CHAPTER TWO

BASIC CONCEPTS OF LOGIC

Introduction

The term "logic" came from the Greek word “logos”, which is sometimes translated as "sentence",
"discourse", "reason", "rule", or "ratio". Of course, these translations are not enough to help us
understand the more specialized meaning of "logic" as it is used today.

So what is logic?

Logic may be defined as the science that evaluates arguments. It can also be defined as “the study and
formulation of the principles of right reasoning”. The most immediate benefit derived from the study
of logic is the skill needed to construct sound arguments of one’s own and to evaluate the arguments of
others. In accomplishing this goal, logic instills a sensitivity for the formal component in language, a
thorough command of which is indispensible to clear, effective and meaningful communication.
Among the benefits expected from the study of logic is an increase in self confidence that we are
making sense when we criticize the arguments of others and when we advance arguments of our own.

On a broader scale, by focusing attention on the requirement for reasons or evidences to support our
views, logic provides a fundamental defense against the prejudiced and uncivilized attitudes that
threaten the foundations of democratic society. Finally, through its analysis of inconsistency as a fatal
flaw in any theory or point of view, logic proves a useful device in disclosing ill-conceived policies in
various spheres and, ultimately, in distinguishing the rational from the irrational, the sane from the
insane.

2.1 Arguments, Premises and Conclusions

All of us encounter arguments in our day-to-day life experience. We read them in books and news
papers, hear them on television, and formulate them when communicating with friends and associates.
The aim of logic is to develop the system of methods and principles that we may use as criteria for
evaluating the arguments of others and as guides in constructing arguments of our own.

1|Page
An argument, as it occurs in logic, is a group of statements, one or more of which (the premises) are
claimed to provide support for, or reasons to believe, one of the others (the conclusion). Or; an
argument is a connected series of statements or propositions, some of which are intended to provide
support, justification or evidence for the truth of another statement or proposition. Arguments consist of
one or more premises and a conclusion. The premises are those statements that are taken to provide the
support or evidence; the conclusion is that which the premises allegedly support.

All arguments may be placed in one of two basic groups: those in which the premises really support the
conclusion and those in which they do not even though they claimed to. The former are said to be good
arguments, the latter bad arguments. The purpose of logic, as a science that evaluates arguments, is
thus to develop methods and techniques that allow us to distinguish good arguments from bad.

As is apparent in the above definition, the term “argument” has a very specific meaning in logic. It does
not mean for example, a mere verbal fight, as one might have with one’s parent, spouse or friend. Let
us examine the features of this definition in greater detail. First of all, an argument is a group of
statements. In English language there are four types of sentences. These are;

 Declarative sentences are used for assertions, e.g. "He is a clever student."

 Interrogative sentences are used to ask questions, e.g. "Is he here?"

 Imperative sentences are used for making requests or issuing commands, e.g. "Come here!"

 Exclamatory sentences are used for the expression of emotional feelings. e.g. “Oh My God!”

For present purposes, we shall take a statement to be any declarative sentence, which makes a claim.
Or we can define a statement as a sentence which is either true or false. Truth and falsity are called
the two truth values of a statement. So here are some examples of statements in logic:
 Ethiopia is located in North Africa.

 Carrot is a good source of vitamin A.

 George Bush was the first President of the United States of America.

 Italy was defeated at the Battle of Adwa.

As you can see, statements can be either true or false, and they can be simple or complex. But they
must be grammatical and complete sentences.

2|Page
Unlike statements, many sentences cannot be said to be either true or false. Questions, proposals,
suggestions, commands and exclamations usually cannot, and so are not usually classified as
statements. The following sentences are not statements:

 Who is the class representative? (Question)

 Switch off your cell phones! (Command)

 Let’s go to Axum next week. (Proposal)

 Oh my God! (Exclamation)

 It would be better for you to study hard to score best grades. (Suggestion)

The statements that make up an argument are divided into one or more premises and one and only one
conclusion. The premises are statements that set forth the reasons or evidence, and the conclusion is the
statement that the evidence is claimed to support or imply. In other words, the conclusion is the
statement that is claimed to follow from the premises. Here is an example of an argument:

All business enterprises aspire to maximize their profits. Ethio-telecom is a business

enterprise. Therefore, Ethio-telecom aspires to maximize its profits.
The first two statements are the premises; the third is the conclusion. (The claim that the premises
support or imply the conclusion is indicated by the word “therefore.”) In this argument the premises
really do support the conclusion, and so the argument is a good one. But consider this one;

Some mathematicians are philosophers. Pythagoras is a mathematician. Thus,

Pythagoras is a philosopher.

In this argument the premises do not strictly support the conclusion, even though they are claimed to
do, and the argument is not a good one.

One of the most important tasks in the analysis of arguments is being able to distinguish premises from
the conclusion. If what is thought to be a conclusion is really a premise, and vice versa, the subsequent
analysis cannot possibly be correct. Frequently arguments contain certain indicator words that provide
clues in identifying premises and conclusion. Some typical conclusion indicators are;

3|Page
Whenever a statement follows one of these indicators, it can usually be identified as a conclusion. By
the process of elimination the other statements are the premises. For example;

Artists and poets look at the world and seek relationships and order. But they translate their
ideas to canvas, or to marble, or to poetic images. Scientists try to find relationships between
different objects and events. To express the order they find, they create the hypotheses and
theories. Thus, the great scientific theories are easily compared to great art and great literature.

The conclusion of this argument is, “the great scientific theories are easily compared to great art and
great literature.” By the process of elimination the rest of the statements in this argument become the
premises of the argument.

If an argument does not contain a conclusion indicator, it may contain a premise indicator. Some typical
premise indicators are

For example;

Expectant mothers should never use recreational drugs, since the use of these
drugs can jeopardize the development of the fetus.

The premise of this argument is the statement, “the use of these drugs can jeopardize the development of
the fetus.” The other statement is the conclusion of the argument.

4|Page
One premise indicator which is not included in the above list is “for this reason.” This indicator is
special in that it comes immediately after the premise that it indicates. “For this reason” (except when
followed by a colon) means for the reason (premise) that was just given. In other words, the premise is
the statement that occurs immediately before “for this reason.” One should be careful not to confuse “for
this reason” with “for the reason that.”

Sometimes a single indicator can be used to identify more than one premise. Consider the following
argument;

The development of high temperature superconducting materials is technologically

justified, for such materials will allow electricity to be transmitted without loss over
great distance, and they will pave the way for trains that levitate magnetically .

The premise indicator “for” goes with both “such materials will allow electricity to be transmitted
without loss over great distances” and “they will pave the way for trains that levitate magnetically.”
These are the premises. By the process of elimination, “the development of high temperature
superconducting materials is technologically justified” is the conclusion.

Sometimes an argument contains no indicators. When this occurs, the reader/listener must ask such
questions as: (1) what single statement is claimed (implicitly) to follow from the others? (2) What is the
arguer trying to prove? (3) What is the main point in the passage? The answers to these questions point
to the conclusion. In the other way, if an argument has no indicator words at all, then good English
style suggests that the topic sentence of the paragraph is the conclusion of the argument.

For example, let us consider the following argument;

Marketing to consumers via the internet has many advantages for marketers. It allows
products and services to be offered 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It allows products to
be offered globally in an efficient manner. And it is cost efficient, saving the need for
stores, paper catalogues, and sales people.

5|Page
In the above argument, the conclusion is “Marketing to consumers via the Internet has many
advantages for marketers.” The other statements in the argument are the premises. Because their
main task in this argument is to provide reasons or support to justify the claim of the conclusion,
i.e., to justify the fact that, marketing to consumers via the internet has many advantages for
marketers.

Passages that contain arguments sometimes contain statements that are neither premises nor
conclusion. If a statement has nothing to do with the conclusion or, for example, simply makes a
passing comment, it should not be included within the context of the argument. Example:

Socialized medicine is not recommended because it would result in a reduction in

the overall quality of medical care available to the average citizen. In addition, it
might very well bankrupt the federal treasury. This is the whole case against
socialized medicine in a nutshell.

The last statement in the above argument makes only a passing comment about the
argument itself and is therefore neither a premise nor a conclusion.

Closely related to the concepts of argument and statement are those of inference and proposition.
An inference, in the technical sense of the term, is the reasoning process expressed by an
argument. Inferences may be expressed not only through arguments but through conditional
statements as well. In the loose sense of the term, “inference” is used interchangeably with
“argument”.

Analogously, a proposition, in the technical sense of the term, is the meaning or information
content of a statement. For the purpose of this course, “proposition” and “statement” are used
interchangeably.

2.2 Recognizing Arguments

Not all passages contain arguments. Because logic deals with arguments, it is important to be
able to distinguish passages that contain arguments from those that do not. In general, a passage
contains an argument if it purports to prove something; if it does not do so, it doesn’t contain
an argument.

6|Page
Two conditions must be fulfilled for a passage to purport to prove something:

1) At least one of the statements must claim to present evidence or reasons.

2) There must be a claim that the alleged evidence or reasons supports or implies
something- that is, a claim that something follows from the alleged evidence.

 The statements that claim to present the evidence or reasons are premises.

 The statement that the evidence is claimed to support or imply is the conclusion.

It is not necessary that the premises present actual evidence or true reasons nor that the premises
actually support the conclusion. But at least the premises must claim to present evidence or
reason, and there must be a claim that the evidence or reasons supports or implies something.

In the above case, the first condition expresses the factual claim, and deciding whether it is
fulfilled usually presents few problems. Thus most of our attention will be concentrated on
whether the second condition is fulfilled. This second condition expresses what is called an
inferential claim. The inferential claim is simply the claim that the passage expresses a
reasoning process-that something supports or implies something or that something follows from
something. Such a claim can be either explicit or implicit.

An explicit inferential claim is usually asserted by premise or conclusion indicator words such
as, “thus,” “since,” “because,” “hence,” “therefore,” and so on). Example:

The human eye can see a source of light that is as faint as an ordinary candle from a
distance of 27 kilometers, through a nonabsorbing atmosphere. Thus, a powerful
searchlight directed from a new moon should be visible on earth with naked eye.

The word “thus” expresses the claim that something is being inferred, so the passage is an
argument.

An implicit inferential claim exists when there is an inferential relationship between the
statements in the passage. Example;

7|Page
 Tattooing and body piercing pose serious health risks to those receiving them. The
primary concern is infection with blood-born pathogens like H.I.V. and hepatitis.
Bacteria that live on the skin are easily spread by unsterilized instruments or ungloved
hands. And tongue and genital piercing can also provide channels for bacteria and
viruses to enter the bloodstream after the piercing procedure.

The inferential relationship between the first statement and the other three constitutes an implicit
claim that evidence supports something, so we are justified in calling the passage an argument.
The first statement is the conclusion, and the other two are premises.

In deciding whether there is a claim that evidence supports or implies something, keep an eye out
for (1) indicator words and (2) the presence of inferential relationship between the statements. In
connection with these points, however, a word of caution is in order. First, the occurrence of an
indicator word by no means guarantees the presence of an argument. This is because; these
words are often used for purposes other than to indicate the occurrence of a premise or
conclusion. The most important way to know whether a given passage contains an argument or
not is to focus whether there is an inferential claim between the statements that construct the
passage or not. This is because; there are cases in which passages contain indicator words, but
lack inferential claim between the statements.

Passages Lacking an Inferential Claim

Passages lacking an inferential claim contain statements that could be premises or conclusion or
both, but what is missing is a claim that a reasoning process is being expressed-that potential
premises support a conclusion or that a potential conclusion follows from premises. Passages
lacking an inferential claim are;

 Passages in which there is no claim that something is being proved.

 They contain statements that could pass for premises or conclusions, or even both, but
they are not.

 They are passages in which there is no claim that a premise might support a conclusion,
or that a conclusion is supported by a premise.

8|Page
Some of the examples of passages lacking an inferential claim are:

Warnings, (such as “watch out that you shouldn’t sleep on the ice”) and Pieces of advice, (such
as I suggest you take accounting during your first semester”) are kinds of discourse aimed at
modifying someone’s behavior. Each of these could serve as the conclusion of an argument; but
in their present context, there is no claim that they are supported or implied by reasons or
evidence. Thus, there is no argument.

For example

When you go to a job interview, be sure to dress neatly and be on time. Be sure to
shake your employer’s hand and look him square in the eye. Try to show him you are
interested in and really want the job.

Statements of belief or opinions: they are expressions about what someone believes or thinks
about something. For example let’s see the following passage;

I believe that our company must develop and produce outstanding products that will
perform a great service or fulfill a need for our customers. I believe that our business
must be run at an adequate profit and that the services and products we offer must be
better than those offered by competitors.

In the above passage, the author is making claims but he/she offers no evidence to support
his/her personal outlook or belief.

Loosely Associated Statements: are passages that contain statements that may be about a
similar subject but, they lack a claim that one is proved by the other. Example:

Not to honor men of worth will keep the people from contention; not to value goods
that are hard to come by will keep them from theft; not to display what is desirable
will keep them from being unsettled of mind.

In the above passage, all the statements don’t offer any support for one another. Therefore, it is
not an argument.

9|Page
Reports; consist of a group of statements that convey information about some situation or event.
Let us see the following report;

A powerful car bomb blew up outside the regional telephone company headquarters
in Melbourne, injuring 25 people and causing millions of dollars of damage to
nearby buildings, police said. A police statement said that 198-pound bomb was
packed into a milk churn hidden in the back of a stolen car.

The statements in the above report could serve as the premises of an argument; but because there
is no inferential claim that the statements support or imply any thing, it is not an argument. One
must be careful, though, with reports about arguments. Example:

500 prisoners were released from the Federal Corrective Center. A spokesman for
the Center said that the prisoners pose “no threat to the community” since they have
showed behavioral change and become persons of civic and moral virtues.

Properly speaking, this passage is not an argument, because the author of the passage does
not claim that anything is supported by evidence.

An Expository Passage; is a kind of discourse that begins with a topic sentence followed by one
or more sentences that develop the topic sentence. If the objective is not to prove the topic
sentence but only to expand or elaborate it, then there is no argument. For example;

There are three familiar states of matter; solid, liquid and gas. Solid objects
ordinarily maintain their shape and volume regardless of their location. A liquid
occupies a definite volume, but assumes the shape of the occupied portion of its
container. A gas contains neither shape nor volume. It expands to fill completely
whatever container it is in.

The aim of this passage is not to prove that the first statement is true. It simply further expands
the idea of the first statement. Because of this passage cannot be considered to be an argument.
Yet expository passages can also be interpreted as arguments if there is good reason that a
statement is being proved by others. This is not to say that some expository are arguments but
only that some passages can be interpreted both as expository passages and as arguments.

10 | P a g e
An Illustration; consists of statements about a certain subject combined with a reference to one
or more specific instances intended to exemplify that statement. Illustrations are often confused
with arguments because many of them contain indicator words such as “thus.” For example

Chemical elements, as well as compounds, can be represented by molecular

formulas. Thus, oxygen is represented by “O 2” Sodium Chloride by “NaCl” and
Sulfuric Acid by “H2SO4.”

This passage is not an argument, because there is no claim that anything supported by
evidence. The purpose of the word “thus” is not to indicate that something is being proved but
merely to show how something is done (how chemical elements and compounds can
represented by formulas).

Nevertheless, as with expository passage, many passages that give examples can be
interpreted as argument. There are arguments which illustrate a process but they do it to prove
a point. Such arguments are called arguments from example. Example:

Although most forms of cancer, if untreated can cause death, not all cancers are life
threatening. For example, basal cell carcinoma, the most common of all skin cancers,
can produce disfigurement, but it almost never result in death.

This passage illustrates the effects of skin cancer, but the point of the explanation is to prove
that not all cancers are life threatening. So it can be taken as an argument. Let us also see
another example.

Water is an excellent solvent. It can dissolve a wide range of materials that will
not dissolve in other liquids. For example, salts do not dissolve in most common
solvents, such as gasoline, kerosene, turpentine and cleaning fluids. But many
salts dissolve readily in water. So do a variety of nonionic organic substances,
such as sugars and alcohols of low molecular weight.

In this passage the examples that are cited can correctly be interpreted as proving the water is
an excellent solvent. Thus, the passage may be considered as an argument.

11 | P a g e
The types of non arguments described here are not mutually exclusive. One passage can often
be interpreted as an illustration, as an expository passage, a statement of opinion, or a set of
loosely associated statements. The main issue here is not what kind of non arguments a certain
passage might be, but whether that passage is best interpreted as an argument or non
argument.

Conditional Statements; a conditional statement is an “if …then…” statement. For example;

If air is removed from a solid closed container, then the container will weigh less than it
did.

Every conditional statement is made up of two components. The component statement

immediately following the “if” is called antecedent, and the one following the “then” is
called the consequent. Occasionally, if the word “then” is left out then the order of antecedent
and consequent is reversed. In the above example, the antecedent is “air is removed from a
solid closed container,” and the consequent is “the container will weigh less than it did.”

Conditional statements are not arguments, because they fail to meet the criteria given earlier.
In an argument, at least one statement must claim to provide the evidence or reasons, and
there must be a claim that this evidence implies something. In conditional statement, there is
no claim that either the antecedent or the consequent present evidence. In other words, there is
no assertion that either the antecedent or the consequent is true. Rather there is only the
assertion that if the antecedent is true, then so is the consequent. Of course, a conditional
statement as a whole may present evidence, because it asserts a relationship between
statements. Yet when conditional statements are taken in this sense, there is still no argument,
because there is no separate claim that this evidence implies anything.

Some conditional statements are similar to arguments, however, in that they express the
outcome of a reasoning process. As such, they may be said to have a certain inferential
content. Consider the following:

1. If both Saturn and Uranus have rings, then Saturn has rings. 2. If iron is less dense than
mercury, then it will float in mercury.

12 | P a g e
The link between the antecedent and consequent of these conditional statements resembles the
inferential link between the premises and conclusion of an argument. Yet there is a difference
because the premises of an argument are claimed to be true, whereas no such claim is made for
the antecedent of a conditional statement. Accordingly, these conditional statements are not
arguments. Yet their inferential content may be re-expressed to form arguments.
The relation between conditional statements and arguments may be summarized as the
following manner

1. A single conditional statement is not an argument.

2. A conditional statement may serve as either the premise or the conclusion or both of an
argument.

3. The inferential content of a conditional statement may be re-expressed to form an

argument. For example, let see us the following conditional statement and it can be re-
expressed to form an argument;

Conditional statement; if cigarette companies publish warning labels, then smokers assumes
the risk of smoking.

Argument form; If cigarette companies publish warning labels, then smokers assume the risk
of smoking. Cigarette companies do publish warning labels. Therefore, smokers assume the
risk of reasoning.

Conditional statements are especially important in logic because they express the relationship
between the necessary and sufficient conditions.

 A is sufficient condition for B whenever the occurrence of A is all that is needed for the
occurrence of B.

 B is said to be a necessary condition for A, whenever A cannot occur without the

occurrence of B.

For example; 1. Being a human is sufficient for being a mammal. But being a mammal is
necessary before you can be a human.

13 | P a g e
 2. Having gas in your car is necessary to driving, but it is not enough to
actually get you on the road. A sufficient condition for deriving would be
to put the key into the ignition, but without gas then driving won’t happen.

Explanations; an explanation consists of a statement or group of statements intended to shed

light on some phenomenon that is usually accepted as a matter of fact. For example;

The sky appears blue from the earth’s surface because light rays from the sun are
scattered by particles in the atmosphere.

Cows can digest grass, while humans cannot, because their digestive systems contain
enzymes not found in humans.

Every explanation is composed of two distinct components: the explanandum and explanans.
The explanadum is a statement that describes the event or phenomenon to be explained, and the
explanans is the statement or group of statements that purports to do the explaining.

Explanations are sometimes mistaken for arguments because they often contain the indicator
word “because.” Yet explanations are not arguments for the following reason:

 In an explanation, the explanans is intended to show why something is the case, whereas in
an argument the premises are intended to prove that something is the case. In the first
example given above, the fact that the sky is blue is readily apparent. The intention of the
passage is to explain why it appears blue – not to prove that it appears blue. Similarly, in
the second example, virtually everyone knows that people cannot digest grass. The
intention of the passage is to explain why this is true.

Explanations bear a certain similarity to arguments. Like certain conditional statements,

explanations express the outcome of a reasoning process. The rational link between the
explanandum and the explanans may at times resemble the inferential link between the premises
and conclusion of an argument. Yet explanations are not arguments, because they do not purport
to prove anything. If explanations are said to have a certain inferential content, that content is not
used for the same purpose as the inferential content expressed in arguments.

14 | P a g e
In summary, in deciding whether a passage contains an argument, one should look for three
things:

1. Indicator words.

2. The presence of an inferential relationship between statements, and

3. Typical kinds of non arguments.

Also, in the absence of indicator words, remember that it is often helps to mentally insert the
word “therefore” before the various statements to decide whether it makes sense to interpret one
of them as following from the others.

2.3 Deduction and Induction

→So far we have seen the meaning and structures of an argument. Now the discussion more
continues on types of arguments. Generally speaking arguments can be classified into two folds:
deductive and inductive.

 A deductive argument is an argument in which the premises are claimed to support the
conclusion in such a way that if they are assumed true, it is impossible for the
conclusion to be false. The word “impossible” in strict sense implies that the conclusion
is claimed to follow necessarily from the premises. Let’s see following two examples of
a deductive argument;
1. Any university student must have passed entrance exam. Daniel is a university
student. Hence, he must have passed entrance exam.
2. All public servants pay income tax. Hana is a public servant. Therefore, she pays
income tax.
 An inductive argument is an argument in which the premises are claimed to support the
conclusion in such a way that if they are assumed true, then based on that assumption it
is improbable that the conclusion is false (that is, it is probable that the conclusion is
true). These are examples of an inductive argument;
1. Most famous philosophers of the world are theists. Fredric Nietzsche was one of
the well-known philosophers of the world. So, he was a theist.

15 | P a g e
 2. From our past experience we realized that the sun rises in the east and sets in the
west. Hence, tomorrow the sun will rise in the east and set in the west.
→NB. The distinction between inductive and deductive arguments appears in the strength of an
argument’s inferential claim. This is to mean that the difference between deductive and inductive
arguments lies in how strongly the conclusion is claimed to follow from the premises. Although
it may be sometimes difficult to know explicitly the strength of the claims in a given argument, it
is advisable to use one’s interpretive skill to evaluate it. There are three (3) factors that influence
our decisions about this claim:

1) The occurrence of special indictor words

→Some of the indictor terms of a deductive argument are “definitely,” “certainly,” and
“absolutely”- these all show that an absolute (strong) connection between the premise(s) and a
conclusion.

▪ E.g. Anyone who is trained in computer engineering must have an ample

knowledge about software programming and maintenance. Kiros is the newly
employed computer engineer in our organization. It certainly follows that he
knows about software programming and maintenance.

→These are some of special indictor words of an inductive argument; “Probable/Improbable,”

“Plausible/Implausible,” “Likely/Unlikely” and “Reasonable to conclude”.

▪ E.g. Many pregnant women in Ethiopia have lost their life because of
malnutrition. Three pregnant women recently died at Mekelle hospital. We may
conclude that they died due to malnutrition.

→ NB: the indictor word “must” can imply either necessity or probability, so that it belongs to both
categories.

2) The actual strength of the Inferential Link

→ Here it is quite important the reader or listener to use the interpretive skill of her own by
pondering the strength of the inferential link between premise(s) and conclusion. If the
conclusion actually does follow with strict necessity from the premises, the argument is clearly
deductive. In such argument it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.

16 | P a g e
On the other hand, if the conclusion does not follow with strict necessity but does follow
probably, it is usually best to consider the argument inductive. Consider the following two
contrasting examples.

1. All saleswomen have studies marketing. Elizabeth is a saleswoman. Therefore, Elizabeth

has studied marketing.
2. The vast majority of saleswomen have studied marketing. Elizabeth is a saleswoman.
Therefore, Elizabeth has studied marketing.

1) The Forms of Arguments

This is the third factor which can be used when an argument contains no indictor words, and the
conclusion does not follow either strictly or probably from the premises. There are five (5)
deductive and six (6) inductive widely recognized forms of arguments. Let us discuss them one
by one.

A. Forms of a Deductive Argument

1. Argument based on mathematics: This includes argument based on some purely arithmetic or
geometric computation or measurement.

▪ E.g. The total number of fresh students who have joined Mekelle University in
2013/2014 is 12,000. For each of the four campuses of the University, 3000 new students
are assigned to train in different fields of study. Therefore, Adi Haki campus of Mekelle
University has enrolled about 3,000 fresh students.

2. Argument from Definitions: This is an argument in which the conclusion is claimed to depend
merely upon the definition of some word or phrase used in the premise or conclusion

1. E.g. George is an egotist. Therefore, he has an inflated impression of his own importance.

2. Arthur is a polygamist. Therefore, he has more than one wife.

3. Syllogistic Arguments: Syllogism is an argument consisting of exactly two premises

and a conclusion.

17 | P a g e
There are three types of a syllogistic argument. These are;

1. Categorical Syllogism; it is a syllogism in which each statement starts with one of words “all,”
“no,” or “some.” For example;

1. All lawyers are politicians. Some lawyers are economists. Therefore, some politicians
are economists.

2. All essay contests are challenges that promote thinking. All challenges that promote thinking are
educational experiences. Thus, all essay contests are educational experiences.

2. Hypothetical Syllogism; is a syllogism having a conditional statement for one or both of its
premises.

1. If the public approves of same sex marriages, then same sex marriages will be legalized.
The public does not approve of same sex marriages. Therefore, same sex marriages will
not be legalized.
2. If the Club won the Championship, then the club received $50, 000 as reward from the
National Football Association. The Club received $50, 000 from the National Football
Association. Therefore, the Club actually won the Championship.

3. Disjunctive Syllogism; is a syllogism having a disjunctive statement (i.e., an “either…or…”

statement) for one of its premises.

E.g.1. Either colonel Muammar Gaddafi is killed by NATO’s military force or by

Libyan rebel groups. Gaddafi is not killed by NATO’s military power. Thus, he was
killed by rebel groups.

2. Either Leonardo da Vinci or Andrew Wyeth painted the Mona Lisa. But it clearly
wasn't Andrew Wyeth. Therefore, da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa.

B. Forms of an Inductive Argument

1. An argument based on prediction; in this type argument the premises deal with some known
event in the present or past, and the conclusion moves beyond this event to some event in the
relative future.

18 | P a g e
 E.g. “Because Mekelle city has been 132 years old since its foundation, and because the
rainfall in it has been 20 inches every year for the past 128 years, it must be the case that
next year the rainfall will be more than 20 inches,” is a strong inductive argument.
2. An argument from analogy; this argument occurs when there is an analogy or similarity
between two things or states of affairs.

E.g. Canada is similar in many ways to the United States. Both countries share the same
language, values, and a free market economy. Also, they share a common border. Therefore, the
Canadian flag must look a lot like the U.S. flag.
3. An Inductive Generalization; this is an argument that proceeds from the knowledge of a
selected sample to some claim about the whole group. Since the members of the sample have a
certain attributes or characteristic(s), it is argued that all the members of the group have that
same characteristic(s).
E.g. Your sample shows that more than 60% of the class are highly interested in learning
Ethiopian traditional painting. Therefore, we may conclude that all students of the class
are very much interested in learning Ethiopian traditional painting.
4. An argument from Authority; this is an argument in which the conclusion rests upon a
statement made by some presumed authority or witness.

E.g. Mr. Thomas Michael, the director of World Food Program in Ethiopia mentioned
that almost three million people of the country are suffering because of food scarcity. On
the basis of Mr. Thomas Michael’s authority, it is reasonable to conclude that millions of
Ethiopians are starved.
5. An argument based on Signs; this is an argument that proceeds from the knowledge of a
certain sign (symbol, symptom) to knowledge of the thing or situation that the sign stands for.

E.g. Look her shoulders, there is a tattoo of Emperor H/Sellasie. Therefore, she is
probably a Rastafarian.
6. A Causal Inference; this is an argument that proceeds from knowledge of a cause to
knowledge of the effect, or, conversely, from knowledge of an effect to knowledge of a cause.

19 | P a g e
 E.g. Ato Wondemu was an alcoholic person throughout his life. The medical test shows
that he is infected with a liver cancer. Thus, he is infected by a liver cancer because he
drunk for a number of years.

2.4 Validity, Truth, Soundness, Strength, Cogency

We have seen that every argument make two basic claims: a claim that evidence exists and a
claim that the alleged evidence supports something (or that something follows from the alleged
evidence). The first is a factual claim; the second is an inferential claim. The evaluation of every
argument centers on the evaluation of these two claims. The most important of the two is the
inferential claim, because if the premises fail to support the conclusion (that is, if the reasoning is
bad), an argument is worthless. Thus we will always test the inferential claim first, and only if
the premises do support the conclusion will we test the factual claim (that is, the claim that the
premises present genuine evidence, or are true).

A Valid Argument is a deductive argument in which, if the premises are assumed true, it is
impossible for the conclusion to be false. In such arguments, the conclusion follows with strict
necessity from the premises. For example;

All terrorist leaders are religious extremists.

Osama Bin Laden was a terrorist leader.
Therefore, Osama Bin Laden was religious extremist.

An Invalid Argument is a deductive argument such that if the premises are assumed true, it is
possible for the conclusion to be false. In these arguments the conclusion does not follow with
strict necessity from the premises, even though it claimed to.

All film makers are millioners.

Amanda is a millioner.

So, Amanda is a film maker.

20 | P a g e
Two immediate consequences follow from these two definitions. The first is that, there is no
middle ground between valid and invalid argument. That means there are no arguments that are
“almost” valid and “almost” invalid. If the conclusion follows with strict necessity from the
premises, the argument is valid, if not, it is invalid.

The second consequence is that there is only an indirect relation between validity and truth. For
an argument to be valid, it is not necessary that either the premises or the conclusion be true, but
merely that if the premises are assumed true, it is impossible that the conclusion be false. Here is
an example of valid argument having a false premise and false conclusion:

All auto makers are computer manufacturers;

NOKIA is an auto maker.

Therefore, NOKIA is a computer manufacturer.

To see this argument is valid one must ignore the fact that the premises are false and attempt to
determine that would be true, if the premises were true. Clearly, if the premises were true, it
would follow necessarily that NOKIA is a computer manufacturer. Thus, the argument is valid.

Just the occurrence of false premises and a false conclusion does not prevent an argument from
being valid, so the occurrence of true premises and a true conclusion does not guarantee validity.
Here is an example of an invalid argument having true premises and a true conclusion:

All wines are beverages.

Vodca is a beverage.
Therefore, Vodca is a wine.

Note that the truth and falsity of premises and conclusion is irrelevant to the question of validity
except in the case of true premises and a false conclusion. Any deductive argument having true
premises and a false conclusion is necessarily invalid. This is perhaps the most important fact
in all of deductive logic. The entire system of deductive logic would be quite useless if it
accepted as valid any inferential process by which a person could start with truth in the premises
and arrive at falsity in the conclusion. Here is an example of an invalid argument having true
premises and a false conclusion:

21 | P a g e
 All banks are financial organizations.

Nyala Insurance Company is a financial organization.

Therefore, Nyala Insurance Company is a bank.

A Sound Argument is a deductive argument that is valid and has all true premises. Both
conditions must be met for an argument to be sound, and if either is missing the argument is
unsound. For example

All trees are plants.

Acacia is a tree.
Therefore, acacia is a plant.

Unsound Argument is a deductive argument that is invalid, has one or more false premises, or
both. Because a valid argument is one such that, if the premises are true, it is impossible for the
conclusion to be false and because a sound argument does in fact have true premises, it follows
that every sound argument, by definition, will have true conclusion as well. A sound argument
therefore, is what is meant by a “good” deductive argument in the fullest sense of the term.

In connection with definition of soundness, a single provision is required: for an argument to be

unsound, the false premise or premises must actually be needed to support the conclusion.

 All invalid deductive arguments are unsound.

A Strong Argument is an inductive argument such that if the premises are assumed true, then
based on the assumption it is probable that the conclusion is true.

E.g. More than 99% of all airplane flights land safely. Therefore, probably the next flight to depart from
Bole International Airport will land safely.

A weak Argument is an inductive argument such that if the premises are assumed true, then
based on that assumption it is not probable that the conclusion is true.

→ Unlike validity and invalidity, strength and weakness generally admit of degrees. The central
question in determining strength or weakness is whether the conclusion would probably be true if
the premises are assumed true. The following examples demonstrate that the first argument is not
22 | P a g e
absolutely weak nor the second absolutely strong. Both arguments would be strengthened or
weakened by the random selection of a larger or smaller sample. The incorporation of additional
premises into an inductive argument will also generally tend to strengthen or weaken it.

E.g. 1) In a random sample of 50 students, 15 said that they regularly read a newspaper. Therefore,
probably more than 50% of the students regularly read a newspaper. (Weak)
2) In a random sample of 50 students, 30 said that they regularly read a newspaper. Therefore,
probably more than 50% of the students regularly read a newspaper. (Strong)
→ As with validity and invalidity, strength and weakness are only indirectly related to truth and
falsity except in the case of true premises and a probably false conclusion. Any inductive
argument having true premises and a probable false conclusion is always weak.
Inductive logic would be useless if it accepted as strong any inductive argument having
true premises and a probably false conclusion.

→ A cogent Argument is an inductive argument that is strong and has all true premises; if
either condition is missing the argument is “uncogent”. Thus, an uncogent argument is an
inductive argument that is weak, has one or more false premises, or both. A cogent
argument is the inductive analogue of a sound deductive argument and is what is meant by
a “good’ inductive argument without qualification. Because the conclusion of a cogent
argument is genuinely supported by true premises, it follows that the conclusion of every
cogent argument is probably true. Also note that all weak inductive arguments are
uncogent.

 There is a difference between sound and cogent arguments in regard to the true-premises
requirement. In a sound argument it is only necessary that the premises be true and nothing
more. Given such premises and a good reasoning, a true conclusion is guaranteed. In a cogent
argument, on the other hand, the premises must not only be true, they must also not ignore
some important piece of evidence that outweighs the given evidence and entails a quite
different conclusion.

E.g. 1) The famous economist Sir Isaac Newton stated that World Bank’s structural
adjustment program cannot be effectively implemented in the Third-World nations due to

23 | P a g e
 governmental mismanagement. In views of Newton, we may conclude that World Banks
structural adjustment program is ineffective. (Uncogent)

2) Almost all African countries were colonized. Kenya is one the of African countries.
Thus, most probably, Kenya was colonized. (Cogent)

24 | P a g e