The Simple Categorical

Syllogism
BASIC STRUCTURE
• MAJOR TERM
– is the predicate of the conclusion
– it must occur in the conclusion and in one of the
premises

• Example:
Every animal is mortal;
but every dog is an animal;
therefore, every dog is mortal.
BASIC STRUCTURE
• MINOR TERM
– is the subject of the conclusion
– it must occur in the conclusion and in the premise in
which the major term does not occur
– it is often introduced by the adversative conjunction
“but”

• Example:
Every animal is mortal;
but every dog is an animal;
therefore, every dog is mortal.
BASIC STRUCTURE
• MIDDLE TERM
– it occurs in each of the premises but not in the
conclusion
– it is the medium through which the major and minor
terms are united in the affirmative syllogism, and
separated in the negative syllogism

• Example:
Every animal is mortal;
but every dog is an animal;
therefore, every dog is mortal.
BASIC STRUCTURE
• as opposed to the middle term, the minor and
major terms are called the EXTREMES.
• the major terms frequently has major or greatest
extension (mortal)
• the minor term receives its name from the fact
that it often has minor or least extension (dog)
• the middle term has medium or intermediate
extension
GENERAL RULES
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Number and Arrangement)
1. There must be three terms and only three – the
major term, the minor term, and the middle
term.
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Number and Arrangement)
1. There must be three terms and only three – the
major term, the minor term, and the middle
term.
 the necessity of having only three terms follows from
the very nature of a categorical syllogism, in which a
minor and a major terms are united or separated
through the intermediacy of a third term, the middle
term
 the terms must have exactly the same meaning and
must be used in exactly the same way in each
occurrence
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Number and Arrangement)
1. There must be three terms and only three – the
major term, the minor term, and the middle
term.
 a term that has a different meaning in each
occurrence is equivalent to two terms
 the syllogism might commit a fallacy called “Fallacy of
Four Terms”
 we must be especially on guard against ambiguous
middle terms, otherwise the syllogism commits the
“Fallacy of Amphiboly”
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Number and Arrangement)
1. There must be three terms and only three – the
major term, the minor term, and the middle
term.

Example:
Men must eat;
but the picture on the wall is a man;
therefore, the picture on the wall must eat.
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Number and Arrangement)
2. Each term must occur in two propositions. The
major term must occur in the conclusion, as
predicate, and in one of the premises, which is
therefore called the major premise. The minor
term must occur in the conclusion as subject,
and in the other premise, which is therefore
called the minor premise. The middle term must
occur in both premises but not in the conclusion
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Number and Arrangement)
 the function of the middle term is to act as a common
term of comparison, which is performed in the
premises
 the middle term has no function to do and no rightful
place in the conclusion
 the fallacy is called “Fallacy of Misplaced Middle
Term”

EXAMPLE:
Every kiwi is a bird;
but some birds are bipeds;
therefore, some birds are kiwis and bipeds.
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Quantity of Extension)
3. The major and minor terms may not be
universal (or distributed) in the conclusion
unless they are universal in the premise.
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Quantity of Extension)
3. The major and minor terms may not be
universal (or distributed) in the conclusion
unless they are universal in the premise.
 the reason for this rule is that we may not conclude
about all the inferiors of the term if the premise have
given us information about only some of them
 the conclusion is an effect of the premises and must
therefore be contained in them implicitly; but all are
not necessarily contained in some – at least not by
virtue of the form of argumentation alone
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Number and Arrangement)
 violation of this rule is called either “extending a term”
or an “illicit process of a term”
 to go from a particular to universal is forbidden – just
as in the square of opposition; but to go from
universal to particular is permissible

EXAMPLE:
All dogs are mammals;
but no men are dogs;
therefore, no men are animals
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Quantity of Extension)
4. The middle term must be universal, or
distributed, at least once.
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Quantity of Extension)
4. The middle term must be universal, or
distributed, at least once.
 the reason for this rule is that when the middle term is
particular in both premises it might stand for a
different portion of its extension in each occurrence
and thus be equivalent to two terms, and therefore fail
to fulfill its function of uniting or separating the minor
and major terms
 a. The Rules of the Terms
(Quantity of Extension)
4. The middle term must be universal, or
distributed, at least once.

EXAMPLE:
A dog is an animal;
but a cat is an animal;
therefore, a cat is a dog.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quality of the Proposition)
5. If both premises are affirmative, the conclusion
must be affirmative.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quality of the Proposition)
5. If both premises are affirmative, the conclusion
must be affirmative.
 the reason for this rule is that affirmative premises
either unite the minor and major terms, or else do not
bring them into relationship with one another at all –
as when there is an undistributed middle
 in neither case may the major term be denied of the
minor term
 hence, to get a negative conclusion you must have
one – and only one – negative premise
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quality of the Proposition)
5. If both premises are affirmative, the conclusion
must be affirmative.

EXAMPLE:
All sin is detestable;
but some pretense is sin;
therefore, some pretense is not detestable.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quality of the Proposition)
6. If one premise is affirmative and the other
negative, the conclusion must be negative.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quality of the Proposition)
6. If one premise is affirmative and the other
negative, the conclusion must be negative.
 the reason for this rule is that the affirmative premise
unites the middle term with one of the extremes, and
the negative premise separates the middle term from
the other extreme
 two things, of which the one is identical with a third
thing and the other is different from that same third
thing, cannot be identical, with one another
 if a syllogism with a negative premise concludes at all,
it must conclude negatively
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quality of the Proposition)
6. If one premise is affirmative and the other
negative, the conclusion must be negative.

EXAMPLE:
Dogs are not centipedes;
but hounds are dogs;
therefore, hounds are not centipedes.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quality of the Proposition)
7. If both premises are negative – and not
equivalently affirmative – there is no conclusion
at all.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quality of the Proposition)
7. If both premises are negative – and not
equivalently affirmative – there is no conclusion
at all.
 to fulfill its function of uniting or separating the minor
and the major terms, the middle term must itself be
united with at least one of them
 if both premises are negative, the middle term is
denied of each of the extremes and we learn nothing
about the relationship of the extremes toward one
another
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quality of the Proposition)
7. If both premises are negative – and not
equivalently affirmative – there is no conclusion
at all.
 the fallacy committed is “Fallacy of Exclusive
Premises”

EXAMPLE:
A stone is not an animal;
but a dog is not a stone;
therefore, a dog is not an animal.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quantity of the Proposition)
8. At least one premise must be universal.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quantity of the Proposition)
8. At least one premise must be universal.
 possible pairs of particular premises; II, IO, OI, OO
 II premises do not contain a distributed term and
consequently they leave the middle term undistributed
 if a conclusion is drawn from IO or OI premises, it
must be negative, and thus the conclusion will
distributed
 OO, two negative premises; no conclusion
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quantity of the Proposition)
8. At least one premise must be universal.

EXAMPLES:

Undistributed Middle Illicit Major

Some M is P Some M is P
Some S is M Some S is not M
Some S is P Some S is not P
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quantity of the Proposition)
8. At least one premise must be universal.

EXAMPLES:

Undistributed Middle Illicit Major

Some M is not P Some P is not M

Some S is M Some S is M
Some S is not P Some S is not P
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quantity of the Proposition)
9. If a premise is particular, the conclusion must be
particular.
 violation of this rule is called “Fallacy of Universal
Conclusion Drawn from Particular Premises”

Valid Valid
Major Premise P (Particular) U (Universal)
Minor Premise U (Universal) P (Particular)
Conclusion P (Particular) P (Particular)
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(Quantity of the Proposition)
9. If a premise is particular, the conclusion must be
particular.

Invalid Invalid
Major Premise P (Particular) U (Universal)
Minor Premise U (Universal) P (Particular)
Conclusion U (Universal) U (Universal)
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(The Existential Import of the Proposition)
10. The actual real existence of a subject may not
be asserted in the conclusion unless it has been
asserted in the premises.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(The Existential Import of the Proposition)
10. The actual real existence of a subject may not
be asserted in the conclusion unless it has been
asserted in the premises.
 the reason for this rule is the general principle that
nothing may ever be asserted in the conclusion that
has not been asserted implicitly in the premises
The Expository Syllogism:
 differs from an ordinary syllogism in that its middle
term is singular in both premises
 it is not an inference at all in the strictest sense of the
word but rather an appeal to experience
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(The Existential Import of the Proposition)
10. The actual real existence of a subject may not
be asserted in the conclusion unless it has been
asserted in the premises.
The Expository Syllogism:
 as its name suggests, it “exposes” a truth to the
senses by setting an example before the mind
 it is useful for refuting A and E propositions by
establishing their contradictories
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(The Existential Import of the Proposition)
10. The actual real existence of a subject may not
be asserted in the conclusion unless it has been
asserted in the premises.
The Expository Syllogism:

EXAMPLE: (A) All woods float.

This does not float;

but this is wood;
therefore, not all woods float.
 b. The Rules of the Proposition
(The Existential Import of the Proposition)
10. The actual real existence of a subject may not
be asserted in the conclusion unless it has been
asserted in the premises.
The Expository Syllogism:

EXAMPLE: (B) No Greek was a philosopher.

Socrates was a philosopher;

but Socrates was a Greek;
therefore, some Greek was a philosopher.