NATIONAL UNIVERSITY // DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES // AY 2020-2021

LOGIC COURSE MATERIAL

Logic is a useful tool to clarify and evaluate reasoning, whether

on deeper questions or on everyday topics. Logic teaches and
improves the kinds of knowledge and basic skills that are
relevant to almost everything a person do or want to study.

MONDIGO  LARDIZABAL
 NATIONAL UNIVERSITY/ DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

LOGIC
II

Introduction
TABLE OF CONTENTS COURSE DESCRIPTION
I. Cover Page This course is an introduction to the meaning and
II-III. Introduction formation of terms, propositions and logical
IV. Key Concepts in Philosophy reasoning. It will acquaint the student with the
and Logic fundamental principles and methods of valid
V. Relevance of Logic reasoning so as to equip him/her with the logical
VI. Brief History of Logic tools necessary for his/her constant battles against
VII. Soundness and Validity fallacies and inconsistencies.  This course is also an
VIII. Definitions introduction to other forms of logical reasoning.
IX. Simple Apprehension
X. Classification of Terms
XI. Judgment and Proposition
XII. Categorical Proposition This module is designed to help you:
XIII. Logical Fallacies
Develop a logical approach on analyzing, critical
References/Sources:
thinking, argumentation and reasoning
Copi, Irving, Cohen, Carl and McMahon, Kenneth, Introduction to Logic,
Harlow, U.K., Pearson, 2014Gensler, Harry J., Introduction to Logic, New
York and London, Routledge, 2017 Apply logical exercises, habits and practices into a
Hausman, Alan, Kahane, Howard and Tidman, Paul, Logic and
Philosophy, Boston, USA, Wadsworth, 2010 course or way of study and into day to day
Hurley,Patrick, A Concise Introduction To Logic (Belmont, California: experiences.
Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1985)
Kelly, David, The Art of Reasoning, New York, USA, W.W. Norton &
Company, 2014
Contribute to the society, create and uphold logical
Tennant, Neil, Introducing Philosophy, New York, Routledge, 2015
reasoning in the light of truth and goodness
Notes and Websites:
Calano, Mark Joseph, Logic, Unpublished Note
https://ourhappyschool.com/philosophy/term-logic
https://philonotes.com/index.php/2018/11/24/terms-and-propositions/
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~fp/courses/15816-s10/lectures/01-judgments.pdf
https://philonotes.com/index.php/2018/11/24/terms-and-propositions/
 NATIONAL UNIVERSITY/ DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

LOGIC
III

Introduction
TABLE OF CONTENTS COURSE LEARNING OUTCOME
I. Cover Page At the end of the course, the student must be able to (CLO): 
II-III. Introduction
IV. Key Concepts in Philosophy Identify and assess different claims and arguments
Independently construct sound and cogent arguments
and Logic
Evaluate and analyze the structure of arguments
V. Relevance of Logic
Recognize erroneous reasoning and fallacies 
VI. Brief History of Logic
Apply critical thinking skills in everyday life and in other disciplines
VII. Soundness and Validity Analyze and evaluate moral, legal, and philosophical arguments
VIII. Definitions Demonstrate critical thinking skills by producing a well-argued paper
IX. Simple Apprehension regarding a moral, legal, or philosophical issue.
X. Classification of Terms
XI. Judgment and Proposition
XII. Categorical Proposition COURSE REQUIREMENTS
XIII. Logical Fallacies
Read assigned text and other learning materials, including
modules
References/Sources:
Smartphone, Laptop and other Computer Devices/
Copi, Irving, Cohen, Carl and McMahon, Kenneth, Introduction
Internet Connection
to Logic, Harlow, U.K., Pearson, 2014Gensler, Harry J.,
Introduction to Logic, New York and London, Routledge, 2017 Regular and punctual attendance in submission of
Hausman, Alan, Kahane, Howard and Tidman, Paul, Logic and
Philosophy, Boston, USA, Wadsworth, 2010
requirements
Hurley,Patrick, A Concise Introduction To Logic (Belmont, Access to Online Class Platform such as; Office 365,
California: Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1985)
Kelly, David, The Art of Reasoning, New York, USA, W.W. Norton Outlook, Microsoft Teams, OneNote and Class Notebook
& Company, 2014 Active Participation in every FLEX approach
Tennant, Neil, Introducing Philosophy, New York, Routledge,
2015 Complete all the minor and major Performance Tasks such
as Critique Paper, Logical Analysis, Reflection Paper etc.
Notes and Websites:
Calano, Mark Joseph, Logic, Unpublished Note
https://ourhappyschool.com/philosophy/term-logic
https://philonotes.com/index.php/2018/11/24/terms-and-
propositions/
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~fp/courses/15816-s10/lectures/01-
judgments.pdf
https://philonotes.com/index.php/2018/11/24/terms-and-
propositions/
 IV Department of Humanities

National University

Logic
Introduction: Key Concepts
in Philosophy
Philosophy
- Etymologically means love of wisdom.
(PHLEIN - to love /PHILOS - love
SOPHIA - wisdom)
Philosophy
- technically means science/discipline
which uses human reason to investigate the
ultimate causes, reasons and principles which
govern all things.

5 Branches of
Philosophy What is Logic?
( Main Areas)
Logic is the study of the methods and principles used to
Metaphysics -is a branch of philosophy that deals with the nature
distinguish correct from incorrect reasoning. When we reason
of beings, the nature of reality and the origin of things. (Greek
word "Meta" means "After" which literally means "After Physics"). about any matter, we produce arguments to support our
Metaphysics is concerned with the necessities and possibilities
conclusions. Our arguments include reasons that we think
governing existence Metaphysical questions typically arise ‘at the
edge’ or ‘at the limits’ of scientific or mathematical inquiry. justify our beliefs. However, not all reasons are good reasons.
Epistemolgy -is a branch of philosophy that deals with the Therefore we may always ask, when we confront an argument:
questions about different kinds of knowledge, its scope and
limits, its proper objects, its sources and its justification. Does the conclusion reached follow from the premises

Ethics - or Moral Philosophy, is the philosophical study of

assumed? To answer this question there are objective criteria;
morality. Morality refers to beliefs concerning right and wrong, in the study of logic we seek to discover and apply those
good and bad—beliefs that can include judgments, values, rules,
principles, and theories. They help guide our actions, define our
criteria.
values, and give us reasons for being the persons we are.

Aesthetic - is a philosophical study of artistic beauty and our Method and Goal of Philosophy
judgements about it. It deals with the questions about the
meaning of art/beauty and tries to determine whether art/beauty Students will develop a crucial understanding of philosophical
is in the subject or in the object. theories and ideas especially in the are of Logic.
Students will learn to understand and apply concepts and

Logic - ?
theories.
Students will acquire the abilities to read, evaluate and respond
critically to intellectual material from any discipline.

LOGIC
 lOGIC
RELEVANCE OF LOGIC - V

WHY STUDY LOGIC?

Logic can be a challenging subject for beginners. Much like learning a new language, it takes
patience and hard work to master the skills necessary to truly excel at logic. Given that
challenging work can sometimes prove frustrating, students often wonder why logic is a
required course for their major, or what the real value of learning logic truly is. This latter
concern is often expressed as: How does logic help me in the “real” world? Given that
students raise this question over and over, it’s worthwhile to provide an answer.

Logic deepens our understanding of

Logic builds our minds. Logic
philosophy – which can be defined as
develops analytical skills essential
reasoning about the ultimate questions of
in law, politics, journalism,
life. Philosophers ask questions like “Why
education, medicine, business,
accept or reject free will?” or “Can one
science, math, computer science,
prove or disprove God’s existence?” or
and most other areas.
“How can one justify a moral belief?” Logic

gives tools to deal with such questions.

Logic can be fun. Logic will challenge

you thinking in new ways and will likely

fascinate you. Most people find logic

enjoyable.

Whatever your college major or career plans, a strong foundation in making good inferences (doing
logic) will improve your performance. If you are interested in science — designing an experiment,
testing hypotheses, drawing warranted conclusions from the evidence, all of these involve making
basic logical inferences. If you are interested in business, economics, or finance, making sound
financial decisions requires knowing how to make correct inferences. If you are interested in
marketing, you will do well to understand the kinds of tactics that convince people to purchase the
products you are trying to promote. Sometimes this will involve asking them to make good inferences.
 VI  •  DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

LOGIC
BRIEF HISTORY OF LOGIC

PHILOSOPHICAL KINDS OF LOGIC

ERA Formal logic is the study of the processes in a formal way. There are
differences between a ‘formal’ study and an ‘informal’ study. A formal study
involves the precise use of terms and a consistent application of a set of
PRE-SOCRATIC rules. An informal study uses terms in less precise way, and will be less
SOCRATIC/ANCIENT meticulous in the application of rules. The strict definitions of all the terms in
syllogistic logic, as well as the strict observance of the several rules and their
MEDIEVAL forms, indicate that syllogistic logic is a kind of formal logic.
MODERN In general, there are two kinds of logic: inductive and
CONTEMPORARY deductive. Deduction is that method of reasoning which
begins with a general or universal statement, and leads to
a particular conclusion, and the particular conclusion is
The inventor of formal logic was within the scope of the universal statement.
Parmenides. He invented logic by applying Induction is that method of reasoning which begins
with a number of particular cases, and leads to a general
mathematical methods of proof to a or universal conclusion.
philosophical problem he was Reflecting on.
That problem was, “What is the nature of *After Aristotle’s death, another Greek philosopher, Chrysippus (280–206 b.c.e.), one of
‘being’ and ‘not- being”? the founders of the Stoic school, developed a logic in which the fundamental elements
were whole propositions.
*The first major logician of the Middle Ages was Peter Abelard (1079–1142). Abelard
Aristotle is considered the father of logic reconstructed and refined the logic of Aristotle and Chrysippus.
because he was the first, as far as we know, *Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716), a genius in numerous fields, attempted to
develop a symbolic language or “calculus” that could be used to settle all forms of
to grasp the full value and importance of disputes, whether in theology, philosophy, or international relations.
logic. He was also the first to systematize *Toward the end of the nineteenth century, the foundations of modern mathematical
logic were laid by Gottlob Frege (1848–1925)
and generalize the rules of logic. Aristotle
was the first to study and analyze the
methods of logic, and the first to realize
that the rules of logic are independent of syllogism
the subject matter and the content of the All boys are future husbands. Aristotle was able to see that
statements used in logic. Edward is a boy. this kind of reasoning allows us to infer a
conclusion from any two premises which
Therefore,
have a relationship to each other, when the
Edward is a future husband. premises are stated in this form.
 VII | DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

Logic
Soundness and Validity

An argument is valid if it would be contradictory

Valid argument (impossible) to have the premises all true and
conclusion false. “Valid” doesn’t say that the
premises are true, but only that the conclusion
- If you overslept, you’ll follows from them: if the premises were all true,
then the conclusion would have to be true. Here
be late.
we implicitly assume that there’s no shift in the
- You aren’t late. meaning or reference of the terms; hence we
- Therefore, you didn’t must use “overslept,” “late,” and “you” the same
way throughout the argument
oversleep

Logicians distinguish valid arguments

from sound arguments:
An argument is valid if it would be
Logic, while not itself resolving
contradictory to have the premises substantive issues, gives us
all true and conclusion false.
intellectual tools to reason better
An argument is sound if it’s valid
and every premise is true. about such issues. It can help us to
be more aware of reasoning, to
Proposition, Inference
and Argument express reasoning clearly, to
A proposition asserts that something is the determine whether a conclusion
case or it asserts that something is not. We
may affirm a proposition, or deny it—but
follows from the premises, and to
every proposition either asserts what really is focus on key premises to defend or
the case, or it asserts something that is not.
Therefore every proposition is either true or
criticize.
false.  
Inference is a process by which one
Logicians call statements true or
proposition is arrived at and affirmed on the false (not valid or invalid). And they
basis of some other proposition or
propositions.
call arguments valid or invalid (not
true or false). While this is
Argument is any group of propositions of
which one is claimed to follow from the
conventional usage, it pains a
others, which are regarded as providing logician’s ears to hear “invalid
support or grounds for the truth of
that one.
statement” or “false argument.”
VIII DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

LOGIC On Definitions

TYPES OF DEFINITIONS Definitions

Definitions are definitions of symbols (not of objects), because
STIPULATIVE DEFINITION only symbols have the meanings that definitions may explain.
To illustrate, we can define the word “chair” because it has
meaning; but a chair itself we cannot define. We can sit on a
LEXICAL DEFINITION chair, or paint it, or burn it, or describe it—but we cannot
define it because an actual chair is not a symbol that has a
meaning to be explained. Sometimes we say, misleadingly, that
the thing is being defined; in fact, what we define are always
PRECISING DEFINITION symbols.

Two commonly used technical terms are useful in discussing

definitions. The definiendum is the symbol being defined. The
THEORITICAL DEFINITION definiens is the symbol (or group of symbols) used to explain
the meaning of the definiendum. Put otherwise, the definiendum
is the term to be defined and the definiens is the definition of it.
PERSUASIVE DEFINITION However, it would be a mistake to say that the definiens is the
meaning of the definiendum—rather, it is another symbol (or
group of symbols) that has the same meaning as the
definiendum.

A. Stipulative definition – a definition in which a new symbol is introduced to which some meaning is arbitrarily
assigned; as opposed to a lexical definition, a stipulative definition cannot be correct or incorrect.

B. Lexical definition - a definition that reports the meaning that the definiendum already has. A lexical definition can be
true or false.

C. Precising definition - a definition devised to eliminate ambiguity or vagueness by delineating a concept

more sharply.

D. Theoretical definition - a definition that encapsulates an understanding of he theory in which that term is a key
element.

E. Persuasive definition - A definition formulated and used to resolve a dispute by influencing attitudes or stirring
emotions, often relying upon the use of emotive language.
IX // Department of Humanities

LOGIC
SIMPLE APPREHENSION

Concept, idea, word, and term

One of our basic mental operations is simple apprehension. Our intellect apprehends or
abstracts the nature or essential qualities (essence) of the things we perceive. The product of
this mental function is called concept. Hence, we have a concept of a dog, for instance, which
refers to our intellectual image or grasp of an animal called dog. Though some logicians and
epistemologists regard concept and idea as synonymous, the two have distinct meanings in the
sense that concept is made up of ideas.

A word is the simplest unit of written or spoken language. It is the fundamental medium of
communication. Without words, sentences and statements cannot be constructed. When
employed to express an idea or group of ideas (concept), a word or group of words (phrases)
is called term. A term is the oral or written representation of an idea or group of ideas
(concept).  It is also the basic component of a statement.

The proposition "The former president of the Philippines is a woman", for instance, contains two
terms: the former president of the Philippines and woman. Woman is a word used to express an
idea. This is an example of a simple term, that is, a single word term. The phrase the former
vice-president of the Philippines is a group of words used to express an idea or concept. This
exemplifies a complex term—a term which is a group of words representing one concept. While
terms are automatically words, words are not necessarily terms.  In the statement above, is a
word but is not a term. Many other words have no referents, and hence are words but not
terms, such as or, only, from, through, out, etc.

Word, therefore, is not synonymous with term for not all words are terms. And as distinct from
concept, word is made up of letters whereas concept is made up of ideas.
X DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

LOGIC
Classification of Terms

There are four (4) classifications of terms in

terms of quantity, namely: singular, collective,
particular, and universal. EXAMPLES

A. TABLE
1. A singular term is one that stands for only one
definite object.
B. PETER

C. TREE
2. A collective term is one that is applicable to each
A. ORCHESTRA
and every member of a class taken as a whole but not to
an individual taken singly. B. PLATOON

C. CHOIR
3. A particular term is one that refers to an indefinite
number of individuals or groups. Some signifiers of a A. SOME ASEANS
particular term are: some, a number of, several, almost
all, a few of, practically all, at least one, not all, and B. ALMOST ALL STUDENTS
the like. Hence, if a term is signified by at least one of
these signifiers, then we conclude that that term is a C. SEVERAL POLITICIANS
particular one.

A. ALL ASEANS
4. A universal term is one that is applicable to each
and every member of a class. Some of the signifiers of a
B. EVERY POLITICIAN
universal term are: no, all, each, every, and the like.
C. NO STUDENT
 XI | DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

LOGIC
Judgment and Proposition

A judgment is something we may know, that is, an

object of knowledge. A judgment is evident if we in A proposition is the
fact know it. We make a judgment such as “it is expression of a
raining”, because we have evidence for it. In judgment in words
everyday life, such evidence is often immediate: we spoken or written. The
may look out the window and see that it is raining. elements of a
In logic, we are concerned with situation where the proposition may be
evidence is indirect: we deduce the judgment by reduced to two, noun
making correct inferences from other evident and verb. -- A
judgments. In other words: a judgment is evident if proposition, as being
we have a proof for it. the expression of a
judgment, must
The chief division of judgments is that based on contain as many
their nature, and embraces the two classes of  a terms as the
priori  and  a posteriori  judgments. An  a judgment
priori  judgment is one in which the agreement or
disagreement of the ideas compared is necessary,
and either is manifest or can beeome so from their
mere consideration; as, "God is infinite."An  a
posteriori  judgment is one in which the agreement
or disagreement of the ideas compared is not
necessary, and can be known from experience
alone; as, "Columbus discovered America."
 XII  | DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

LOGIC
There are four and only four kinds of 1. Universal affirmative propositions. In these we
standard-form categorical propositions. assert that the whole of one class is included or
Here are examples of each of the four
contained in another class. “All politicians are liars”
kinds:
1. All politicians are liars. is an example; it asserts that every member of one
2. No politicians are liars. class, the class of politicians, is a member of
3. Some politicians are liars. another class, the class of liars. Any universal
4. Some politicians are not liars.
affirmative proposition can be written schematically
as All S is P.

Categorical Proposition 2. Universal negative propositions. The second example

above, “No politicians are liars,” is a proposition in which it
is denied, universally, that any member of the class of
Categorical proposition is proposition that can politicians is a member of the class of liars. It asserts that
the subject class, S, is wholly excluded from the predicate
be analyzed as being about classes, or
class, P. Schematically, categorical propositions of this kind
categories, affirming or denying that one
can be written as No S is P.
class, S, is included in some other class, P, in
whole or in part. 3. Particular affirmative propositions. The third example
Categorical propositions are the fundamental above, “Some politicians are liars,” affirms that some
elements, the building blocks of argument, in members of the class of all politicians are members of the
the classical account of deductive logic. class of all liars. But it does not affirm this of politicians
universally. Only some particular politician or politicians are
Consider the argument
said to be liars. This proposition does not affirm or deny
anything about the class of all politicians; it makes no
No athletes are vegetarians. pronouncements about that entire class. Nor does it say
All football players are athletes. that some politicians are not liars, although in some
Therefore no football players are vegetarians. contexts it may be taken to suggest that. “Some” is an
indefinite term. Does it mean “at least one,” “at least two,”
This argument contains three categorical propositions. or “at least several”? How many does it mean? Context
We may dispute the truth of its premises, of course, might affect our understanding of the term as it is used in
but the relations of the classes expressed in these everyday speech, but logicians, for the sake of
propositions yield an argument that is certainly valid: If definiteness, interpret “some” to mean “at least one.” A
those premises are true, particular affirmative proposition may be written
that conclusion must be true. It is plain that each of the schematically as Some S is P.
premises is indeed categorical; that is, each premise
affirms, or denies, that some class S is included in 4. Particular negative propositions. The fourth example
above, “Some politicians are not liars,” like the third, does
some other class P, in whole or in part. In this
not refer to politicians universally, but only to some member
illustrative argument the three categorical propositions
or members of that class; it is particular. Unlike the third
are about the class of all athletes, the class of all
example, however, it does not affirm the inclusion of some
vegetarians, and the class of all football players.
member or members of the first class in the second class;
this is precisely what is denied. It is written schematically as
Some S is not P.
 XIII * DEPARTMENT OF HUMANITIES

LOGICLogical Fallacies

Fallacies in Language Logical Fallacies

A fallacy is a defect in an argument that arises from either a
1. EQUIVOCATION is an argument where words are used in mistake in reasoning or the creation of an illusion that makes a
different meanings. The fallacy can be based on a confusion bad argument appear good. The fallacies that appear in this
between the formal meaning of the term and the material chapter involve errors that occur so often that they have been
meaning of the term. For example: given specific names. The term non sequitur (“it does not
Spirits are immaterial substances. follow”) is another name for fallacy. Both deductive and
Whiskey and rum are spirits inductive arguments may contain fallacies; if they do, they area
Therefore, Whiskey and rum are immaterial substances. either unsound or uncogent, depending on the kind of
argument. Conversely, if an argument is unsound or uncogent,
2. AMPHIBOLY is the ambiguous use of a phrase or sentence. it has one or more false premises or it contains a fallacy (or
For example, “This man his father killed” can be understood to both).
say that “this man killed his father” or “this man was killed by his
father”.
Fallacies of Insufficient Evidences
1. Hasty Generalization - this occurs when one generalizes about an
3. COMPOSITION consists in taking jointly what is intended to entire class on the basis of a small sample that does not represent the
be taken separately class. Ex. My Adidas lasted only for two months, and my brother’s lasted
For example, for two months. Therefore, Adidas can only last for two months.
Two and three are less than four 2. Fallacy of Accident - this is committed when one takes a general rule
Two and three are five and applies it to its accidental or exceptional cases. It is based on a
Therefore, Five is less than four confusion between the accidental qualities of a thing and its essential
attributes. Ex. As a rule he who kills another commits a crime. Since
4. 4. DIVISION consists in taking separately what is intended to Capt. Cruz killed an enemy during the war he committed a crime.
be taken jointly. 3. False Cause (post hoc ergo procter hoc) - It is argued that A is the
Sixteen is divisible by four cause of B simply because A happens earlier than B.
Nine and seven are sixteen Ex. I have a stomach ache now because I ate plenty of guavas last night.
Therefore, Nine and seven are divisible by four

Fallacies of Irrelevant Evidences Miscellaneous Fallacies

These refer to arguments in which the premises are logically irrelevant 1. Begging the Question(petitio principii)
to the conclusion. The premises, however, are relevant psychologically a. Assumptio non probata - this occurs when one assumes as already
so the conclusion may seem to follow from the premises. proven true what has yet to be proven true.
1. Argumentum Ad Misericordiam ( Appeal to pity ) Ex. All men are polygamous. (to be proven true) Therefore, your
This is the error of by-passing logic and the point at issue by appealing father is polygamous.
to pity or sympathy. b. Circular Reasoning (Circulus in probando)
Ex: Student to teacher: “We are poor and my parents cannot send me One argues by using the premise to prove the conclusion and then
to school for another semester if I don’t graduate this year; my father is uses the same conclusion to prove the premise.
very sick and may have a heart attack if he learns that I failed your Ex. Carmencita is the muse of the class because she is the loveliest
course. So I deserve to pass your course.” of all. She is the loveliest of all because she is the muse of the class.
2. Argumentum Ad Populum (Appeal to the people) 2. Complex Question - this is asking a question that presupposes an
This is committed when one evades the point under discussion and answer to another question that has not been asked and answered.
instead appeals to the opinions, passions or prejudices of the people. Ex. Have you stopped passing bad checks?
Ex: Ex: “Ms. Cuneta is sure to win the presidency. Why, she has been 3. Self contradiction - presenting an argument containing
consistently topping election surveys.” contradictory or inconsistent premise.
3. Argumentum Ad Hominem (Argument against the person) Ex. He found a solution to an insoluble solution.
This happens when the “person” of the arguer is attacked, rather than 4. Rationalizing -inventing seemingly valid reasons for acts, events,
his argument.Ex: “Why should I believe in what my uncle says about the and opinions in place of real ones.
virtues of studying hard? Wasn’t he kicked out of the university for Ex. A student who gets a low grade in Math because he has not
cheating on exams?” studied rationalize to his parents that the teacher did not explain well
4. Argumentum Ad Baculum (Appeal to the stick) or gave a very difficult examination.
This is committed when one seeks to establish a conclusion by 6. Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam(Appeal of Ignorance)
resorting to “force” or “intimidation”. Might is right. This occurs when one proves that a thing is true because it cannot be
Ex: “If you don’t accept what I am telling you I will kill you.” proven false; or a thing is false because it cannot be proven true. Ex. “God
5. Argumentum Ad Verecundiam ( Appeal to wrong authority ) does not exist because one has yet to prove that He exists.”
This happens when a wrong or unqualified authority is cited to establish 7. Non Sequitur (It does not follow) - this is a fallacy of irrelevant evidence
a conclusion. Ex: Another killer quake will hit Baguio next year. Robert that does not appeal psychologically.It refers to an argument whose
Jaworsk said so. conclusion does not follow logically from the premises as when two ideas
are disconnected. Ex. The sky is blue. Therefore, I love you.