FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

2ND Semester 2023/2024 Academic Session
Course Code: GST 123
Course Tittle: Logic, Philosophy and Human Existence
Course Status: Compulsory( 2unit)
Course Duration: 2 hours per week
Lecturer: Oguchukwu Temple
Topic: Analyzing validity, Ambiguity, Sound Argument.

In everyday life, we encounter numerous arguments, claims, and statements that

require critical evaluation. To make informed decisions, we must be able to
distinguish between valid and invalid arguments, recognize ambiguity, and identify
sound reasoning. This process is crucial in various fields, including philosophy,
law, science, and critical thinking.

Validity refers to the logical structure of an argument, ensuring that the conclusion
follows logically from the premises. Ambiguity arises when words, phrases, or
sentences have multiple meanings, leading to confusion or misinterpretation. A
sound argument, on the other hand, is both valid and has true premises, making the
conclusion logically and factually correct.

In this topic, we will delve into the concepts of validity, ambiguity, and sound
arguments. We will explore the different types of arguments, including deductive
and inductive reasoning, and examine the various forms of ambiguity. By the end
of this discussion, you will be equipped with the skills to critically evaluate
arguments, identify potential flaws, and construct sound reasoning.
Before that, we shall clarify the following concepts:
Statement and Proposition
There is no difference between a statement and a proposition in logic. The two
terms are synonymous and thereupon interchangeable. However, logicians
differentiate between statement and sentence. To them, even though the two terms
are interwoven, they are not actually the same.
For instance, in everyday English, a sentence is a set of words expressing a
statement, a question or a command. Thus whenever a sentence expresses a
statement without question or command it can also be called logical statement. It
should also be clear to you that in ordinary English, every logical statement is a
sentence. But as stated earlier not every sentence is a logical statement. It is only
when a sentence can both be denied or asserted that is qualified as logical
statement or proposition. For example, the sentence “Nigeria is rich” can be
asserted as follows: yes Nigeria is rich. It can also be denied by stating as follows:
No, Nigeria is not rich. Thus the sentence
“Nigeria is rich” because it can be asserted and can also be denied, is a logical
statement or proposition. Any sentence expressing questions, commands etc does
not qualify as logical statement or proposition.
Which of the following are sentences?
Which are statements?
1) The sky is blue
2)Murder is wrong
3) Either humans evolved from apes, or apes evolved from humans.
4) If seven is greater than six, then six is greater than seven.
5) “Stand at attention!” ordered General Bradley
6) Trees or
7) It is not the case that Ben Franklin.
Premise
Premise is also one of the basic concepts in logic. It is known as evidence or
conclusion. Basically, a premise refers to that proposition or statement, within an
argument, which provides support for or grounds for asserting the conclusion of
that argument. (Meneye Eze, 2003:18). In a valid argument, the premises imply the
conclusion. Premise and conclusion are relative terms. Conclusion does not
necessarily mean the last sentence. The premise in an argument A can be the
conclusion in argument B and vice versa.
For example:
All men are mortal
Abiola is a man
Therefore Abiola is a mortal.
In this example, the first two statements or prepositions are the premises while the
last one is the conclusion.
Premise - Indicators
These are words and expression that indicate the premises within an argument. The
following are some of the premise indicators. “since”, “for”, “as”, “because”, “in
as much as”, “for the reason that” etc… When a statement follows the word
“since” that statement is a premise.
For example,
“since the Vice- Chancellor is in School, there will be light today”, in any
argument, the statement or proposition that comes after the word “because” is
usually a premise

for instance:
There will be light today because the vice – chancellor is in school. Whenever the
word “for” is used, it simply means that the sentence following it is the premise of
the above argument. For example: there will be light today for the Vice-Chancellor
is in School.
CONCLUSION
In logic, conclusion is that proposition, within the argument, that is arrived at on
the strength or basis of the information provided by the premises. Simply put,
conclusion means to come or brings to an end. You should always remember that
in any valid argument, the conclusion follows from the premises.
For instance,
All philosophy students are wise
Aina is a philosophy student
Therefore Aina is wise
Here, it is clear that the third preposition “Aina is wise”, which is the conclusion of
the argument, is arrived at on the basis of the information provided by the first two
prepositions, which are the premises.
Conclusion – indicators: There are some expressions and words that function to
indicate the conclusion within a passage. These are generally called conclusion–
indicators. For example: “hence”, “consequently’, “therefore”, “we may
conclude”, “we may infer”, “thus”, “so” etc. whenever any of these words begins a
statement or proposition, it is obvious that such proposition is a conclusion.
Inference
In logic to infer means to derive the conclusion of an argument from the premises
of that argument.

For example:
All Cameroonians are strong
Song is a Cameroonian
Therefore, Song is strong
Here you can see that the conclusion “Song is strong” is derived from the first and
second premises of the argument. This process of derivation is called inference
Argument
An argument is a group of propositions, one of which, called the conclusion, is
affirmed on the basis of the others, which are called premises. An argument is
always the smallest unit of argumentation. At least two propositions or statements
form an argument other wise it is not argument. But not all the statements are
arguments. Some non argumentative uses of statements such as in reports,
illustration, explanatory statements, conditional statement etc…are sometimes
confused with arguments. As earlier stated, at least two statements or propositions
form an argument. In the case of two propositions only one must be the premise
while the other must be the conclusion. For instance: “As soon as Dr Ofotokun
comes, he marks his scripts.” Here the conclusion is “he marks his scripts” while
the premise is “Dr. Ofotokun comes”. The expression “as soon as” stands as
premise – indicator. When more than two propositions or statements form an
argument, one must be a conclusion while the others must be premises Example;
All women are caring
Carine Ngamen is a mother
Therefore, Carine Ngamen is caring
You should always remember that no matter how many premises form an
argument, an argument can never have more than one conclusion.

Valid and Invalid Arguments

An argument is said to be valid when the conclusion of that argument is derived
from or follows from the premises. In other words, in a valid argument, it is
necessary that if the premises are true, then the conclusion is true. Thus, in any
valid argument, there is an absolute connection between the premises and the
conclusion. In any valid argument, it is impossible for the conclusion to be false
when the premises are true, for example: All Americans are proud
Peter is an American
Therefore, peter is proud.
What matters most here is the link between the premises and the conclusion rather
than on the truth or falsity of the statements comprising the arguments,
Example:
All birds have beaks. Some cats are beaks. So, some cats are birds. Here you can
see that although the second premise is false, the argument is still valid. Because
when the premises are assumed to be true the conclusion must be true also. In logic
proper, an argument can still be valid when all the premises are false.
For example:
All men are monkeys. All monkeys are politicians. So all men are
politician.
However, it is not also advisable to hastily conclude that an argument is valid
simply because its premises are all true. Example: Some Nigerians are bad. Ukwa
is a Nigerian.
Therefore Ukawa is bad.
An argument can have true premises and true conclusion but may not necessarily
be valid. Because sometimes, the premises may not support the conclusion in the
right way. “Are the premises actually true?” “Is the argument valid?” These are
two distinct and fundamental questions in logic. In logic proper, validity only
preserves truth but cannot preserve falsehood.
An invalid argument is the opposite of valid one. But invalid argument has a
peculiar characteristic: for instance: it is not necessary that if the premises are true,
then the conclusion is true.
In conclusion, any valid argument with all premises true is a sound argument. Any
valid argument with at least one false premise in an unsound argument. All invalid
arguments are unsound.
Types of Logic
There are basically two types of logic which are:
Deductive and Inductive Logic
In Logic, an argument is deductive if it is claimed that it is impossible for the
premises of the argument to be true without the conclusion also being true
Deductive Logic is mainly found in Aristotelian essay called THE ORGANON
which dealt with the Principles of sound reasoning, arriving at conclusions by way
of valid evidence. A classic example of deductive logic is:
All men are mortal
Socrates is a man
Therefore, Socrates is mortal
Note: The grammatical structure of this argument form makes the conclusion
necessarily follow – not with probability, but with certainty.
All B is C
All A is B
All A is C
Thus, deductive argument claims certainty – “claim” is used because some
deductive arguments do not meet this claim and are called “invalid”.

From General
to

Specific

Inductive Logic on the other hand, are those that establish truth of their conclusion
as probable or probably true. It is vital to know that inductive arguments can range
in probability from very low to very high, but always less than 100%. Indeed,
inductive arguments often (but not always) are the sort of inferences which attempt
to reach conclusion concerning all the members of a class on the basis of the
observations of only some of them. Some examples are found in:
(a) extrapolations: inferring from known to the unknown. E.g. increasing voltages
leads to increasing rpm.
(b) Predictions: The future will be like the past
(c) Part to Whole: Since some things are this way, that all must be this way
d) Analogies: His father is gentle, so he will also be gentle
Note: Unlike deductive argument in which nothing can be added to make the
inference more certain, premises can be added to inductive argument to make them
more probable.
From Specific

To General
Proposition
Proposition in logic simply means assertion or statements. They can be denied but
not questions, commands and exclamations (Copi 1986)
Types of proposition
Conjunction: All compound propositions that are linked with the English words
known as conjunctive – “and” but, yet also, still, although, however, moreover,
nevertheless, the comma and semicolon can be represented by the dot. E.g.
Musa is tall and his speech in elegant = P.q
Justice is found in wig and gown
His courage admits no intimidation and is not cowed by persuasion.
In the above examples, two constituent categorical propositions are conjoined by
‘and’ conjunctions may be categorical, negative, affirmative or disjunctive. They
always assert the truth of all its conjoint members. The first part of conjunction is
known as precedent while the other part is the consequent.
Negation: All compound propositions that are linked with the English word “not”
the logical symbol called the negation or denial or contradictory is represented by
the curl or a tilde sign (~).
Where p is any statement whatever in ordinary English, the negation (or
contradictory or denial) of p can often be expressed in ordinary English by
inserting the word ‘not’ in the appropriate place in P. The negation of P can also be
expressed by saying ‘it is false that ‘p’ or it is not the case that ‘p’. Where p is any
statement whatever, the negation of p is symbolized as ~ p. Since the compound
statement ~ p asserts that p is true when p is false and false when p is true. The
truth table goes like this.
P~p
TF FT
This truth table states that true value of ~ p for each of the two possible truth
values of p. The first row indicates that when p is true, then ~ p is false and the
second row indicates that when p is false then ~ p is true.
Disjunction: This compound statement is clearly intended to assert that at least
one (and perhaps both) of the component statements is true. When the word ‘or’ is
used to make such a compound assertion, ‘or’ is being used in its inclusive sense,
according to which p or q is to be understood as asserting that either p is true or q
is true or both p and q are true.
Any compound statement composed of two statements connected by the word ‘or’
is the symbol for disjunction in the inclusive sense.
Affirmative: An affirmative proposition asserts that the subject term (or Part of the
subject term) is included in the predicate term. The subject term refers to the
referent about which something is affirmed (asserted) or denied, the predicate term
specifies that which is being affirmed or denied of the referent. Affirmative
propositions always go with copula which means the verb that binds the subject
and the predicate
Key Components of an Affirmative Proposition

1. Subject Term: The term that refers to the entity or concept being described. It's
the "thing" about which something is being affirmed or denied.
2. Predicate Term: The term that specifies the attribute, property, or characteristic
being affirmed or denied of the subject term.
3. Copula: The verb that connects the subject term to the predicate term, indicating
the relationship between them. Common copulas include "is," "are," "am," and
"be."

Characteristics of Affirmative Propositions

1. Assertive: Affirmative propositions assert or affirm that the subject term is

included in the predicate term.
2. Universal or Particular: Affirmative propositions can be either universal
(applying to all members of the subject class) or particular (applying to only some
members of the subject class).
3. Always with a Copula: Affirmative propositions always include a copula to link
the subject and predicate terms.

Examples of Affirmative Propositions

1. "All humans are mortal." (Universal affirmative)

2. "Some students are attending the lecture." (Particular affirmative)
3. "The sky is blue." (Universal affirmative)

Equivalent: Two sentences or statements are said to be equivalent, or equivalent in

truth value, when they are either both true or false. This notion is expressed by the
symbol “=“. If two statements are materially equivalent, they also materially imply
one another. Therefore, the symbol “= “ may be read “if and only if”. A statement
of form P=q is called a biconditional and the form is biconditional . For truth
functional compound statements, two statements are logically equivalent when the
(biconditional) statement of their equivalence is a “tautology” truth of all logical
possibilities). Thus, “the principle of double negation”, expressed by the
biconditional P=q - - P, is a tautology.
Law of Thought
1. The law of identity: The law stipulates that (a) Whatever is what it is, and is not
something else. A is A or anything is itself. This is the logic of classes. (b) If the
statement is true, then it is true. This is the logic of statements.

2. The Law of excluded middle: The law stipulates that (a) any statement is either
true and false. This is the law of statements. (b) Anything is either this or that, it is
either A or –A. This is the law of classes.

3. The Law of Contradiction: The law stipulates that (a) Nothing can be both
what it is and not what it is with the same specification. Nothing can be both A and
–A. This is the law of classes (b) A statement cannot be both true and false. This is
the law of statements.

Conditional Statements: This is another of compound statement composed of two

component statements, usually with the word “if” before the first component
statement and the word “then” between the two component statements. Such
statement could also be referred to as hypothetical or implications and they are of
the form “if P then q” where the first statement is called the antecedent and the
second is consequent. Our special symbol for this the horseshoe (“)”) and we
define P)q to mean the same thing as – (P.-q assets that if P is true then q is true,
which means that it is not the case that P is true and q is false or –(P.-q).
Nature or Argument
In logic, expression of strong feelings is termed emotive discourse, not
argumentative discourse. So technically, argument means a demonstration or a
proof of some statement, not emotional language. The central part of an argument
include:
a. premiss: A statement or proposition which gives reasons, grounds, or evidence
for accepting some other proposition, called the conclusion.
b. Conclusion: A proposition, which is purported to be established on the basis of
other propositions.
an example of an argument is below.
If we set out goals too high, then we will not meet those goals.
If we do not meet those goals, then we are less than we could be
If we are less than we could be, then we feel inferior
Therefore, if we set goals too high, then we feel inferior.
Reading and coming to understand the above connotes a passage of a
psychological process known as inference. This inference could be defined as the
reasoning process by which a logical relation is understood. Argument structure is
the sum and substance of logic.
Truth, Validity and Soundness
The foundation concepts of logic are truth, validity and soundness. Truth ordinarily
is property of statements, i.e. statements are true or false. True in ordinary parlance
means correct facts while false is the opposite. However, logic is not concerned
with facts but strict observance of rules of logic.
Validity: validity on other hand, is property of arguments. Depending on their
structure, argument could be valid or invalid. A valid argument is one which the
premise and conclusion are so related that it is impossible for the premises to be
true when the conclusion is false.
Soundness: belongs to both arguments and propositions. It refers to the situation
where the propositions are true and argument is valid.
Determining Validity and Invalidity of Argument
An argument must satisfy two conditions to establish the truth of this conclusion. It
must be valid and all its premises must be true. The determination of the truth or
false hood of premises is the task of scientific inquiry in General. But determining
the validity or invalidity of any argument is the special task of deductive logic. The
logician is interested even in unsound argument because their premises might
happen to be false. A categorical syllogism is an argument that has two premisses
and a conclusion, each of which is a categorical proposition. As we have discussed
earlier, each of the propositions has a subject and predicate terms. Not with
standing that, in the entire syllogism, only three distinct terms could be isolated.
These are the middle term (M) minor term (S) and the major term (P). The M
occurs once in each premise. The S occurs as the subject term of the conclusion
and also in one premise. The final term which is P occurs as the predicate term of
the conclusion and in one of the premises.
Normally, the premise containing the major term (P) is put first and that is
followed y the one having the minor term. Thus;
All men (M) are good (P) = major premise
All Nigerians (S) are men (M) = minor premise
All Nigerians (S) are good (P) = Conclusion.
This is a valid syllogism. “Good” is the major term (P) “Nigerians” the minor term
(S) and “Men” the middle term (M).
Rules for Valid Categorical Syllogism are:
i. The middle term must be distributed at least once.

ii. Any end term distributed in the conclusion must also be distributed in its
premises.

iii. These must be the same number of negative conclusions as negative promises
e.g.

All smokers have lung problems

No children are smokers Therefore, no children have lung problems.
Any categorical syllogism that satisfies all three rules is valid but any that violates
any of the three rules is invalid. Violation of rule (1) amounts to fallacy of
undistributed middle. Violation of rule (2) is referred to as fallacy of illicit major or
illicit minor. Finally, violation of rule (3) tantamount to the fallacy of quality.
Subject and predicate Term
Remember that we can talk either of the subject term of a proposition or the subject
or the subject term of a syllogism or of an argument. But always remember that in
logic proper, you must talk of the subject term of a proposition. Syllogism is more
than a preposition syllogism, it is an argument that contains and must contain three
propositions, two of which are called the premises and one the conclusion. A
typical case of a syllogism is:
All Black women are beautiful
Cacy Ngamen is a black woman
Therefore Cacy Ngamen is beautiful
In this syllogism “Cacy Ngamen is beautiful” is known as conclusion and it
necessarily follows from the first and second prepositions, which serve as premises
of the syllogism. You can see that a whole syllogism can neither be asserted nor
denied. But the sentence “Cacy Ngamen is beautiful” which stands here as a
preposition can be asserted or denied.
As the subject of the proposition it is called the subject term so “Cacy Ngamen is
beautiful” is the subject term of the above proposition.
As it is with the subject term, so it is with the predicate term. The logician does not
talk of the predicate term of an argument or syllogism. In logic, we talk of the
predicate term of a preposition. For instance, in the preposition ‘Cacy Ngamen is
beautiful,” the predicate of the preposition is ‘beautiful”.
In conclusion, you should always remember that in logic proper, subject and
predicate term are associated with individual propositions only. It does not matter
whether that individual proposition is a premise or a conclusion.
Major, Minor and Middle Terms
Major, minor and middle terms are all parts of a syllogism. But unlike predicate or
subject term as seen earlier, a logician can never talk of major, minor or middle
term of a preposition. For instance, in an argument or in a syllogism, the predicate
term of the conclusion becomes automatically the major term of the syllogism. For
example:
All Cameroonians are footballers
Eto is a Cameroonian
Therefore, Etoo is a footballer. “footballer” is the predicate term of the conclusion,
in the above example. But it automatically becomes the major term of the
syllogism. So, “footballer” is the major term of the syllogism. You should always
remember also that in logic, the premise containing the major of the syllogism is
referred to as the major premise of that syllogism, thus in the above example, the
premise “all Cameroonians are footballers”, which contains the major term of the
syllogism (footballer) becomes the major premise of the syllogism, because it
contains the major term of that syllogism.
Minor term
As it is with the major term, so it is with the minor term. That is, the logician does
not talk of the minor term of a proposition, but rather of the minor firm of a
syllogism. Always remember that in any syllogism, the subject or the subject term
of the conclusion becomes automatically the minor term of that syllogism, for
instance:
All Cameroonians are footballers
Etoo is a Cameroonian
Therefore, Etoo is a footballer
In the above example, Etoo is the subject term of the conclusion and it
automatically becomes the minor term of that syllogism. So Etoo is the minor term
of the above syllogism. In logic, the premise that contains the minor term of the
syllogism is called the minor premise of that syllogism. Thus in the above example
the premise “Etoo is a Cameroonian” which contains the minor term of the
syllogism (Etoo) is called the minor premise because it contains the minor term of
that syllogism.
Middle Term
As it is with the major and minor terms, so it is with the middle term. That is, the
logician does not talk of the middle term of a proposition, but rather of the middle
term of a syllogism. Always remember that in any syllogism, the term that occurs
in both premises but does not occur in the conclusion is called the middle term of
that syllogism. For
instance:
All Cameroonians are footballers
Etoo is a Cameroonian
Therefore Etoo is a footballer
You can see that in the above syllogism,” Cameroonians” is the middle term
because the term (Cameroonian) occurs in both the major and minor premises but
does not occur in the conclusion.