LOGIC: FUNDAMENTALS

BY: ADEWALE, SIKIRU AKINPELU1

INTRODUCTION: Philosophy, like a big tree, has a lot of divisions, sub-divisions, sub-

subdivisions, etc. It is divided into two main branches: Practical Philosophy and

Speculative/Theoretical Philosophy. Practical Philosophy is subdivided into Ethics and Logic.

Logic is further subdivided into Informal Logic and Formal Logic. Formal Logic is also further

subdivided into Logic of Propositions, Methodology, Logic of Terms, Meta Logic, Logic of

Class, Logic proper / Mathematical Logic, Logic of Relations, Philosophical Logic, Modal

Logic, Computational Logic and Non-Classical Logics. Each of these subdivisions are also

further divided. Logic belongs to the Practical Philosophy because it is a tool used to direct the

reasoning. The scope of logic includes classification of arguments, study of inference, fallacies,

study of semantics, and paradoxes.

EVOLUTION, DEFINITIONS AND SCOPE OF LOGIC: Etymologically, Logic is derived

from Logike, logos, Greek words meaning thought or reason. Therefore, logic refers to

reasoning. Logic consists of systematic study of rational justification or reasons for arguments.

In other words, logic, rather than the study of human mind, is the study of the methods and

principles used in making difference between correct and incorrect arguments. Logic teaches us

how to think and reason correctly, it enables us to reach true and certain conclusions. Logic is

studied in philosophy, mathematics, computer science, linguistics, psychology, and other fields.

Logic is the science of the laws of thought or the science of reasoning.2 Logic is development of

a system of methods and principles used as criteria for evaluating the arguments of others and as

guides in constructing arguments of our own3. Logic is the study of the methods and principles

1
LECTURER, FACULTY OF LAW, ADELEKE UNIVERSITY, EDE, OSUN STATE
2
Irving Copi 1968. Introduction to Logic. London: Macmillan
3
Neneye, E. P. 2003. Introduction to Logic and Philosophy. Owerri: Prosperity Publishers

1
used in distinguishing good (correct) from bad (incorrect) reasoning. Logic is an attempt to

distinguish between correct (valid) and incorrect (invalid) arguments4. Logic is the art directing

the act of reason, through which man may proceed in the act of reason itself in an orderly

fashion without error5. Logic is the science that appraises reasoning as correct or incorrect”6.

Logic is the systematic study of the classes of arguments. Logic is the science of good or bad

reasoning. Using simple words, logic is the study of reasoning and argument. An argument

consists of a series of statements (called premises) which are meant to establish a proposition

(called conclusion). For example:

All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrated their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

Logic is a formal science because sound reasoning, which is a feature of logic, is important in all

sciences, social sciences and humanities. Logic is concerned with argument, critical thinking,

and reasoning. Logic teaches how to reason better. Logic is an important area of Philosophy.

Logic is to Philosophy what Mathematics is to the sciences. Logic is also the background of

Mathematics. There is no way you can study Philosophy, Mathematics, Sciences, etc without

reasoning and constructing arguments correctly. That is why logic is important to all human

disciplines and studies. Logic is the queen of all disciplines and no scientist, historian, lawyer,

engineer, etc. can afford to present his/her work in a disorderly manner and expect to be taken

seriously because to be logical means to be orderly.7

PURPOSE OF STUDYING LOGIC: Perhaps the most important thing to give to your child

to prepare him to confront this world is a firm grasp of logical thinking skills. Without this skill

– the ability to reason correctly – his thinking is not firmly anchored, but is “tossed to and fro,

4
Kahane, H. 1968. Logic and Philosophy. California: Wadsworth
5
Thomas Aquinas
6
Wesley, Salmon. 1984. Logic. 3rd edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
7
Layman, C. S. 2000. The Power of Logic. 2nd edition. New York: McGraw Hill

2
and carried about with every wind of doctrine.”8 A student who can logically understand what

he believes will hold fast to the truth and will be able to defend it throughout his life. Logic is

necessary to analyze other people’s beliefs. Logical fallacies are everywhere in our society. If a

student cannot detect the logical mistakes he hears, then hoe will he discern who is right? Logic

is necessary to understand and communicate our own beliefs. The study of logic will give the

students life-long skill in proper reasoning. Therefore, the study of logic is considered

indispensable to every university student. Logic is concerned with the validity of arguments.

Logic is the scientific study of valid argument. Philosophy is all about arguments and reasoning.

Logic allows us to test validity rigorously. Logic is used in linguistics, mathematics, computer

science etc. Logic helps us make fine-grained conceptual distinctions.

STRUCTURE OF LOGIC: This is also referred to as Logical Processes. The structure of

logic is to enable you to know how you talk and what you are talking about. The structure of

logic has three elements: simple apprehension; judgment; reasoning and argument. Simple

apprehension is the act of the mind by which we grasp the essence of a thing. It is the mental

image which is created by the mind on the process of conceiving the object. Simple

apprehension is attained through the process of abstraction9. Simple apprehension is the act of

perceiving an object intellectually, without affirming or denying anything concerning it, e.g. “I

saw a man” This is a simple apprehension because I have not deny or affirm or qualify the man.

Simple apprehension produces concept or an idea.

Judgment is the act of the mind by which we compare two concepts and declare them to be

either in agreement or disagreement with each other. In logic, a judgment may be defined as an

act of the mind affirming or denying the agreement of two objective ideas. The mind in judging

compares two ides, and consequently the objects represented by those ideas, and affirms or

denies that they agree with one another; eg . The man I saw was fat” by this sentence then I

8
Harvey Bluedorrn, Why Study Logic?
9
Abstraction is the mental process whereby the mind separates the essential features of an object from the non-essential ones
3
have made a judgment by affirming the “fatness” of the man. A judgment expressed in words is

called a Proposition. Thus, judgment produces the proposition, which is a statement expressing

the truth. Reasoning and argument it the act of the mind by which we derive new truths from

what is previously assumed to be true.

SOME VOCABULARY RELATED TO LOGIC: It is helpful to know some important

logic’s vocabulary and distinguish between them and related terms and concepts. Some of them

are the following:

1. PROPOSITION OR STATEMENT: The two terms are used synonymously in logic.

The term proposition is a particular kind of sentence, one which affirms or denies a predicate of

a subject. In logic, there are differences between a statement and a sentence: a statement is a part

of sentence but a sentence is not part of a statement. A sentence is a group of words expressing

a statement, a question or a command. A sentence expressing a statement (without being a

question or a command) is a sentence. However, every sentence is not a statement. A sentence

expressing question or command is not a statement or proposition. A statement / proposition is a

sentence can either be denied or asserted, eg

i. Biola is wise

ii. Promise is a debt

iii. Their marriage is valid.

For example, the sentence “Biola is wise” can be denied (No, Biola is not wise) and it can also

be asserted (Yes, Biola is wise).

2. PREMISE: Premise is a proposition upon which an argument is based or from which a

conclusion is drawn. A premise is a proposition, within an argument, which provides support

for the conclusion of that argument. A premise is an assumption; this assumption is made for the

sake of argument. A premise is a proposition used as evidence in an argument, eg

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

4
 Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

3. PREMISE-INDICATORS: They are words and expression that begin or introduce the

premises in an argument, eg in as much as, for, since, as, because, for the reason that etc A

proposition following any of the indicators is a Premise eg

i. In as much as Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act, their marriage is

valid.

ii. Since Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult, he is disqualified from

gubernatorial election.

iii. Segelu has committed murder because Segelu killed Kris unlawfully.

4. CONCLUSION: Conclusion is a proposition, in an argument, that is deduced or arrived

at as a result of the information given by the premise(s). Conclusion is the logical result of the

relationship between the premises. Conclusion serves as the thesis of the argument. The

conclusion follows from the premises.

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

5
iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

iv. In as much as Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act, their marriage is

valid.

ii. Since Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult, he is disqualified from

gubernatorial election.

iii. Segelu has committed murder because Segelu killed Kris unlawfully.

Notice that conclusion does not necessarily mean the last proposition. The premise in an

argument can be the conclusion in another argument.

5. CONCLUSION-INDICATORS: They are words or expressions that begin or

introduce the conclusion within an argument, eg: therefore, so, thus, hence, consequently, we

may conclude, we may infer etc. A proposition that is begun with any of the indicators is a

conclusion, eg

i. Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act, therefore their marriage is

valid.

ii. Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult, so he is disqualified from gubernatorial

election.

iii. We may conclude that Segelu has committed murder because he killed Kris unlawfully.

6. SUBJECT TERM: Subject term is related to a Proposition (there is no subject term of

an argument or syllogism.). The Subject Term of a Premise is the Subject of the Statement eg

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

6
 Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

7. PREDICATE TERM: Predicate Term is also related with a Proposition. There is no

predicate term of an argument or syllogism. Predicate Term is the predicate of a Proposition eg

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

Notice that subject term and predicate term are used in reference to individual propositions -

whether a premise or a conclusion.

8. INFERENCE: Inference is a process of derivation of the conclusion. Inference is an act

of deriving the conclusion of an argument from the premises of that argument eg

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

In this argument, the Conclusion, their marriage is valid is derived from the 1st and 2nd premises

of the argument.

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

7
 Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

In this argument, the Conclusion, Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election is

derived from the 1st and 2nd premises of the argument.

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

In this argument, the Conclusion, Segelu has committed murder is derived from the 1st and 2nd

premises of the argument.

9. ARGUMENT: An Argument is a group of propositions whose function is to make a

claim about something. An argument has premises and conclusion. The conclusion of an

argument is inferred from the premises. An argument is always the smallest unit of

argumentation consisting of at least two propositions to form an argument. In such a case, only

one must be the premise while the other must be the conclusion. For example:

i. Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act, therefore their marriage is

valid.

ii. Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult, so he is disqualified from gubernatorial

election.

iii. We may conclude that Segelu has committed murder because he killed Kris unlawfully.

10. DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT: Argument are exhaustively of two kinds- deductive and

inductive. Deductive Argument is also called Deductive Logic, Symbolic Logic, or Formal

Logic. Deduction is a process through which the premises provide conclusive proof for the

conclusion. Arguments can be Deductive or Inductive. In Deductive Argument, the conclusion

of the minor premise is deduced from the major premise; i.e. a process where one argues from

the general to the particular. Deductive argument depends upon the formal or structural

relationship between the premises and the conclusion. It goes like this: it starts from a major

8
premise, and brings in a minor premise and from the two premises one makes their logical

conclusion.

i. Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act, therefore their marriage is

valid.

ii. Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult, so he is disqualified from gubernatorial

election.

iii. We may conclude that Segelu has committed murder because he killed Kris unlawfully.

11. INDUCTIVE ARGUMENT: Induction is a process through which the premises

provide some basis of probability for the conclusion. Inductive argument is a process whereby

we argue from the observed (the experienced, the known) to the unobserved (the inexperienced,

the unknown), concluding that some quality found to reside in all observed members of a class

must therefore reside in all members of it. It is a process of reasoning from particular situations

to a general proposition. Inductive Argument is an argument which is based on the fact that

there is at least some likelihood that the conclusion will be true given that the premises are true.

In an inductive argument, the premises do not lead to the conclusion with certainty but with

probability eg

i. Kemison always loses her temper, therefore she will get annoyed today.

Here always does not mean all the time, therefore, one cannot conclude with certainty that

Kemison will get annoyed today; she may be patient today.

ii. Prof Future will travel this week because he has been travelling every week.

Here, it is probably and not certainly that Prof Future will travel this week.

iii. My pregnant wife will give birth to a baby girl since all her children are girls.

iv. In the case of Donoghue v. Stevenson, a person who injured another man was asked to

pay damages to the injured - Premise

A similar position was held by the courts in the cases of Duke v. White & Sons;

Scarsbrook v. Mason, among others. - Premise

9
 Therefore, Shola should pay damages to Kunle for causing him injury – Conclusion

v. Peter Rufai is a Nigerian and is a good goalkeeper - Premise

Best Ogedegbe is a Nigerian and is a good goalkeeper -Premise

Vincent Enyeama is a Nigerian and is a good goalkeeper -Premise

Therefore, all Nigerians are good goalkeepers -Conclusion

12. SYLLOGISM: Syllogism is more than a preposition. Syllogism is an argument that

contains three propositions, two of which the premises and one the conclusion. No matter how

many premises are in an argument, it will have only one conclusion. The goal of syllogism is to

arrange premises so that only one true conclusion is possible, eg

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

13. ENTHYMEME: This is a shortened form of syllogism which omits the first premise

allowing the audience to fill it in, eg:

i. Biola and Ngozi’s marriage is valid because they celebrate their marriage under the Act.

(Here, the first premise, All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid, is

omitted)

ii. Since Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult, he is disqualified from

gubernatorial election.

iii. Segun has committed murder for he killed Kris unlawfully.

10
14. MAJOR TERM: Major, minor and middle terms are all parts of a syllogism or an

argument (and not a Proposition). The Predicate Term of the Conclusion is the Major Term of

the syllogism/argument eg

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

15. MINOR TERM: The Minor Term of an Argument/Syllogism is the Subject Term of

the Conclusion eg:

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

16. MIDDLE TERM: The Middle Term of an Argument/Syllogism is the term which

occurs in both premises but does not occur in Conclusion eg:

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

11
 Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

17. MAJOR PREMISE: This is the Premise that contains the Major Term of the

Argument/Syllogism eg.

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Major Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Major Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Premise

Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Major Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

18. MINOR PREMISE: The Minor Premise is the premise which contains the Minor Term

of the Conclusion.

i. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Major Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Minor Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

ii. A member of any secret cult is disqualified from gubernatorial election – Major Premise

Bobo Mekafo is a member of ‘eiye’ secret cult - Minor Premise

12
 Bobo Mekafo is disqualified from gubernatorial election - Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Major Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Minor Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

19. VALID ARGUMENT: An argument may be valid or invalid. A valid argument is the

one where the Conclusion is derived with certainty from the Premises. If the premises are true,

then the Conclusion must also be true. However, to make a valid argument, it is not necessary

that the Premises and the conclusion are true: what matters is that the Conclusion must be

derived from the Premises. An argument can still be valid even when all the premises are false

eg:

i. All Adeleke University students are truthful - Premise

Yemkem is a student of Adeleke University - Premise

Therefore, Yemkem is truthful. - Conclusion

ii. Every man is gentle. -Premise

Gbem is a man -Premise

Gbem is gentle. -Conclusion

iii. A person who kills a human being unlawfully has committed murder – Premise

Segelu killed Kris unlawfully - Premise

Segelu has committed murder - Conclusion

For a deductive argument to be valid, the conclusion must be derived with certainty from the

premises. Furthermore, validity is not a matter of degree- an argument either has it in full or

lacks it altogether. Therefore, one cannot say that one argument is more valid or less valid than

another. Validity is not a property of isolated proposition – premise or conclusion – so, one

cannot say a proposition is valid or invalid.

20. INVALID ARGUMENT: This is the opposite of valid argument. An Invalid Argument

is the argument whose Conclusion is not derived from the Premises. All the premises may be

13
true and yet the Argument is invalid. It is not necessary that if the premises are true, then the

conclusion must be true, eg:

i. Kemison always loses her temper, therefore she will get annoyed today.

ii. Prof Future will travel this week because he has been travelling every week.

iii. My pregnant wife will give birth to a baby girl since all her children are girls.

The words “true” or “false” are used to qualify propositions eg true/false proposition; the

words, “valid” or “invalid” are used to qualify arguments eg valid/invalid argument. An

inductive argument is one which is neither formally valid nor claimed to have validity as its

goal. Instead, it is claimed to be such that there is at least some likelihood that the conclusion

will be true, given the premises are true.

21 & 22. WEAK AND STRONG INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS: ‘Weak’ or ‘strong’ is

used to qualify an Inductive Arguments. The words strong and weak are used to indicate the

level, degree and strength of the probability contained in the conclusion eg:

i. Peter Rufai is a Nigerian and is a good goalkeeper - Premise

Best Ogedegbe is a Nigerian and is a good goalkeeper -Premise

Vincent Enyeama is a Nigerian and is a good goalkeeper -Premise

Therefore, all Nigerians are good goalkeepers -Conclusion

(WEAK INVALID ARGUMENT)

ii. In the case of Donoghue v. Stevenson, a person who injured another man was asked to

pay damages to the injured - Premise

A similar position was held by the courts in the cases of Duke v. White & Sons;

Scarsbrook v. Mason, among others. - Premise

Therefore, Shola should pay damages to Kunle for causing him injury – Conclusion

(STRONG INVALID ARGUMENT)

23 & 24. SOUND AND UNSOUND ARGUMENT: A Sound Argument is the argument

having all its premises true. An Unsound Argument is the argument having at least one false

14
premise. All invalid arguments are automatically unsound. Therefore, the words “sound” and

“unsound” only used to qualify a valid deductive argument and the words have nothing to do

with an invalid argument. It means that before an argument becomes sound or unsound, it must

first be valid eg.

i. All Adeleke University students are truthful - Premise

Yemkem is a student of Adeleke University - Premise

Therefore, Yemkem is truthful. - Conclusion

(UNSOUND VALID ARGUMENT)

ii. All marriages celebrated under the Marriage Act shall be valid. - Premise

Biola and Ngozi celebrate their marriage under the Act. - Premise

Therefore, their marriage is valid - Conclusion

(SOUND VALID ARGUMENT)

iii. Peter Rufai is a Nigerian and is a good goalkeeper - Premise

Best Ogedegbe is a Nigerian and is a good goalkeeper -Premise

Vincent Enyeama is a Nigerian and is a good goalkeeper -Premise

Therefore, all Nigerians are good goalkeepers -Conclusion

(INVALID ARGUMENT)

CONCLUSION: Given an argument, we want to know if the argument is valid; does the

conclusion follow logically from the premises? Is the conclusion a logical consequence of the

premises? To provide a clear analysis of the logical concepts of ‘validity’ and ‘logical

consequence’, and to provide methods of classifying arguments as valid, invalid, sound,

unsound, weak and strong is the central task of logic. The foregoing are the fundamentals of

logic.

EXERCISE:

15
1. Etymologically, logic was from ……….. meaning ……………..

2. In logic, any argument must have ………………… and ……………..; and

……………… must follow ………………….

3. In logic, argument is …………….. when the conclusion follows from its premises; and

is ……………….. when premises do not lead to the conclusion.

4. In logic, ……………. is the process of moving from the specific to the general; and

……………. is the process if moving from the general to the specific.

5. In logic, ………………..is based on probability; and ……………….. is based on

certainty.

6. Give one example of deductive argument:

7. Give one example of inductive argument:

8. Why do we study logic?

9. …………… is the queen of all disciplines.

10. State whether each of the following is SENTENCE or STATEMENTS:

i. It is not the case that Dr Tolulowo …………………………..

ii. Either a tall man or a short lady ………………………….

iii. The colour is white ……………………………

SUGGESTED READING:

Chinenye, E and Ochulor, L. 2002. Introduction to Logic. Calabar: Darl-Bassy Press

Copi, I. M., 1968. Introduction to Logic. London: Macmillan

Kahane, H. 1973. Logic and Philosophy -A Modern Introduction. 2nd edition. California:

Wadsworth

Kahane, H. 1968. Logic and Philosophy. California: Wadsworth

Layman, C. S. 2000. The Power of Logic. 2nd edition. New York: McGraw Hill

16
Minimah F. and Inoka, V. 1997. A Concise Introduction to Philosophy and Logic. Ikot Ekpene:

Belpot

Neneye, E. P. 2003. Introduction to Logic and Philosophy. Owerri: Prosperity Publishers

O’Connor, D. J. and Powell, B. 1980. Elementary Logic. London: Hodder

Stebbing L.S. 1993. A Modern Introduction to Logic. London: Methuen

Wesley, Salmon. 1984. Logic. 3rd edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

17