Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
THE ELEMENTS OF
REASONING
I. Words - The smallest units of meaningful,
natural language are words.
II. SENTENCE/STATEMENT
III. ARGUMENTS
A group of statements some of which, called the
premises, purport to provide support for the truth
of a controversial statement called the conclusion.
IV. JUDGMENT/REASONING
Act of making statement: in logic, the mental act
of making or understanding a positive or negative
proposition about something
It is generally expressed in declarative statement
ANDsometimes in exclamatory sentence.
WORD
Words vs. Term
Word has a general meaning than term. The
later is used to mean special words in
particular fields or subjects.
The Reference of word ( what the word
refers to) - is the range of application of
the word or the class of all things that the
word applies to.
The Meaning of a word is the cognitive
significance conveyed by word. It is
captured by conveying the class of all the
characteristics that are shared by the things
that are in the extension of word.
SENTENCE, LANGUAGE
USES
NECESSARY vs.
CONTINGENT
NECESSARY
STATEMENT
CONTINGENT
STATEMENT
It is informative
NORMATIVE vs.
DESCRIPTIVE
NORMATIVE
STATEMENT
It does not convey any
information about how
things are but rather
prescribes how things
ought to be.
Ex. People ought to
obey the laws.
DESCRIPTIVE
STATEMENT
It describes or tells us
truly or falsely about
something or the world.
SINGULAR vs.
CATEGORICAL
SINGULAR
CATEGORICAL
STATEMENT
STATEMENT
COMPOUND
STATEMENT
It contains at least one
simple statement as a
component.
TRUTH-FUNCTIONAL COMPOUNDS
KINDS OF COMPOUNDS
I. CONJUNCTIONS
These are formed with the word and 0r one of its
cognates (but, although, also, yet, however etc).
RULE:
For any 2 statements A and B, the conjunction A
and B is true when and only when both component
statement A, B are true. Otherwise it is false.
A and B are placeholders which represent any
statement.
Ex. Pedro was found guilty in the criminal trial of physical
injuries and he was held liable in the civil trial to pay the
damages resulted therein.
TRUTH-FUNCTIONAL
COMPOUNDS
II. DISJUNCTION
These are formed with the word or and one of its
cognates (either, unless).
RULE:
For any 2 statements A and B, the disjunction A or
B, is false when and only when both component
statements A,B are false. Otherwise it is true.
Inclusive Disjunction this or that and perhaps
both
Exclusive Disjunction this or that but not both
TRUTH-FUNCTIONAL
COMPOUND
III. CONDITIONALS
These are formed with the form If _____, then
_______. where the blanks are filled by simple
statements.
The 1st blank is called the antecedent and the 2nd
blank is called the consequent of a conditional.
RULE:
For any 2 statements A and B, the conditional If
A then B is false when and only when the
antecedent is true and the consequent is false.
Otherwise it is true.
Ex. If Pedro marries again, then he will have a
spouse.
TRUTH-FUNCTIONAL
COMPOUND
IV. BICONDITIONALS
These are also called equivalence, and
they are formed with the expression if and
only if.
RULE:
For any 2 statements A and B, the
biconditional A if and only if B is true when
both A and B have the same truth value.
Ex. Pedro is a criminal if and only if he
committed a crime.
TRUTH-FUNCTIONAL
COMPOUND
V. NEGATION
The truth value of a negative statement depends
on the truth value of the affirmative statement.
It is formed with the word not, it is not the
case that, or it is false that.
It is also formed with the expression
neither.nor. (negation of a disjunction)
RULE:
If the statement A is true, then not A is false,
and if A is false then its negation not A is true.
Ex. Neither X will be arrested nor Y will be
arrested.
A
B
T
SUMMARY OF TRUTH
CONDITIONS FOR
COMPOUNDS
A and
B
(Conjunctio
n)
A or
B
(Disjunctio
n)
If A
A if and
then B only if B
(Conditional
s)
(Biconditionals)
A/B
then
not A/B
(Negation)
T
F
T
T
F
F
F
RELATIONS OF
STATEMENTS
A. EQUIVALENCES
RULE: Two statements are equivalent if
they have exactly the same truth value.
PATTERNS:
1. If A then B is EQ to If not A then
not B
2. If A then B is EQ to Not B unless A
3. If A then B is EQ to It is not the
case that
A and not B
Ex. If Pedro committed the crime then he will
go to prison.
RELATIONS OF
STATEMENTS
B. CONTRADICTIONS
RULE: Two statements are contradictory
if they have exactly opposite truth
values.
PATTERNS:
1. Any statement A and its negation not A.
2. All S are P and Some S are not P.
3. No S are P and Some S are P.
RELATIONS OF
STATEMENTS
C. CONTRARIES
RULE: Two statements are contraries if
they cannot be true, yet they may
both be false.
Example:
1. JR is the single murderer of Juan.
RJ is the single murderer of Juan.
2. A is a better lawyer than B.
B is a better lawyer than A.
3. All murderers get the death sentence.
No murderer gets the death sentence.
III. ARGUMENTS
A group of statements some of which, called
the premises, purport to provide support for
the truth of a controversial statement called
the conclusion.
ARGUMENTS IN LOGIC
Not every group of statements is an
argument.
Requirements:
1. Premise/s a claim that is uncontroversial,
and which is offered as a supporting reason
for the truth of the conclusion.
2. conclusion a claim that is controversial
enough to need justification.
Pattern:
A. Epichreme a complete argument
All men are mortal. - premise 1 (major
premise)
Socrates is a man. premise 2 (minor
premise)
Thus, Socrates is mortal. - conclusion
B. ENTHYMEMES
Also called as incomplete arguments because
some premise/s or even the conclusion is missing.
The order of statements is not always that the
premises appear first and the conclusion last.
Ex. Juan should be in prison, since he murdered
Maria.
The missing premise is Murderers should be in
prison.
Arguments are sometimes expressed in this way
because the speaker believes that the missing
part is so obvious that the audience will readily
supply it on their own.
Kinds of
Arguments/Reasoning
First, all prospective lawyers should
make themselves intimately familiar
with the fundamentals of deductive
reasoning. - is based on the act of
proving a conclusion by means of
two other propositions.
Kinds of Arguments
BASIS OF
DISTINCTIO
N
DEDUCTIVE
INDUCTIVE
Necessity
vs.
probabilit
y
In a good deductive
argument, the truth of
the premises
necessitates the truth
of the conclusion.
In a good inductive
argument, by contrast,
the truth of the
premises merely makes
the conclusion
probable.
Ex. The sun has risen
every morning to this
day. Thus, probably, the
sun will rise tomorrow.
Criteria
of
Appraisa
l
Appraising Validity
Valid is one that, on the
assumption that the
premises are true, has a
true conclusion that follows
with necessity from the
premises
Appraising
Strength
Test/scale of strength
that has very weak
arguments at the low
end and extremely
strong argument at the
BASIS OF
DISTINCTIO
N
Methods
of
Appraisal
DEDUCTIVE
(Validity)
I. Practical test of
validity.
II. Validity as a matter
of
form/pattern.
III. Showing invalidity
by
analogical
counterexample
IV. Equivocation and
circular
arguments
INDUCTIVE
(Strength)
I. Reasoning
from
authority
II. Causal
Reasoning
III. Analogical
Reasoning