two changes. These changes occur in the (1) quality of the proposition (but not in its quantity) and the (2) status of the predicate term (Barker, 1989, as cited by Hinacay and Hinacay, 2004:99). In obversion, the original proposition is called obvertend while the derived proposition is the obverse (Bittle, 1950:156). Following the procedures outline above, we can now form the obverse of the following proposition:

1. If the obvertend is an A proposition, its obverse will be the E proposition with the predicate of the obvertend substituted with the complementary class of its predicate. 29

2. If the obvertend is an E proposition, its obverse will be the A proposition with the predicate of the obvertend substituted with the complementary class of its predicate. 3. If the obvertend is an I proposition, its obverse will be the O proposition with the predicate of the obvertend substituted with the complementary class of its predicate. 4. If the obvertend is an O proposition, its obverse will be the I proposition with the predicate of the obvertend substituted with the complementary class of its predicate.

OBVERTEND

OBVERSE OBVERTEND

Example OBVERSE No angels are non spiritual beings. All angels are non carnal beings. Some students are not non scholars. Some plants are non vines.

All S is P

No S is non P.

All angels are spiritual beings.

No S is P.

All S is non P.

No angels are carnal beings.

Some S is P.

Some S is not non P.

Some students are scholars.

Some S is not P.

Some S is non P.

Some plants are not vines.

Further Examples:

Obvertend: Obverse: Obvertend: Obverse: Obvertend: Obverse: Obvertend: Obverse:

No men are non-bipeds. All men are bipeds. All angels are non-mortal beings. No angels are mortal beings. Some brand new cars are non-expensive. Some brand new cars are not expensive Some homicides are not non-murders. Some homicides are murders.

Lets Practice: Instruction: Form the obverse of the propositions below. provided. 1. All men are rational animals. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 2. No umpires are prejudiced. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 30 Write your answers on the space

3. Some saints are martyrs. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 4. No fish is a mammal. ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 5. Some professors are not scholars. ____________________________________________________________________________________________

CONVERSION Conversion (L., convertere, to turn) is a process of immediate inference, in which the inferred judgment takes the subject of the original proposition (convertend) for its predicate and the predicate of the convertend as its subject (Bittle, 1950:158). The derived proposition is called converse. In simple terms, conversion is a simple switching of the subject and predicate terms. Thus, the proposition Some new graduates are employed professionals becomes Some new employed professionals are new graduates. There are three rules to observe in making the conversion. 1. Interchange the subject and predicate terms. This rule implies that the quality of the

proposition and the quantity of the terms should be left unchanged. Example: Convertend: Converse: No carabaos are pigs. No pigs are carabaos.

2. Retain the quality of the proposition. If the convertend is affirmative, then the converse must also be affirmative. If the convertend is negative, then the converse must also be negative. Example: Convertend: Converse: Some students are athletes. Some athletes are students.

3. Do not extend any term. The quantity of the term must not be affected in the process of conversion. If a term, either subject term or predicate term, is particular, then in conversion, it must retain its quantity. Concerning the quantity of the terms, as a general rule, the predicate term of all affirmative propositions is always particular while the predicate term of all negative proposition is always universal.

Example: Convertend: No rubies are diamonds (In this case, the predicate is universal). Converse: No diamonds are rubies. 31

Convertend: Converse:

Some Filipinos are millionaires. (In this case, the predicate is particular). Some millionaires are Filipinos.

Convertend: Converse:

All plants are living beings. Some living beings are plants. (Conversion by limitation)

Convertend: Converse:

All men are rational animals. All rational animals are men. (Full conversion).

Convertend: Converse:

Some plants are not trees. Some trees are not plants.

It is clear that the conversion of O proposition is generally invalid.

Lets Practice

Instruction: Form the converse of the following convertend below. Write your answers on the space provided.

1. All men are rational animals.

2. No judges are partisan.

3. Some saints are martyrs.

4. No fish are mammals.

5. Some students are not athletes.

32

CONTRAPOSITION

Contraposition is the process of eduction which combines conversion and obversion. It is formed by two steps:

1. Application of the conversion process. 2. Substitution of the subject and complementary class. predicate terms of the converse with their

The original proposition is referred to as contraponend while the equivalent proposition is called the contrapositive.

Example: Contraponend: Contrapositive: All men are mortal beings. All non-mortal beings are non-men. Or All immortal beings are non-men. Thus, if the proposition, All men are mortal beings is true, then its contrapositive All immortal beings are non-men is true.

Example: Contraponend: Contrapositive: Some prisoners are not innocent individuals. Some non-innocent individuals are not non-prisoners.

Concerning the I propositions, the contrapositive is generally invalid. For the E proposition, its contrapositive is an O proposition. This procedure is called as partial contraposition. Hence, if we argue No spiritual beings are moral being

Its contraposition will be: Some non-mortal beings are not non-spiritual beings.

If we want to check our contrapositive propositions for its validity, the following procedure can be adopted:

33

Original Proposition Step 1. Form the obverse Step 2. Form the converse of Step 1. Step 3. Form the obverse of Step 2. This is the contrapositive.

For example: Original Proposition: All men are mortal beings. Step 1. Obverse: No men are n on-mortal beings. Step 2. Converse: No non-mortal beings are men. Step 3. Obverse: All non-mortal beings are non-men. (This is the contrapositive of the original proposition All men are mortal beings).

Lets Practice: Instruction: Form the contrapositive of the proposition below. Write your answers on the space provided.

1. All men are rational animals. _________________________________________________________________________________ 2. Some saints are martyrs. _________________________________________________________________________________ 3. No umpires are partisans. _________________________________________________________________________________ 4. Some books are not educational materials. _________________________________________________________________________________ 5. No fish is a mammal. _________________________________________________________________________________ 6. No elements are living. _________________________________________________________________________________ 7. Every plant is an organism. _________________________________________________________________________________ 8. Some professors are scholars. _________________________________________________________________________________ 9. Some athletes are drug-dependent individuals. _________________________________________________________________________________ 10. Every professor must be a scholar. _________________________________________________________________________________ 34

Name: _____________________________________________________ Course/Year/ Section:__________ Class Schedule:________________________________________ Date:___________

Activity 6. By applying the rules of immediate inference, what can be said about the validity of the inferences? All Filipino lawyers are members of the Philippine Bar. Therefore, 1. no Filipino lawyers are non-members of the Philippine Bar. All presidents are natural-born citizens. It follows then that all non 2. natural-born citizens are non-presidents. It is certain that every dog is a member of a canine family. 3. Therefore, Rottweilers are dogs. It is true that some research findings are questionable. Whether 4. there are some research findings that are not questionable. No judges are biased is true. 5. biased. No typewriters are high-end technology is true. Therefore, it is 6. also true to infer that all typewriters are non high-end technology. All Sony VAIO Notebooks are high-end products. Therefore, all 7. high-end products are Sony VAIO Notebooks. It is certain that some mortal beings are men. Whether all men 8. are mortal beings is doubtful. It is acceptable that no carabaos are pigs. It further follows that 9. no pigs are carabaos. It is true that no perishable things are spiritual beings. Therefore, 10. all non spiritual beings are perishable things. Therefore, all judges are non-

35