Part2Module4:CategoricalSyllogismsConsiderArgument1andArgument2,andselecttheoptionthatcorrectlyidentifiesthevalidargument(s),ifany.Argument1Allbearsareomnivores.Allomnivoresarehungry.Therefore,allbearsarehungry.

Argument2Some lawyers are judges. Some judges are politicians. Therefore, some lawyers are politicians.

A.OnlyArgument1isvalid.B.OnlyArgument2isvalid.C.Botharevalid.D.Neitherisvalid.

Existentialstatementscannotberewrittenasif…thenstatementsInPart2Module3,wepointedoutthatuniversalstatementscanberephrasedasconditionalstatements.Thisallowedustousetruthtablesorcommonformstodealwithcertainargumentsinvolvinguniversalstatements.“AllAareB”isequivalentto,“If____isanA,then____isaB,”and“NoAareB”isequivalentto“If____isanA,then____isnotaB.”Becauseofthis,Argument1isvalid,duetoTransitiveReasoning.Unlikeuniversalstatements,however,existentialstatements(“SomeAareB;”“SomeAaren’tB;”)cannotberewrittenin“if…then”form.Becauseofthis,TransitiveReasoningdoesnotapplytoArgument2.Ingeneral,weneedadifferentmethodtoanalyzeargumentshavingoneormoreexistentialstatements.Thetruthtable/commonformapproachdoesn’twork.

Some lawyers are judges.

Some judges are politicians.

Therefore, some lawyers are politicians.

Remember that the validity of an argument has nothing to do with whether the conclusion sounds true or reasonable according to your everyday experience.

The argument above is invalid, even though the conclusion “sounds true.”

One way to see that the argument has an invalid structure is to replace “lawyers” with “alligators,” replace “judges” with “gray (things),” and replace “politicians” with “cats.”

Then, the argument does not sound too convincing:

Some alligators are gray.

Some gray things are cats.

Therefore, some alligators are cats.

We will introduce a formal technique to deal with categorical syllogisms.

Categorical Syllogisms

A CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM is an argument having two premises, both of which (along with the conclusion) are categorical statements. Recall that categorical statements are propositions of the form All are… None are… Some are… Some aren’t… The two arguments in our opening exercise are both categorical syllogisms. Because categorical syllogisms frequently involve propositions that cannot be symbolized with logical connectives or plotted on truth tables, we need a new method for analyzing these arguments.

Categorical Syllogisms During the middle ages, scholastic philosophers developed an extensive literature on the subject of

categorical syllogisms. This included a glossary of special terms and symbols, as well as a classification system identifying

and naming dozens of forms. This was hundreds of years before the birth of John Venn and the subsequent invention of Venn

diagrams. Through the use of Venn diagrams, analysis of categorical syllogisms becomes a process of

calculation, like simple arithmetic.

DiagrammingcategoricalsyllogismsHere is a synopsis of the diagramming method that will be demonstrated in detail in the

following exercises. It is similar to the method of diagramming Universal-Particular arguments.

1. To test the validity of a categorical syllogism, use a three circle Venn diagram.

2. Mark the diagram so that it conveys the information in the two premises.

Always start with a universal premise.

(If there is not at least one universal premise, the argument is invalid, and no further work is needed.)

3. If the marked diagram shows that the conclusion is true, then the argument is valid.

4. If the marked diagram shows that the conclusion is false or uncertain, then the

argument is invalid.

Diagrammingacategoricalsyllogism We will use the following categorical syllogism to introduce the step-by-step diagramming process: Some bulldogs are terriers. No terriers are timid. Therefore, some bulldogs are not timid. A. Valid B. Invalid

Step 1: Is there a universal premise? Some bulldogs are terriers. No terriers are timid. Therefore, some bulldogs are not timid. 1. A valid categorical syllogism must have at least one universal premise.

If both premises are existential statements (“Some are…,” “Some aren’t…”) then the argument is invalid, and we are done.

Step 2: Diagram universal premises first No terriers are timid.

2. Assuming that one premise is universal and

one premise is existential, draw a three-circle Venn diagram and mark it to convey the information in the universal premise.

This will always have effect of shading out two

regions of the diagram, because a universal statement will always assert, either directly or indirectly, that some part of the diagram must contain no elements.

We mark our diagram according to the premise

“No terriers are timid.”

“No terriers are timid” means that these two regions are empty.

Step3:DiagramtheotherpremiseSome bulldogs are terriers. 3. Now mark the diagram so that it conveys the

information in the other premise. Typically, this will be an existential statement, and

it will have the effect of placing an “X” somewhere on the diagram, because an existential statement always asserts that some part or the diagram must contain at least one element.

Pay attention to whether the “X” sits directly in one

region of the diagram, or on the border between two regions.

“Some bulldogs are terriers” means that there must be at least one element in the regions where bulldogs and terriers overlap. The “x” must go here.

X

Step4:Istheconclusionshowntobetrue?Therefore, some bulldogs are not timid.

4. Now that we have marked the diagram so that it conveys the information in the two premises, we check to see if the marked diagram shows that the conclusion is true.

If the marked diagram shows that the

conclusion is true, then the argument is valid.

If the marked diagram shows that the conclusion is false or uncertain, then the argument is invalid.

“Therefore, some bulldogs are not timid.”

In order for this conclusion to be true, the diagram should show an “X” in the region that is inside “bulldogs” but outside “timid.”Since that ias what the diagram shows, the argument is VALID.

X

Example

Use diagramming to test the validity of this argument. Some useful things are interesting. All widgets are interesting. Therefore, some widgets are useful. A. Valid B. Invalid