Argumentation and Advocacy

Argumentation and Advocacy

Problems

2. Some evergreens are objects of worship, because all fir trees are evergreens, and some objects

of worship are fir trees.

Step 1: “Some evergreens are objects of worship,” is the conclusion.

Step2: The predicate term of the conclusion is, “objects of worships,” hence, it is the primary term of a syllogism.

Step 3: “Some objects of worship are fir trees,” is the central premise that contains the primary term.

Step4: “All fir trees are evergreens,” is the minor premise since it covers the subject term of the conclusion.

Step 5: The standard form of the syllogism is:

Some objects of worships are fir trees.

All fir trees are evergreens.

Thus, some evergreens are objects of worship.

Step 6: In this syllogism, the three propositions are arranged in the order, I, A, and I. The central term, “fir trees,” is the predicate term of the fundamental premise, and it is the subject term of the minor premise. Therefore, the syllogism is in the fourth figure. IAI-4 is the mood and figure of the syllogism.

3. All artificial satellites are important scientific achievements; therefore, some important

scientific achievements are not U.S. inventions, in as much as some artificial satellites are not U.S. inventions.

Step 1: “some important scientific achievements are not U.S. inventions,” is the conclusion

Step 2: “U.S. inventions” is the predicate term of the conclusion. Therefore, it is the leading term of this syllogism

Step 3: “Some artificial satellites are not U.S. inventions,” is the central premise

Step 4: “All artificial satellites are important scientific achievements,” is the minor premise since it contains the subject term of the conclusion.

Step 5: This syllogism in standard form is written as:

Some artificial satellites are not U.S. inventions.

All artificial satellites are important scientific inventions.

Hence, some remarkable scientific achievements are not U.S. inventions.

Step 6. The three propositions in this syllogism are in the order, O, A, and O. The middle term, “artificial satellite,” is the subject of both premises. Therefore, the syllogism is in the third figure, OAO-3

4. No television stars are certified public accountants, but all certified public accountants are

people of good business sense; it follows that no television stars are people of good business

sense.

Step 1: The conclusion in this syllogism is, “no television stars are people of good business

sense.”

Step 2: The predicate term of the conclusion is, “people of good business sense,” thus, the critical term of the syllogism.

Step 3: “All certified public accountants are people of good business sense” is the central premise that contains the main term.

Step 4: The outstanding premise, “no television stars are certified public accountants,” is the minor premises. This is because it contains the subject term.

Step 5: The syllogism in standard form is written as:

All certified public accountants are people of good business sense.

No television stars are certified public accountants.

So, there are no television stars with good business sense.

Step 6: In this syllogism, the three propositions are arranged in the order, A, E, and E. The middle term, “television,” is the subject of both premises; hence the syllogism is in the fourth figure. The mood and figure of the syllogism is, AOO-4

5. Some conservatives are not advocates of high tariff rates, because all advocates of high tariff

rates are Republicans, and some Republicans are not conservatives.

Step 1: The conclusion is, “Some conservatives are not advocates of high tariff rates,”

Step 2: “Advocates of high tariff rates,” is the predicate hence the major term of the syllogism.

Step 3: The major premise, the premise that comprises this term, is “all advocates of high tariff

rates are Republicans.”

Step 4: The outstanding premise, “some Republicans are not conservatives,” is the minor premises, since it contains the subject term of the conclusion, “conservatives.”

Step 5: The standard form of this syllogism is:

All advocates of high tariff rates are Republicans.

Some Republicans are not conservatives.

Therefore, some conservatives are not advocates of high tariff rates.

Step 6: The three propositions in this syllogism are in the order, A, O, and O. The central term, “Republicans,” is the predicate term of the fundamental premise and subject to the minor premise. Therefore, the syllogism is in the fourth figure. The mood and figure of this syllogism are AOO-4.

6. All CD players are delicate mechanisms, but no delicate mechanisms are suitable toys for

children; consequently, no CD players are suitable toys for children.

Step 1: The conclusion here is, “no CD players are suitable toys for children.”

Step 2: The predicate term of the conclusion is “suitable toys for children,” thus the leading term of this syllogism.

Step 3: “No delicate mechanisms are suitable toys for children;” is the central premise.

Step 4: “All CD players are delicate mechanisms,” is the minor premises.

Step 5: In standard form, this syllogism is written,

No delicate mechanisms are suitable toys for children; consequently.

All CD players are delicate mechanisms.

Then, no CD players are suitable for children.

Step 6: The three propositions of this syllogism are in order, E, A, and E. The central term, “delicate mechanisms,” is a subject term of the major and the predicate term of the minor premise; hence it is in the first figure. The figure and mood are, AEE-1

7. All juvenile delinquents are maladjusted individuals, and some juvenile delinquents are

products of broken homes; hence some maladjusted individuals are products of broken homes.

Step 1: “some maladjusted individuals are products of broken homes,” is the conclusion.

Step 2: The predicate term of this conclusion is, “products of broken homes;” hence the significant term of this syllogism.

Step 3: “Some juvenile delinquents are products of broken homes,” is the central premise that contains this term.

Step 4: The minor premise is, “all juvenile delinquents are maladjusted individuals.”

Step 5: In standard form, this syllogism is written as:

Some juvenile delinquents are products of broken homes.

All juvenile delinquents are maladjusted individuals.

Therefore, some maladjusted individuals are products of broken homes.

Step 6: In this syllogism, the three propositions are written in the order, I, A, and I. The middle term, “juvenile delinquents,” is subject to both terms; hence it is in the third figure. The mood and figure of this syllogism are IAI-3.

8. No stubborn individuals who never admit a mistake are good teachers, so, because some well-

informed people are stubborn individuals who never admit a mistake, some good teachers are not

well-informed people.

Step 1: The conclusion is, “some good teachers are not well-informed people.”

Step 2: “Well-informed people” is the predicate term of this syllogism; therefore, its primary term.

Step 3: The major premise is, “some well-informed people are stubborn individuals who never admit a mistake.”

Step 4: “No stubborn individuals who never admit a mistake are good teachers,” is the minor premise.

Step 5: The standard form of this syllogism is:

Some well-informed people are stubborn individuals who never admit a mistake.

No stubborn individuals who never admit a mistake are good teachers.

Therefore, some good teachers are not well-informed people.

Step 6: In this syllogism, the three propositions are in order, I, E, and O. The middle term, “stubborn individuals,” is the predicate term of the major premise and is the minor premise of the small term. Therefore, the syllogism is in the fourth figure. The mood and figure of the syllogism are IEO-4.

9. All proteins are organic compounds; hence all enzymes are proteins, as all enzymes are

organic compounds.

Step 1: “All enzymes are proteins,” is the conclusion.

Step 2: “Proteins,” is the predicate term; hence the dominant term of the syllogism.

Step 3: The major premise is, “all proteins are organic compounds.”

Step 4: The minor premise is, “all enzymes are organic compounds.”

Step 5: The standard form of this syllogism is written hence:

All proteins are organic compounds.

All enzymes are organic compounds.

Therefore, all enzymes are proteins.

Step 6: The three propositions are arranged in the order, A, A, and A. The middle term, “enzymes, |” is the predicate term of both premises; hence it is in the second figure. The mood and figure of this syllogism is AAA-2

10. No sports cars are vehicles intended to be driven at moderate speeds. Still, all automobiles

designed for family use are vehicles designed to be driven at moderate speeds, from which it

follows that no sports cars are automobiles designed for family use.

Step 1: The conclusion is, “no sports cars are automobiles designed for family use.”

Step 2: “Automobiles designed for family use” is the predicate term of this syllogism hence the dominant name.

Step 3: The major premise is, “all automobiles designed for family use are vehicles intended to be driven at moderate speeds.”

Step 4: The remaining premise, “no sports cars are vehicles intended to be driven at moderate speeds, |” is the minor premise since it contains the subject term of the conclusion.

Step 5: In standard form, this syllogism is written:

All automobiles designed for family use are vehicles intended to be driven at moderate speeds.

No sports cars are vehicles intended to be driven at moderate speeds.

Thus, no sports cars are automobiles designed for family use.

Step 6: The three propositions are arranged in the order, A, E, and E. The middle term, “sports cars,” is the predicate term of both premises; hence it is in the second figure. The mood and figure of this syllogism are AEE-2.

Problems

2. EIO–2

The given syllogism is in the second figure; hence the middle term is the predicate of both premises. Therefore, it reads:

No P is M; some M is S; hence S is not P.

3. OAO–3

In this syllogism, the middle term is the subject of both premises; thus, it is in the third figure. Therefore, it is written as:

Some P is not M, all S is P, and no S is M.

4. AOO–4

This syllogism is in the fourth figure; hence, the middle term is the predicate of the major premise and the subject of the minor premise. It is written as:

All P is M, some P is not M, and some P is not M.

5. EIO–4

In this syllogism, the middle term is the predicate term of the major premise and the subject to the minor proposition; thus, it is in the fourth figure. It is therefore written as;

No P is M, some M is S, and some S is not P.

Problems

1. Some reformers are fanatics, so some idealists are fanatics because all reformers are idealists.

Some reformers are all fanatics.

All reformers are idealists.

Therefore, some idealists are fanatics.

The mood and figure of this syllogism is IAI-3

2. Some philosophers are mathematicians; hence some scientists are philosophers because all

scientists are mathematicians.

Some philosophers are mathematicians.

All scientists are mathematicians.

Therefore, some scientists are philosophers.

The mood and figure include; IAI-1

3. Some mammals are not horses, for no horses are centaurs, and all centaurs are mammals.

Some mammals are not horses.

All centaurs are mammals.

Hence, no horses are centaurs.

The mood and figure are, OAE-4

4. Some neurotics are not parasites, but all criminals are parasites; it follows that some neurotics

are not criminals.

All criminals are parasites.

Some neurotics are not criminals.

Thus, some neurotics are not parasites.

The mood and figure of this syllogism is AOO-2

5. All underwater craft are submarines; therefore, no submarines are pleasure vessels, because no

pleasure vessels are underwater craft.

All underwater craft are submarines.

No pleasure vessels are underwater craft.

Therefore, no submarines are pleasure vessels.

The mood and figure are AEE-3

Problems

2. All inventors are people who see new patterns in familiar things, so all inventors are

eccentrics, because all eccentrics are people who see new patterns in familiar things.

In this syllogism, the conclusion, “all inventors are eccentrics,” is valid since it consists of two premises. The middle term, “all inventors are people who see new patterns in familiar things,’ commits a fallacy hence breaks rule 2. Therefore, this syllogism is invalid.

3. Some snakes are not dangerous animals, but all snakes are reptiles; therefore some dangerous

animals are not reptiles.

This syllogism is valid since it has a contrary conclusion, “some dangerous

animals are not reptiles.” The end contains both a harmful premise and an affirmative premise.

4. Some foods that contain iron are toxic substances, for all fish containing mercury are foods

that contain iron, and all fish containing mercury are poisonous substances.

The conclusion, “all fish containing mercury are toxic substances,” confirms that all statements are affirmative. All statements are correct; thus, none of them is negative, thereby committing a fallacy of drawing any conclusion.

5. All opponents of basic economic and political changes are outspoken critics of the liberal

leaders of Congress, and all right-wing extremists are opponents of basic economic and political

changes. It follows that all outspoken critics of the liberal leaders of Congress are right-wing

extremists.

In this syllogism, the conclusion, “all outspoken critics of the liberal leaders of Congress are right-wing extremists,” breaks the rule that states that any term which is dispersed in the end must also be dispersed in the premise. Therefore, the syllogism commits a fallacy of illicit minor; thereby, it is invalid.

6. No writers of lewd and sensational articles are honest and decent citizens, but some journalists

are not writers of lewd and sensational articles; consequently, some journalists are honest and

decent citizens.

This syllogism contains negative premises and a negative premise with an affirmative conclusion, “some journalists are honest and decent citizens.” Thereby, committing a fallacy of private premises hence, invalid.

7. All supporters of popular government are democrats, so all supporters of popular government

are opponents of the Republican Party, since all Democrats are opponents of the

Republican Party.

In this syllogism, the conclusion contains a harmful premise that does not draw up a conclusion. Thereby it commits a fallacy of illicit minor; thus, it is invalid.

8. No coal-tar derivatives are nourishing foods, because all artificial dyes are coal-tar derivatives,

and no artificial dyes are nourishing foods.

This syllogism commits a fallacy of drawing a contrary conclusion from an affirmative premise. Therefore, it is invalid.

9. No coal-tar derivatives are nourishing foods, because no coal-tar derivatives are natural grain

products, and all-natural grain products are feeding foods.

Here, the syllogism commits a fallacy of drawing an affirmative conclusion from a harmful premise; hence it is invalid.

10. All the people who live in London are people who drink tea, and all the people who drink tea are

people who like it. We may conclude, then that all people who live in London are people who

like it.

The conclusion of this syllogism is contrary, “all people who live in London are people who drink tea.” One of the premises is affirmative, “all people who drink tea are people who like it.” Therefore, the syllogism is invalid since it violates the rule that states if either premise is harmful, the conclusion must be contrary. Thereby, it commits a fallacy of drawing an affirmative conclusion from a negative proposition.