Logic & Critical Thinking

Session 8 1 March, 2014

Theory of Deduction
A method of reasoning from the general to the specific. In a deductive argument, a conclusion follows necessarily from the stated premises. A deductive argument is one whose premises are claimed to provide conclusive grounds for the truth of its conclusion . The fundamental property of a deductively valid argument is this: If all of its premises are true, then its conclusion must be true.

Contd. Every deductive argument is either valid or invalid. If it is valid, it is impossible for its premise to be true without its conclusion also being true. The theory of deduction aims to explain the relationship of valid premises and conclusion. Everything made of copper conducts electricity. (Premise) This wire is made of copper. (Premise) This wire will conduct electricity. (Conclusion)

Classes and Categorical Propositions

Classical logic deals mainly with arguments based on relations of classes of objects to one another. By a class we mean a collection of all objects that have some specified characteristics in common The classes can be related in at least of the three ways:
All of one class may be included in all of another class (All dogs are mammals) Some but not all, of the members of one class may be included in another class (Some chess players are females) Two classes may have no members in common (No triangles are circles)

Contd.

These 3 relations may be applied to classes, or categories, of every sort. In a deductive argument, we present propositions that state the relations between one category and some other category. These propositions are called categorical propositions.
5

Four Kinds of Categorical Propositions

The four kinds of categorical propositions include: All S is P (A) No S is P (E) Some S is P (I) Some S is not P (O) Where S refers to subject and P refers to predicate

All politicians are liars

Subject

Predicate

Contd.
All politicians are liars (A)
Universal affirmative proposition

No politicians are liars (E)

Universal negative proposition

Some politicians are liars (I)

Particular affirmative proposition

Some politicians are not liars (O)

Particular negative proposition

Universal Affirmative Proposition

All politicians are liars
It is about two classes, the class of all politicians and the class of all liars, saying that the first class is included or contained in the second class. A universal affirmative proposition says that every member of the first class is also a member of the second class. In the present example, the subject term politicians designates the class of all politicians, and the predicate term liars designates the class of all liars. Any universal affirmative proposition is written as: All S is P where the terms S and P represent the subject and predicate terms, respectively. It is denoted by A.

Politicians (S)

Liars (P)

The diagram for the A proposition, which asserts that all S is P, shows that portion of S which is outside of P shaded out, indicating that no members of S that are not members of P.

10

Universal Negative Proposition

No politicians are liars
It denies of politicians universally that they are liars. Concerned with two classes, a universal negative proposition says that the first class is wholly excluded from the second, which is to say that there is no member of the first class that is also a member of the second. Any universal negative proposition may be written as: No S is P where the terms S and P represent the subject and predicate terms, respectively. It is denoted by E

11

Politicians (S)

Liars (P)

The diagram for the E proposition, will exhibit this mutual exclusion by having the overlapping portion of the two circles representing the classes S and P shaded out.

12

Particular Affirmative Proposition

Some politicians are liars
Clearly, what the present example affirms is that some members of the class of all politicians are (also) members of the class of all liars. But it does not affirm this of politicians universally: Not all politicians universally, but, rather, some particular politician or politicians, are said to be liars. This proposition neither affirms nor denies that all politicians are liars; it makes no pronouncement on the matter. Any particular affirmative proposition may be written as: Some S is P where the terms S and P represent the subject and predicate terms, respectively. It is denoted by I

13

Contd..
The word some is indefinite. Does it mean at least one, or at least two, or at least one hundred? In this type of proposition, it is customary to regard the word some as meaning at least one. The name particular affirmative is appropriate because the proposition affirms that the relationship of class inclusion holds, but does not affirm it of the first class universally, but only partially, of some particular member or members of the first class.

14

Politicians (S)

Liars (P)

The diagram for the I proposition indicates that there is at least one member of S that is also a member of P by placing X in the region which the two circles overlap.

15

Particular Negative Proposition

Some politicians are not liars
This example, like the one preceding it, does not refer to politicians universally but only to some member or members of that class; it is particular. But unlike the third example, it does not affirm that the particular members of the first class referred to are included in the second class; this is precisely what is denied. A particular negative proposition, schematically written as: Some S is not P Above statement states that at least one member of the class designated by the subject term S is excluded from the whole of the class designated by the predicate term P. where the terms S and P represent the subject and predicate terms, respectively. It is denoted by O

16

Politicians (S)

Liars (P)

The diagram for the O proposition indicates that there is at least one member of S that is not a member of P by lacing X in the region S that is outside P.

17

Standard-Form Categorical Propositions

Proposition Form Name Type Example

All S is P
No S is P

A
E

Some S is P
Some S is not P

I
O

Universal Affirmative All lawyers are wealthy people Universal Negative No criminals are good citizens Particular Affirmative Some chemicals are poisonous Particular Negative Some insects are not pests

18

Quantity, Quality and Distribution

Quantity refers to the amount of members of the subject class that are used in the proposition. If the proposition refers to all members of the subject class, it is universal. If the proposition does not employ all members of the subject class, it is particular. For instance, an Iproposition ("Some S are P") is particular since it only refers to some of the members of the subject class.

19

Contd.
Quality refers to whether the proposition affirms or denies the inclusion of a subject within the class of the predicate.

The two possible qualities are called affirmative and negative.

For instance, an A-proposition ("All S are P") is affirmative since it states that the subject is contained within the predicate. On the other hand, an O-proposition ("Some S are not P") is negative since it excludes the subject from the predicate.

20

All Humans Are Mammals

Quantifier

Subject

Copula

Predicate

21

Distribution
Distribution is an attribute of the terms (subject and predicate) of propositions. A term is said to be distributed, if the proposition makes an assertion about every member of the class denoted by the term; otherwise, it is undistributed. In other words, a term is distributed, if and only if the statement assigns (or distributes) an attribute to every member of the class denoted by the term. Thus, if a statement asserts something about every member of the S class, then S is distributed; otherwise S and P are undistributed.

Sentence

Standard Form
A All S is P

Attribute
Universal affirmative Universal negative Particular affirmative Particular negative

Distribution

All apples are delicious

S only

No apples are delicious Some apples are delicious Some apples are not delicious

E No S is P

S and P

I Some S is P

Neither

O Some S is not P

P only

23

The Square of Opposition

25

Contradictories
(A and O; E and I): have opposite truth values. The propositions on the diagonals of the square are CONTRADICTORIES: they DENY each other TOTALLY. BOTH cannot be true at the same time BOTH cannot be false at the same time. Two propositions are contradictory if one is the denial or negation of the other: that is, they cannot both be true and cannot both be false. A and O propositions are contradictory, as are I and E... one of the pair MUST be true and the other MUST be false. If the statement "All S are P",(A) is true, then the statement "some S are not P", (O) must be false. Example: If "All dogs are animals" is true, then "Some dogs are not animals" must be false.

Contraries
A statements and E statements. Both CANNOT be true at the same time. But could both be false. If one is TRUE, the other is FALSE. If one is FALSE, the other MAY be true or false, THEREFORE, if one is FALSE, the other is UNKOWN. Two propositions are contrary if they cannot both be true but they might both be false. A and E are contrary. It can't be that "all dogs are animals" and "no dogs are animals" at the same time, but it may be that only some dogs are animals, making both Universal statements false.

Subalternates
A and I, and E and O statements. the superaltern (the universal) implies the subaltern (the particular) If the UNIVERSAL is true, the PARTICULAR is true. If the PARTICULAR is false, the UNIVERSAL is false. A and I propositions are related by subalteration. Subalterns are a different sort of 'opposition', because a subalternation does not imply a contradiction at all. The truth of I may be inferred by the truth of A. If "All S are P" is true, then we can be certain that "Some S are P" must be true. The reverse, from I to A, is invalid. The same goes for the negative propositions E and O. One can infer the truth of O from the validity of E, but not vice versa

Subcontraries
Two propositions are subcontraries if they cannot both be false, although they both may be true. I (Some S is P) and O (Some S is not P) propositionswhich are both particular but differ in quality-are subcontraries unless one is necessarily false. For example: Some dogs are cocker spaniels. Some dogs are not cocker spaniels.

29

Immediate Inferences
Conversion Contraposition Obversion These operations give us rules to create logically equivalent claims and determine in some cases if two categorical claims are logically equivalent.

30

Conversion
The converse of a claim is created by switching positions of subject and predicate terms. E: No S are P = No P are S

I: Some S are P = Some P are S

ConvErsIon - Valid for E & I

31

Contd.
E: No metal is house = No house is metal I: Some country is pop = Some pop is country Avoid the common mistake of converting an A-claim! The fact that all H are W does not imply that all W must be H. For example, it is true that all employees are human, but it is not true that all humans are employees. And avoid the similar mistake of converting an O-claim! If it is true that some managers are not leaders, that does not imply that some leaders are not managers.

32

Contraposition
The contrapositive of a claim is created by: (1) switching positions of subject and predicate terms, and; (2) replacing both terms with their complements

A: All S are P = All non-P are non-S O: Some S are not P = Some non-P are not non-S ContrApOsition - Valid for A & O

33

Obversion
The obverse of a claim is created by: (1) changing affirmative to negative or vice-versa, and; (2) replacing predicate term with its complement A: All S are P = No S are non-P E: No S are P = All S are non-P I: Some S are P = Some S are not non-P O: Some S are not P = Some S are non-P

Obversion - Valid for ALL

34

Thank you

35