Syllogisms*

A syllogism is an argument with exactly two

premises.
A standard form categorical syllogism is a syllogism
entirely of standard-form categorical propositions,
presented as follows: major premise first, minor
premise second, conclusion last.
Example:

Some politicians are women.

No wealthy men are women.
So, some wealthy men are not politicians.

Valid ?

Some politicians are women.

No wealthy men are women.
So, some wealthy men are not
politicians.

Standard Form Categorical Syllogism

Middle Term
(in both premises)

Some politicians are women.

Major Premise

No wealthy men are women.

Minor Premise

Some wealthy men are not politicians.

Minor Term
(subject of conclusion)

P
Major Term
(predicate of conclusion)

Forms of the Syllogism

The form of a standard form categorical
syllogism is completely specified by its
mood and figure.
Examples:
AAA-1
EIO - 4
mood

figure

Mood of Syllogism
The mood of a syllogism is specified by
listing the form of each proposition as it
appears in that syllogism.
Example:

Some politicians are women.

No wealthy men are women.
So, some men are not politicians.

Mood: I E O -

I
E

Figure of the Syllogism

The figure of a syllogism is determined by the
relative placement of the middle term in the
premises, as shown below:

M P
S M

P M
S M

M P
M S
3

P M
M S
4

Go Figure !

The Form of Our Syllogism

Some politicians are women.

M
No wealthy men are women.
So, some men are not politicians.

IEO-2

Forms of the Syllogism

256 Possible Forms
Fifteen Valid from Hypothetical Viewpoint
Nine more are valid, provided existential
assumptions are made.
See page 51 Barker, for a list.

Test for Validity by Form

Some politicians are women.
No wealthy men are women.
So, some wealthy men are not
politicians.

IEO-2

Not listed.

Invalid.

A Second Test of Validity by Form

M

No working poor are wealthy bankers.

Some wealthy bankers
M are Republicans.
Some Republicans are not working poor.

Valid ?

EIO- 4

Valid

E
I
O

A Third Test of Validity by Form

M

All Republicans are wealthy women.

M
No working poor are wealthy women.
No working poor are Republicans.

Valid ?

AOO- 2

Listed

Valid

A
O
O

Why Are Some Forms Valid, Others Invalid ?

Valid forms have no counterexamples

Invalid forms admit counterexamples.

A Counterexample to Our First Argument:

First Argument:

Counterexample:

Some politicians are

women.
No men are women.
So, some men are not
politicians.

Some mammals are

women.
No baby humans are
women.
So, some baby humans
are not mammals.

Can you create a plausible* counterexample

to this invalid argument ?
First Argument:
Some women are
politicians.
No men are women.
So, some men are not
politicians.

Counterexample:

*One which would convince an intelligent person with no training

in logic.

A Counterexample to Our Second Argument ?

Second Argument:

Counterexample:

No working poor are

wealthy bankers.
Some wealthy bankers
are Republicans.
Some Republicans are
not working poor.

?
No counterexample
possible.

A Counterexample to Our Third Argument ?

Second Argument:

Counterexample:

All Republicans are

wealthy women.
No working poor are
wealthy women.
So, no working poor
are Republicans..

?
No counterexample
possible.

Venn Diagrams for Testing Syllogisms

M
1
2

S
5

3
6

P
7

Map Of Our Universe

M
SMP
1

SMP
2

SMP
5

SMP
SMP
6

SMP
4

P
SMP

SMP
7

Venn Diagram Validity Test for Syllogisms

Diagram both premises (not the conclusion).
Conclusion appears in diagram
of the combined premises?

Yes
Argument Valid

No
Argument Invalid

Venn Diagram Testing IEO-2 Syllogism

P are women.
M
Some politicians
No wealthySmen are women.
M
So, some wealthy men are not politicians.
S

IEO-2

S
5

*4

3
6

P
7

Invalid
8