Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 118 views

    Chapter Four 4.1. Proposition 4.1.1.categorical Proposition: Class of Similar Things

    Uploaded by

    Abel Taye
    The document discusses categorical propositions, which make statements about the relationship between two classes. It defines the components of categorical propositions, including the quantifier, subject term, copula, and predicate term. It also discusses the standard forms of categorical propositions and how they can be interpreted using Venn diagrams and the square of opposition. The relationships between the different forms, such as being contradictory, contrary, subcontrary, or subaltern are also examined.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Chapter Four 4.1. Proposition 4.1.1.categorical Proposition: Class of Similar Things

    Uploaded by

    Abel Taye
    118 views26 pages
    The document discusses categorical propositions, which make statements about the relationship between two classes. It defines the components of categorical propositions, including the quantifier, subject term, copula, and predicate term. It also discusses the standard forms of categorical propositions and how they can be interpreted using Venn diagrams and the square of opposition. The relationships between the different forms, such as being contradictory, contrary, subcontrary, or subaltern are also examined.

    Original Title

    6-Logic

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses categorical propositions, which make statements about the relationship between two classes. It defines the components of categorical propositions, including the quantifier, subject term, copula, and predicate term. It also discusses the standard forms of categorical propositions and how they can be interpreted using Venn diagrams and the square of opposition. The relationships between the different forms, such as being contradictory, contrary, subcontrary, or subaltern are also examined.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    118 views26 pages

    Chapter Four 4.1. Proposition 4.1.1.categorical Proposition: Class of Similar Things

    Uploaded by

    Abel Taye
    The document discusses categorical propositions, which make statements about the relationship between two classes. It defines the components of categorical propositions, including the quantifier, subject term, copula, and predicate term. It also discusses the standard forms of categorical propositions and how they can be interpreted using Venn diagrams and the square of opposition. The relationships between the different forms, such as being contradictory, contrary, subcontrary, or subaltern are also examined.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 26

    Chapter Four

    4.1. Proposition
    4.1.1.Categorical proposition

    • Category: a group, collection, or class of similar things.

    • Proposition: refers to statement. A declarative sentence that can be


    evaluated as either true or false.

    • Categorical proposition: a simple statement that expresses relation


    of two classes, asserting that one class is either totally or partially
    included or excluded from another class.

    • Any categorical proposition has two terms: subject term and predicate
    term.
     
    4.1. Components and Standard Forms of Categorical Proposition

    A. Components
    • Every CP, if it is stated in standard from, has exactly four distinct
    components. These are:

    • Quantifier: “All”, “No” or “Some”. Note that “some” in logic


    refers to at least one.
    • Subject term: term which is stated by referring to other class term
    (predicate).
    • Copula: term that connects subject and predicate term.
    • Predicate term: term that serve as a reference for the subject term.
    Example:

    1. All human beings are mortal.


    2. Some birds are mammals.
    • For the 1st example; Quantifier = All, subject term = human
    beings, Copula = are; Predicate term = mortal
    • For the 2nd example: Quantifier =some; Subject term = birds;
    Copula = are; and Predicate Term = mammals
    Correct order of categorical proposition

    Quantifier subject term copula predicate term


    B. Standard Forms
    • Forms are designed based on the rules of the partial or whole
    inclusion or exclusion.
    1. The whole ST is included in the PT.
    2. The whole ST is excluded from PT.

    3. Partially, the ST is included in the PT.

    4. Partially, ST is excluded from the PT.


    The above forms have the following symbolic representations.

    • All S are P all members of S are in P.


    • No S are p No members of S are in P.
    • Some S are p. at least one member of S is in P class
    • Some S are not p. at least one member of S is not in P class.
    Note:
    • The form ‘All S are not P’ is not a standard form. This form is
    ambiguous and can be rendered as either ‘‘No S are P’’ or ‘‘Some
    S are not P,’’ depending on the content.

    • There are exactly three forms of quantifiers and two forms of


    copulas i.e ‘‘are’’ and ‘‘are not.’’
    • Other texts allow the various forms of the verb ‘‘to be’’ (such as
    ‘‘is,’’ ‘‘is not,’’ ‘‘will,’’ and ‘‘will not’’) to serve as the copula.
    • For the sake of uniformity, we are restricted on the above two
    copula.
    4.2 Quality, quantity and distribution
    • Quality and quantity are attributes of categorical propositions.

    • In order to see how these attributes pertain, it is useful to rephrase


    the meaning of categorical propositions in class terminology:
     
    A. Quality:
    • The quality of a categorical proposition is either affirmative or
    negative depending on whether it affirms or denies class
    membership.

    i. Affirmative = ST is partially or entirely included in the PT


    ii. Negative = ST is partially or entirely excluded from the PT.
     
    • Example: ‘‘All S are P ’’ and
    ‘‘Some S are P ’’ have affirmative quality, and ‘‘No S
    are P ’’ and
    ‘‘Some S are not P ’’ have negative quality.
    B. Quantity:
    • Can be either universal or particular.

    I. Universal: full inclusion or exclusion of ST from the PT

    II. Particular: partial inclusion or exclusion of ST from the PT

    Example:
    • ‘‘All S are P ’’ and ‘‘No S are P ’’ each assert something about
    every member of the S class and thus are universal.
    • ‘‘Some S are P ’’ and ‘‘Some S are not P ’’ assert something about
    one or more members of the S class and hence are particular.
    • But categorical propositions have no ‘‘qualifier.’’
    • In universal propositions, the quality is determined by the
    quantifier, and in particular propositions it is determined by the
    copula.
     

    N.B: There are four letters that represent the four forms of
    categorical proposition: A, E, I & O.
    • The universal affirmative is called an A proposition, the universal
    negative an E proposition, the particular affirmative an I
    proposition, and the particular negative an O proposition.
    C. Distribution: it is an attribute of terms (subject and predicate)
    unlike quality and quantity which are attributes of proposition.

    • A term is said to be distributed if it is stated without ambiguity


    (when it asserts all of its members).

    • A term is said to be undistributed if it doesn’t state the class of


    things in it.
    Standard from Letter Quantity Quality Distribution
    name Term Term
    distributed Undistributed
    All S are P A Universal Affirmative S P
    No S are P E Universal Negative S&P --------
    Some S are P I Particular Affirmative ------ S&P
    Some S are’t P O Particular Negative P S
    4.3 Interpretation of categorical propositions
    • Two types of interpretations: Aristotelian and Boolean.

    • These two interpretations vary only in connection with universal

    categorical propositions.

     All S are P - All members of S are included in P, and asserts that all members

    of S actually exist. (Aristotelian Interpretation)

     No S are P - no members of S are included in P, and members of S are actually

    exist. (Aristotelian interpretation)

     However, Boole is neutral about existence. He stated universal categorical

    propositions like Aristotle but for Boole it is not assumed that members of S

    actually exist.
     However, the two interpretations are the same/ compatible with

    regard to particular propositions.

     Since, therefore Boolean is neutral about existence, it is simple

    than Aristotelian. So our focus is on Boolean interpretation.

    Boolean Interpretation:
    • All S are P = No members of S are outside p
    • No S are P = No members of S are inside P
    • Some S are P = at least one S exists and that S is p
    • Some S are not P = at least one S exists and that S is not P
    4.3.1 Venn Diagram and Square of Opposition
    • Venn diagram: it is arrangement of overlapping circles in which
    each circle represents the class denoted by a term in a categorical
    proposition.
    • Since a categorical proposition has two terms, Venn diagram has
    two overlapping circles. Conventionally, the first circle represents
    the ST and the second circle represents the PT.
    • We use two marks: shading (refers to empty) and marking (refers
    to something.)
    • Shading is for universals and marking is for particulars.

    4.3.3.1 Modern Square of Opposition (MSO)


    • From the above Venn-diagrams, A & O are contradictory and also
    E & I.
    • MSO is a diagram that shows the relationship of contradictory
    propositions.
    A E

    I O
    • Immediate Inference: proposition having one premise and
    conclusion is drawn from this single premise.
    – From the MSO, if we know the truth value of “A” is true, “O” is false and
    vice versa.
    – If “E” is true, “I” is false and vice versa

    – Venn diagram is used to test immediate inference as valid or invalid.


    – Valid: if information expressed by the conclusion is presented in the
    premise. If not, invalid.
    4.3.1.2 Traditional Square of Opposition
    • Depends on Aristotelian Interpretation.
    • Has four square of oppositions:
    • Contradictory
    • contrary
    • Sub-contrary
    • Sub-alternation
      A contrary E

     
    I Subcontrary O
    A. Contradictory:
    • The same as we discussed under section of Modern Square of
    Opposition.
    B. Contrary:
    • Top linear square between A & E.
    • Both have the same quantity but different quality.

    • So, it is partial opposition.


    • Both can be false at the same times but not true.
    • Either of the two should be false if no fallacy of illicit contrary
    will be committed.
    So, if A true, E is false.
    If E true, A False Valid.
    But

    If A is false, E is undetermined
    If E is fasle, E is undermined. Invalid--------- illicit
    contrary
     
    C. Sub-contrary

    • Partial relationship

    • Bottom linear relationship between T & O

    • Different in quality but the same in quantity.

    • Both can’t be false simultaneously.


     
    • If I is false_ O is true
    • If O is false_ I is true valid/ no fallacy
     
     
    • If I is true _O is undetermined
    • If O is true _ I is undetermined invalid/fallacious----- illicit sub-
    contrary
    D. Sub-alternation
    • Vertical relationship.
    • Same in quality but differ in quantity.
    • Represented by two arrows. The truth down arrow and the false up arrow.
    • The dawn ward arrow transmits only true and the up-ward arrow only false.
    • So:
    If A is true _I is true valid
    If E is true_ O is true
     
    If I is true _ A is false valid
    If O is false _ E is false Illicit Su alternation
    If A is false _ I is undetermined invalid
    If E is false _O is undetermined
     
    If I is true _ A is undetermined invalid
    If O is true _E is undetermined
    • Note that whenever contrary, sub-contrary, and sub-alteration are
    used on propositions about things that do not actually exist, we
    commit existential fallacy.

    4.4 Conversion, obversion and contraposition


    A. Conversion
    • Simplest of the three.
    • Interchanging the place of S & P.
    • Accordingly, by conversion the four propositions look like the following.

    Letter Name Given Proposition New Statement by Conversion


    A All S are P All P are S
    E No S are P No P are S
    I Some S are P Some P are S
    O Some S are not P Some P are not S

    • E & I are identical in conversion.


    • A & O are illicit conversion.
     
    Example:

    Some men are people. -------- Some people are men. (T)
    No men are eternal------ no eternal are men. (T)
     
    B. Obversion
    • 1st change the quality
    • 2nd replacing the predicate with its complement.
    • Note that complement refers to a group of anything outside that
    class.
    Example . complement of “chairs” is “non -chairs”

    Accordingly, when we apply obversion the four propositions look


    like the following. Study the following tabular demonstration:
      Letter Name Given Proposition New Statement by Obversion

    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


    • All categorical proposition forms have the same truth value in
    obversion.
    • So, no illicit obversion.
    C. Contraposition
    • 1st replacing the ST with the complement of the PT.

    • 2nd replacing the PT with the complement of the ST.


    • Study the following table:
    Letter Name Give Proposition New Statement by Contraposition

    A All S are P All non-P are non-S

    E No S are P No non-P are non-S

    I Some S are P Some non-P are non-S

    O Some S are not P Some non-P are not non-S


    • From this we can see that A & O have identical Venn diagram
    with their contrapositions.

    • E & I are neither opposite nor identical. So, they are illicit in
    contraposition.
     

    You might also like