HOME TABLE OF CONTENTS

PDF
2. 5 Venn Di agrams
In this section, we study how to use Venn diagrams to determine the validity of a categorical
syllogism.
2.5.1 Basic Setup for Venn Diagrams
In using Venn diagrams to determine the validity of a categorical syllogism, we draw three
overlapping circles to represent the minor, middle and major terms. The three circles are divided
into seven areas.

A categorical syllogism is valid if its two premises together imply the conclusion. That is, if the two
premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. Visually in terms of Venn diagrams, this
means that if we combine the basic diagrams of the two premises, we would get the basic diagram
of the conclusion. To combine the basic diagrams of the premises, we place them on top of the three
overlapping circles.
For example, to determine whether the form AOO-2 is valid, we first place the Venn diagram of the
major premise, the blue pair of circles, on top of the three circles. Next, we place the Venn diagram
of the minor premise, the green pair, on top of the three circles. Click on the play button to view the
illustration.
I L O G I C
Venn Diagrams
1 of 19

The animation shows how the blue pair and the green pair are placed on top of the three circles.
Now click the above play button again to see the resulting diagram in black and white.
Next, we try to see if the Venn diagram of the conclusion, the red pair, is already present in the
completed diagram. If it is, the argument form is valid; if not, then it is invalid. Click on the play
button of the next illustration. You will see that a portion of the Venn diagram gradually turns red
to illustrate that the red pair is already there in the diagram. This shows that we get the red pair
from the blue and the green pairs. This in turn means that we have derived the conclusion from the
two premises. As a result, the argument form AOO-2 is valid. Notice we did not superimpose the
red pair on the three circles.

2.5.2 Rules for Venn Diagrams
We can also view drawing Venn diagrams as a matter of shading some areas and placing Xs within
the three circles. In the above example, the Venn diagram for the argument form AOO-2 is
completed by shading Area 6 and Area 7, and placing an X in Area 5. Superimposing the blue and
the green pairs over the three circles is an easy way to see which areas are shaded and where the X
Venn Diagrams
2 of 19
is placed. But to draw Venn Diagrams accurately we need to follow the following two important
rules:
1. Shading always goes before placing an X.
2. If one of the two areas in which an X should be placed is shaded, place the X in the
other area that is not shaded. If none of the two areas are shaded, put the X on the
line between the two areas.
A shaded area means that the area is empty, and no X can be in the area. This is why shading is
done first to determine which areas are empty. Placing an X on the line between two unshaded
areas means that all we know is that the X is in either of the two areas, but we do not know for sure
which one.
Use the following interactive illustration to become familiar with these two rules.

You will also learn more about how to apply these two rules by going over examples. Let us first
look at the argument form EAE-1.

Venn Diagrams
3 of 19
From the animation, we can see that after shading Area 3 and Area 4 according to the blue pair,
and shading Area 5 and Area 6 based on the green pair, the Venn diagram of the conclusion is
already present in the three circles, as shown by the part of drawing gradually highlighted in red.
Since the diagram in red matches the red pair, the form EAE-1 is valid.
In the next form EAE-3,

the part of the diagram in the three circles that is highlighted in red does not match the red pair.
This means that the conclusion may not be true given that the premises are true. Consequently, the
form is invalid.
The form AAA-1 is one of the most commonly used form in Categorical Logic. The Venn diagram
clearly shows that it is valid.

The next few examples illustrate how to apply the two rules when drawing the Venn Diagram.
Venn Diagrams
4 of 19

In the form OAO-3, we have a pair with a shaded area and another pair with an X. According to
Rule #1, we need to draw the shading first. This is why we start with the green pair. We do the
shading first to find out which of the seven areas are empty. In this case, we know after the shading
that Area 1 and Area 4 are empty. This tells us that we cannot place the blue X (that is, the X in the
blue pair) in these two areas. To find out where to put the blue X, we first recognize that it is inside
the area of the blue pair (from now on, we will call the area Blue for short). In the three circles,
Blue amounts to Area 1 and Area 2. But according to Rule #2, since Area 1 is shaded, X has to be
placed in Area 2. This is why in the animation, the blue X shows up in Area 2. As a result, the part
highlighted in red matches the red pair (that is, we have an X in Red ). So the form is valid.
In the next example, to decide whether the form AII-1 is valid, we start with the blue pair because it
is the pair with a shaded area.

After the shading, we know that Area 1 and Area 2 are empty. The green X is inside the area (that
is, Green ). In the three circles, Green is equivalent to Area 2 and Area 3. Since Area 2 is shaded,
we have to place X in Area 3. Consequently, the red pair is present in the three circles (that is, we
have an X in Red ), and the form is thus valid.
Venn Diagrams
5 of 19
Now, compare AII-1 with the form AII-2.

Since neither Area 2 nor Area 3 is shaded, according to Rule #2, X needs to be placed on the line
between the two areas. The resulting drawing highlighted in red does not match the red pairwe
do not have an X in Red . This tells us that AII-2 is invalid.
If both of the premises of a categorical syllogism are particular sentences (that is, either I or O
statements), then there is no shading in the Venn diagram.

The Blue is equivalent to Area 3 and Area 4 of the three circles. So the blue X needs to be placed
on the line between these two areas. The Green is equivalent to Area 2 and Area 3, and the green
X should be placed on the line between them. The resulting diagram shows that we have two Xs on
the lines, but not in Red (Area 3 and Area 6 combined). So the form is invalid.
2.5.3 Conditional Validity
Venn Diagrams
6 of 19
Some categorical syllogisms with two universal sentences (i.e., A or E sentences) as premises, but a
particular sentence (i.e., an I or O sentence) as the conclusion are conditionally valid. They are
valid if a certain set is not empty. For example, the form AAI-1 and EAO-3 are conditionally valid.

After the shading is done, notice that in the circle S, three out of four areas (that is Area 2, 5 and 6)
are shaded and only Area 3 remains unshaded. Now if the set S is not empty, this would mean that
Area 3 cannot be empty. So under the condition that S is not empty we can infer that Area 3 cannot
be empty. Consequently, we can place an X in Area 3. (I use a brown X to show that this X does not
come from the blue and the green pairs.) As a result, the part of the diagram in red matches the red
pair, and the form AAI-1 is valid if the set S is not empty (S ).
In the form EAO-3,

after the blue and the green pairs are superimposed on the three circles we can see that in the circle
M three areas (Area 1, 3 and 4) are shaded. Now if the set M is not empty, then Area 2 cannot be
empty. We indicate this by placing a brown X in Area 2. The resulting diagram highlighted in red
matches the red pair, and the form is valid if M .
Venn Diagrams
7 of 19
The form AEO-3 also has two universal sentences as premises, but a particular sentence as the
conclusion. So we need to check to see if it is conditionally valid.

If the set M is not empty, then Area 4 cannot be empty. However, even after we place a brown X in
Area 4, the resulting diagram highlighted in red does not match the red pair. So the form is simply
invalid.
2.5.4 Evaluating Categorical Syllogisms
In section 2.4, we learned how to turn a categorical syllogism into the standard form. In this
section, we have learned how to use the Venn Diagram to determine if a standard form is valid or
not. By combining these two sections, we have a process that enables us to assess the validity of
categorical syllogisms written in everyday language. Here is an example that shows how the whole
process works.
Some voter-approved propositions are not constitutional. All laws that are
unconstitutional should be overturned. So some voter-approved propositions should be
over-turned. (V: voter-approved propositions, C: laws that are constitutional, O: laws
that should be overturned)
First of all, we paraphrase the argument as
All non-C are O.
Some V are not C.
Some V are O.
We then reduce the number of terms to three by applying obversion to the minor premise.
Venn Diagrams
8 of 19
All non-C are O. All non-C are O.
Some V are not C. Obv. Some V are non-C.
Some V are O. Some V are O.
The resulting standard form is AII-1. To determine its validity, we draw the Venn Diagram. Notice
that the minor term is V, the major term is O and the middle term is non-C.
The diagram shows that AII-1 is valid. After completing the whole process, we find out that the
written argument is valid.
We saw in section 2.4 that some sentences need to be paraphrased as two categorical sentences.
Arguments contain such sentences need to be evaluated using two forms. In the next example
Few politicians are not spin doctors. All spin doctors are untrustworthy. Therefore, not
all politicians are trustworthy. (P: politicians, S: spin doctors, T: people who are
trustworthy)
The sentence
Few politicians are not spin doctors.
needs to be paraphrased as
Some politicians are not spin doctors, but most politicians are spin doctors.
Recall that we cannot use the quantifier most, so we need to replace it with some. We thus end
up with the sentence
Some politicians are not spin doctors, but some politicians are spin doctors.
After paraphrasing all the sentences we have the argument form:
Venn Diagrams
9 of 19
All S are non-T.
Some P are not S and some P are S.
Some P are not T.
If we write Some P are not S and some P are S as two sentences, the form would then looks like
this:
All S are non-T.
Some P are not S.
Some P are S.
Some P are not T.
The argument form has three premises. To decide whether it is valid we need to break it apart as
two argument forms:
All S are non-T. All S are non-T.
Some P are not S. and Some P are S.
Some P are not T. Some P are not T.
We then reduce the number of terms to three and get two standard forms:
All S are non-T. Obv. No S are T.
Some P are not S. Some P are not S.
Some P are not T. Some P are not T.
EOO-1
and
All S are non-T. Obv. No S are T.
Some P are S. Some P are S.
Some P are not T. Some P are not T.
EIO-1
The Venn Diagram of EOO-1 tells us that it is invalid.
Venn Diagrams
10 of 19
But the drawing shows that EIO-1 is valid.
This means that the original argument is valid because we can get EIO-1 from the original
argument by simply tossing out the second premise.
All S are non-T. Obv. No S are T.
Some P are not S.
Some P are S. Some P are S.
Some P are not T. Some P are not T.
Exercise 2.5
I. Use the Venn Diagram to determine whether the categorical syllogism is valid, conditionally
valid or invalid.
1.
Venn Diagrams
11 of 19

2.

3.

4.
Venn Diagrams
12 of 19

5.

6.

Venn Diagrams
13 of 19
II. Decide the validity of the following syllogisms. You need to (1) identify the mood and figure;
(2) draw Venn Diagrams; (3) determine whether the syllogism is valid, conditionally valid or
invalid.
1.
All P are M.
No M are S.

2.
Some P are not M.
All M are S.

No S are P. Some S are not P.
3.
No P are M.
All M are S.

4.
All P are M.
All S are M.

No S are P. All S are P.
5.
No M are P.
No M are S.

6.
Some P are M.
All M are S.

No S are P. Some S are P.
Venn Diagrams
14 of 19
7.
Some P are M.
All S are M.

8.
All P are M.
Some S are not M.

Some S are P. Some S are not P.
9.
All P are M.
Some M are S.

10.
Some P are not M.
Some M are S.

Some S are P. Some S are not P.
Venn Diagrams
15 of 19
11. No P are M.
Some M are S.

12. All P are M.
All M are S.

Some S are not P. All S are P.
13.
Some M are P.
No M are S.

14.
Some M are not P.
All S are M.

Some S are not P. Some S are not P.
15.
Some P are M.
Some S are not M.

16.
Some P are not M.
No M are S.

Some S are P. Some S are not P.
Venn Diagrams
16 of 19
17.
All P are M.
All M are S.

18.
All P are M.
All S are M.

Some S are P. Some S are P.
19.
No P are M.
All M are S.

20.
All P are M.
No M are S.

Some S are not P. Some S are not P.
Venn Diagrams
17 of 19
III. Use Venn Diagrams to determine whether the following syllogisms are valid or invalid. You
need to (1) paraphrase the argument into the standard categorical argument form using the
capital letters provided; if necessary, reduce the number of terms and indicate the operation
(s) used; (2) identify the mood and figure; (3) draw the Venn Diagram; (4) decide whether the
syllogism is valid, conditionally valid or invalid.
Example:
All reasonable people are fair-minded. Only people who are against favoritism are fair-
minded. Therefore, people who are not against favoritism are unreasonable. (R:
reasonable people, F: fair-minded people, A: people who are against favoritism)
1. Beliefs in magic are at odds with the laws of nature. Beliefs that are at odds with the laws of
nature are superstitions. Therefore, beliefs in magic are superstitions. (M: beliefs in magic,
O: beliefs that are at odds with the laws of nature, S: superstitions)
2. Whatever is immoral should be illegal. Whatever is obscene is not moral. Therefore,
whatever is obscene should not be legal. (M: things that are moral, L: things that should be
legal, O: things that are obscene)
3. Only drugs approved by FDA are safe. Unsafe drugs should be recalled. So some drugs
approved by FDA should be recalled. (D: drugs approved by FDA, S: safe drugs, R: drugs
that should be recalled)
4. Some genetically altered foods can cause allergic reactions. Not all foods that can cause
allergic reactions should be banned. So some genetically altered foods should not be
banned. (G: genetically altered foods, R: foods that can cause allergic reactions, B: foods
that should be banned)
5. All M-rated video games are unsuitable for young kids. No video games that are gory are
suitable for young kids. It follows that many M-rated video games are gory. (M: M-rated
video games, S: games suitable for young kids, G: gory games)
Venn Diagrams
18 of 19
6. Not all eyewitnesses testimonies are reliable. All unreliable testimonies should be
inadmissible in court. Therefore, some eyewitnesses testimonies should not be admissible
in court. (E: eyewitnesses testimonies, R: reliable testimonies, A: evidence that should be
admissible in court)
7. All but those who cannot empathize with others are reasonable people. The only reasonable
people are open-minded people. Therefore, all people who can empathize with others are
open-minded. (E: people who can empathize with others, R: reasonable people, O: open-
minded people)
8. Only gamblers are stock investors. Some stock investors are adverse to risk-taking. It
follows that some gamblers are not adverse to risk-taking. (G: gamblers, S: stock investors,
A: people who are adverse to risk-taking)
9. Few drugs are without side effects. Drugs with side effects should be taken with cautions.
So many drugs should be taken with cautions. (D: drugs, S: drugs with side effects, C:
things that should be taken with cautions)
10. Not all Democrats are fiscal liberals. Only fiscal liberals support universal health care. It
follows that some Democrats do not support universal health care. (D: Democrats, F: fiscal
liberals, S: supporters of universal health care)


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works
3.0 United States License.
PREVIOUSNEXT
Venn Diagrams
19 of 19