Logic and Reasoning

Class: B.A. LL.B (3rd Semester)

Lecture # 1, 2 & 3 Topic: Basic Concepts

1) Logic:
 Literal Meaning
 The word Logic is derived from a Greek Word Logos which means “Spoken
word”, “Speech” or “Reason”.
 It was introduced by Zero, a Greek philosopher, through his use of the term
“Logike” which means “discourse of thinking” or “treatises on thought”.
 Definitions
 Logic is the study of the methods and principles used to distinguish correct from
incorrect reasoning.
 Logic is the study of principles used to distinguish good reason from bad
reason.
 Logic is the study of valid thoughts/reasoning, that is logic tries to establish
criteria to decide whether some piece of knowledge is valid or invalid.
 Explanation
 Logic is an evaluative or normative study.
 Logic is a branch of philosophy rather than science.
 Logic is the anatomy of thinking (Lock).
 Logic is the source of human thinking.
 Reason is the subject matter of logic.
 Logic is the basis of human thinking.
 The objective of logic is to clear the mindset.
 The function of logic is to able one to think.
 Purpose of Logic
 The purpose of logic is to accept good reason and reject bad reason and to
sharp the intellect.
2) Reasoning
 The directed chain of thought is called reasoning. Logical thinking is reflective
thinking which begins with a genuine problem, aims at solving it, and comes to
an end as soon as the problem is solved. Such a chain of thought is technically

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 1

 called 'reasoning'. Whenever, an individual is trying to solve a problem, he is,
in fact, doing reasoning.
 Reasoning is 'continuous'. It consists of units of thought which are related
together by means of connectives called logical connectives. A reasoning is
valid only if its various units or constituents are logically connected to each
other.
3) Law of Non-Contradiction
 This law states that "contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same
sense at the same time, i.e. when one statement is false the other statement must
be true.
4) Law of Excluded Middle
 It states that "for any proposition, either that proposition is true, or its negation is
true i.e. when there is no third option. E.g. Afternoon or non-afternoon.
 Third option is present in Contraries, where as there is no third option in
contradictories.
5) Law of Identity
 It states that "each thing is identical with itself. By this it is meant that each thing
is composed of its own unique set of characteristic qualities or features which the
ancient Greeks called its essence. E.g. you are what you are.
6) Term
 Human mind formulates concepts, and when these concepts are expressed in
words, they are called terms. There are various kinds of terms with which logic
deals. With the help of these terms propositions are formed.
7) Truth and Validity
 Truth and falsity are the characteristics of proposition. There are two kinds of
TRUTH:
1. Material Truth
o Material truth means 'accordance with facts', that is, a proposition is materially
true if it tallies with actual facts. For instance, the propositions like, 'It is
raining outside', 'The sun is shining', etc. are factual propositions and are
materially true or false. Their truth-value depends on the factual facts.
o Material truth is relative, and not absolute. A given proposition can be true
under certain conditions, false under other conditions. For example,
proposition 'The sun is shining' is true during daytime when the sky is clear,
but false at night or when the sky is cloudy'. Thus, propositions derive their
material truth from the conditions.
2. Formal Truth
o Propositions which are formally true are not conditional, they are true under all
conditions that is, universally true. The truth of these propositions depends on
their internal nature or structure. For example, proposition like 'if it rains, the
ground will be wet', etc. is proposition which is unconditionally true.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 2

 8) Validity and Invalidity
 Validity and invalidity are characteristics of argument. Only arguments can be
valid or invalid. Validity applies to inference and not to propositions. Validity
does not demand that an argument should be in accordance with facts, it requires
that the conclusion of an argument should necessarily follow from the given
premise or premises. E.g.
i. All men are mortal,
Anwar is man,
Therefore, Anwar is not mortal.
This is an invalid argument because the conclusion does not follow from
the premises. Thus, the argument,
ii. All men are mortal,
Rashid is a man,
Therefore, Rashid is mortal.
This is a valid argument because the conclusion follows from the two
premises.
 Validity is a formal aspect of thought and has nothing to do with the material truth
of its premises and conclusion. Thus, material truth of thought and its validity are
two very different aspects. Material truth applies to propositions only which
validity is concerned with arguments only. However, validity of an argument
depends on the truth of its premises and conclusion. The general rule in this
regard is: An argument must be invalid when all its premises are true, and the
conclusion is false.
9) Proposition
 The various units of thought are called 'prepositions'. Or 'when any two concepts are
compared or contrasted in the mind and a relationship of agreement or disagreement
is formed, the result is a judgment. When a judgment is expressed in language, it is
called proposition'. According to Aristotelian logic, Term is the basic unit of thought,
while according to the modern logic, proposition is the basic unit of thought.
 A proposition asserts that something is the case or it asserts that something is not.
 Which is asserting or denying something. Therefore, every proposition is either true
or false.
 Propositions are the building blocks of our reasoning.
 The term statement is not an exact synonym of proposition, but it is often used in
logic in much the same sense.

All men are mortal.

Quantifier Predicate

Subject Copula

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 3

  Quantifier:
 It shows the measurement or quantity of the members of a group,
proposition/something.
 For Example:
 All, few, some etc.
 Quantifiers are of two types but normally three types:
i. Singular
Universal
ii. Universal
iii. Particular
1. Universal Quantifier:
 A universal quantifier is a word which is extended to the whole members of the
group.
 For Example:
 All, total, whole, non, etc.

2. Particular Quantifier:
 A particular quantifier is a word which is extended to the certain members of the
group.
 For Example:
 Some, Few, Most, Majority, Usually, Maximum, Minimum, etc.
 Subject:
 The subject is that part of the proposition about which is something either affirmed
or decided.
 For Example:
All the apples are fruits.
 Here the word “Apples” is subject.
 Copula:
 These are qualifier words which is making a relationship between Subject and
Predicate.
 It shows the quality of proposition that is affirmative or negative.
 For Example:
i. All apples are fruits. (Affirmative Copula)
ii. All apples are not fruits. (Negative Copula)
 Predicate:
 Predicate gives the information about Subject.
 For Example:
All dogs are mammals.
 Here the word “mammals” is predicate which tells information about subject
“dog”.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 4

  Types of Propositions:
1. Hypothetical Proposition
2. Categorical Proposition
1. Categorical Proposition
 The proposition which are based on categories, separate classes or categories
are formed.
 Reasoning which are based on categories of objects.
 The nature of the categorical proposition is a kind of proposition that expresses
unconditional judgement.
 Kinds of Categorical Proposition
The four kinds of standard categorical proposition:
i. A: Universal Affirmative (All men are mortal.)
ii. E: Universal Negative (No man is mortal.)
iii. I: Particular Affirmative (Some men are mortal.)
iv. O: Particular Negative (Some men are not mortal.)
 Propositions with definitions
I. Universal Affirmative Proposition
 When the quantifier denotes all the subject with affirmation or positivity,
then it is called Universal Affirmative Proposition.
 For Example:
 All students are intelligent.
II. Affirmative Proposition
 When there is an affirmation of a proposition with positive nature, then it
is called Affirmative Proposition.
 Where copula of “is, are. Am” is used.
 For Example:
 Indian doctors are intelligent.
 Indians are handsome in the world.
III. Negative Proposition
 When there is a deny of any claim or statement, then it is called Negative
Proposition.
 Where copula of “is not, are not, am not” is used.
 For Example:
 Indian doctors are not intelligent.
 Indians are not handsome in the world.
IV. Personal Proposition
 When there is no quantity or quantifier in a proposition, then it is called
Personal Proposition.
 For Example:
 Socrates is man.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 5

 This somehow also falls in the category of universal proposition
which may be negative or positive.
V. Particular Proposition
 When the quantifiers of some, few, many are used in the claim, then it is
called Particular Proposition.
 For Example:
 Some Pakistani are cricketer.
10) Distribution of Terms
 It means how much of a term is taken into consideration in a Proposition, that is,
whether the whole quantity for a term is taken or only a part of it.
Distributed Term
When in a Proposition a Term is taken in its total quantity or a term is used with
reference to every member of a class, it is called 'distributed';
Undistributed Term
When only a part of a Term is taken or if the term is not being used to refer to
each and every member of the class, it is called 'undistributed'.
In the four kinds of Proposition, the position of distribution of Terms is as under:
i. In Proposition A, 'All S is P', subject S is distributed, while the predicate P
is undistributed.
ii. In Proposition E, 'No S is P', both Subject and Predicate are distributed.
iii. In Proposition I, 'Some S is P', both the subject and predicate are
undistributed.
iv. In Proposition O, 'Some S is not P', subject is undistributed and predicate
is distributed.
11) What are not Propositions?
A sentence is not the same thing as proposition. It is necessary for a proposition to give
some information which can be true or false. Thus the following sentences are not
propositions:
i. Interrogative Sentences
 Those sentences which are used for asking questions are called
interrogative sentences, e.g. where is Akbar? what do you do? etc.
ii. Exclamatory Sentences
 Sentences which are used to press feelings and emotions are called
exclamatory sentences, e.g. 'Hurrah! You have done well', 'what a
beautiful picture! etc.
iii. Imperative Sentences
 Those sentences which express command, e.g. 'Shut the door', 'Open the
window', etc.

Thus, only those sentences are Propositions which can give some information which may
be true or false. Thus, only informative sentences are Propositions because they can give
true or false information about something.
Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 6
 Logic and Reasoning
Class: B.A. LL.B (3rd Semester)

Lecture # 4 & 5 Topic: Arguments

Arguments

 Definition:
 An argument is a connected series of statements intended on establish a
proposition.
 Argument is consisted of a set of connected reasoning.
 An argument is an attempt to establish conclusion.
 An argument consists of some premises and a conclusion.
 An argument is a system of thought in which the earlier proposition or
propositions state the problem itself and are called “Premise or premises‟. While
the last proposition offers the solution of the problem and is called the
“Conclusion”.
 Elements of Argument:
 An argument is consisted of some Premises and a conclusion.
 Premises and Conclusion are all statements.
 Factual Claim + Premise = Conclusion or Inferential Claim
 For Example
 All men are mortal. Factual Claims or Premises
 Some Americans are men.
 Therefore, Some Americans are mortal. (Conclusion)
 Premise:
 The statements giving reasons for accepting the conclusion.
 Conclusion:
 The statement argued for or the statement for the acceptance of which the
reasons are being presented.
 Statement:
 A statement is a sentence. However, a sentence may of any four types
namely:
i. Imperative Sentence (Commands, Giving orders)
ii. Interrogative Sentence (Questions, asking something)

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 7

 iii. Exclamatory Sentence (Feelings, vent of emotions)
iv. Declarative Sentence (Sentence which may be true or false or the
truth of which may be asserted or denied)
 This is related to propositions. Other 3 sentences are not
propositions.
 Structure of Argument
 Premise 1 = All Indians are poets.
 Premise 2 = Aslam is an Indian.
 Conclusion = Therefore, Aslam is a poet.

 “ss” Formula
To Check:
 The “s” stands for “Structure of the Argument".
 The “s” stands for “Strength of the Conclusion”.
 For Example:
 All men are mortal.
 Akram is a man.
 Therefore, Akram is a student. (Conclusion)
o There is no strength in the conclusion. This statement is true in
itself but it does not follow the conclusion.

 Three terms in Categorical Proposition/Argument

 Premise 1 = All human beings are living things.

 Premise 2 = No angels are living things.
 Conclusion = Therefore, no human beings are angels.

i. Major Term
 Predicate of the conclusion is called the Major Term.
 For Example:
 No human beings are angels.

ii. Minor Term

 Subject of the conclusion is called the Minor Term.
 For Example:
 No human beings are angel.
iii. Middle Term
 That term which occurs in the both of the premises but not in the
conclusion.
 For Example:

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 8

  All human beings are living things.
 No angels are living things.
 Types of Arguments
There are two types of arguments:
i. Deductive Argument
ii. Inductive Argument

1. Deductive Argument
 It is that argument which consists of using general principles to infer specific
propositions.
 Universal Universal
 Universal Particular
 For Example:
 Aisha always wears glasses to go to school.
 Aisha will be come to school tomorrow.
 Therefore, Aisha will be wear glasses to go to school tomorrow.

2. Inductive Argument
 It is that argument which consists of using specific principles to infer general
proposition.
 Particular Universal
 For Example:
 Fareed wore Shalwar Qameez to work on Friday.
 Fareed wore Shalwar Qameez to work on Saturday.
 Fareed wore Shalwar Qameez to work on Monday.
 Therefore, Fareed always wears Shalwar Qameez to work.

 Remember:

 If the given premises are true, then conclusion will be true.

 If the given premises are false, then the conclusion will be false.
 Claim General Conclusion General
 Claim Particular Conclusion Particular

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 9

 Logic and Reasoning
Class: B.A. LL.B (3rd Semester)

Lecture # 6, 7 & 8 Topic: Inference

Inference

 Definition:
 Inference is that mental process in which from given proposition or propositions a
new proposition is derived by way of conclusion.
 The evidence is called inference because it contains data or it would be a factual
claim.
 Kinds of Inference
There are two (2) kinds of Inference:
i. Deductive Inference
 In deductive inference a less general or partial conclusion is drawn from
General propositions.
 For Example
 All men are mortal.
 Aslam is a man.
 Therefore, Aslam is mortal.
ii. Inductive Inference
 In inductive inference, on the other hand, a general conclusion is arrived at
with the help of particular propositions.
 For Example
 A is a man and he has died.
 B is a man and he has died.
 C is a man and he has died.
 Therefore, all men are mortal.
 Kinds of Deductive Inference
There are generally speaking two kinds of Deductive Inference which are as follows:
A. Immediate Inference
B. Mediate Inference
1) Immediate Inference (Without Medium)

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 10

  Immediate Inference is that mental process in which the mind infers a conclusion
from one proposition only.
 Immediate Inference is that inference in which from a single premises or
propositions a conclusion is drawn.
 In this inference no second proposition is needed to draw the conclusion.
 It is also called Direct Inference.
 For Example
 All men are mortal. (Premise)
 Therefore, no man is non-mortal. (Conclusion)
2) Mediate Inference (Medium required)
 Mediate Inference is that in which a conclusion is drawn from more than one
propositions (premises) taken jointly.
 It can be approached by the help of a medium.
 It may be called as Indirect Inference.
 For Example
 All men are mortal.
 Yasir is a man.
 Therefore, Yasir is mortal.
 Kinds of Immediate Inference
i. Conversion
ii. Obversion
iii. Contraposition
iv. Inversion
1) Conversion
 Conversion is that kind of Immediate Inference in which a proposition is inferred
from a given proposition in such a way that the subject and the predicate of the
premises interchange places in the conclusion.
 The proposition or premises is called Convertend.
 The conclusion inferred is called Converse.
 For Example:
 No table is chair. (Premise)
 Therefore, no chair is table. (Conclusion)
 Here, “No table is chair” is the convertend, while “No chair is table” is the
converse.
 Rules for Conversion
1. In conversion, the subject and predicate interchange their places in the
Conclusion.
2. The quality of the convertend and converse remain the same; that is, if the
convertend is affirmative the converse will also be affirmative, and if the
convertend is negative the converse will also be negative.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 11

 3. No term can be taken Distributed in the converse, if it is not distributed in
the convertend. But a term which is disturbed in the convertend may be
taken Undistributed in the converse.

Let us apply the process of Conversion to the four standard forms of Propositions
A,E,I,O and see the results.

Propositions A = 'All S is P' is a Universal Affirmative Proposition. By

applying the three Rules we will have:

1. Applying the rule, we will change 'All S is P' to 'All P is S'.

2. According to the 2nd rule, the converse will remain affirmative;
3. According to the 3rd rule, since the predicate of an A proposition 'All S is
P' is undistributed in the convertend, it should remain undistributed in the
converse.

Thus, the converse of an A proposition is always Particular affirmative

Proposition which is an I proposition.

Proposition E = 'No S is P' is a Universal Negative Proposition. By applying

the three rules we will have:

1. Applying the 1st rule, we will change 'S is P' to 'P is S'.
2. According to rule 2, since both the subject and predicate of the convertend
are distributed, they will remain distributed in the converse.

Hence, the Converse of an E proposition is always a Universal Negative

Proposition which is an E proposition.

Proposition I = 'some S is P' is a particular Affirmative Proposition. By

applying the rules:

1. By applying rule 1, we will change 'Some S is P' to 'Some P is S'.

2. According to rule 2, the converse will remain affirmative.
3. According to rule 3, since both subject and predicate of the convertend are
undistributed in the converse also. Thus, a particular affirmative
proposition will remain a particular affirmative proposition, i.e. an I
proposition.

Hence the converse of an I proposition is an I proposition.

Proposition O = 'Some S is not P' is a Particular Negative proposition applying

the rules we have:

1. According to rule , 'Some S is not P' becomes 'Some P is not S';

2. According to 2nd rule, the converse will be a Negative Proposition.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 12

 3. According to rule 3, we cannot distribute any term in the converse which
is not distributed in the convertend. However, in the converse of an O
proposition, the subject of the convertend is distributed when it was not
distributed in the convertend which is logically false.

Hence, no Conversion of the O is possible.

2) Obversion
 Obversion is that process of Immediate Inference in which from a given
proposition another proposition is drawn in which the predicate of the premises is
hanged to its contradictory. The premise is called the Obvertend, while the
conclusion is called the Obverse.
 Rules for Obversion
1. The Predicate of the obverse must be the contradictory of the predicate of
the Obvertend;
2. The quality of the Obvertend will be changed in the obverse, i.e., if the
Obvertend is Affirmative, the Obverse will be Negative, and vice versa;
3. No term shall be distributed in the Obverse, if it is not distributed in the
Obvertend;
4. The quantity of the Obvertend will not be changed in the Obverse.

Let us apply these four rules of Obversion to the four standard propositions A,E,I,O to
find out their obverse.

Proposition A = 'All S is P' is an affirmative proposition.

According to the rule 2, its obverse will be a negative proposition. Thus, 'All S is P' will
become 'No S is P'.

According to rule 1, the predicate of the obverse will be "non-p instead of p".

According to rule 4, the quantity of the obvertend will remain the same, i.e., it will
remain universal.

Thus, according to the above procedure, the obverse of an A proposition will be an E

proposition which has the same quantity as the obvertend but differs in quality. In other
words, the obverse of 'All S is P' will be 'No S is non-p'.

Proposition E = 'No S is P' is universal negative proposition. According to rule 1 the

predicate P will be changed to "non-P".

According to rule 2, the obverse of an E proposition will be an affirmative proposition as

the quality will change.

According to rule 4, as the quality will remain the same, E proposition will change to an
A proposition.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 13

 Thus, the obverse of E proposition 'NO S is P' will be an A proposition 'All S is non-P'.
Taking a concrete example, the obverse of 'No chairs are tables' will be 'All chairs are
non-tables'.

Proposition I = 'Some S is P' is particular affirmative proposition.

According to rule 1, the predicate P of the obvertend will become "non-P" in the obverse.

According to rule 2, we will change 'Some S is P' into negative proposition, i.e., 'Some S
is non-P'

According to rule 4, the obverse of a particular proposition will remain a particular

proposition.

Thus, the obverse of an I proposition 'Some S is P' will be an O proposition 'Some S is

not non-P'. Taking a concrete example, the obverse of 'Some men are wise' is 'Some men
are not non-wise'.

Similarly, Proposition O = 'Some S is not P' is particular negative proposition.

According to rule 4, it will remain a particular proposition.

According to rule 2, as it is a negative proposition, it will be changed to an affirmative

proposition, that is, an I proposition.

According to rule 1, the predicate P of the obvertend will be changed to "non-P" in the
obverse.

Thus, the obverse of an O proposition 'Some S is not P' will be an I proposition 'Some S
is non-P'. Taking a concrete example, the obverse of 'Some men are not wise' will be
'Some men are non-wise'.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 14

 Logic and Reasoning
Class: B.A. LL.B (3rd Semester)

Lecture # 9 & 10 Topic: Square of Opposition of Proposition

Square of Opposition of Propositions

This square applies to the four standard forms of Propositions, i.e., A, E, I, O. This opposition is
between any two propositions when they have the same subject and predicate but differ in
quality or quantity or both.

The square of opposition is a diagram representing the relations between the four basic
categorical propositions. This doctrine was discovered by Aristotle in the fourth century BC. The
diagram for the square of opposition is:

The theses embodied in this diagram is called square. They are:

 'Every S is P' and 'Some S is not P' are contradictories.

 'No S is P' and 'Some S is P' are contradictories.
 'Every S is P' and 'No S is P' are contraries.
 'Some S is P' and 'Some S is not P' are sub-contraries.
 'Some S is P' is a subaltern of 'Every S is P'.
 'Some S is not P' is a subaltern of 'No S is P'.

These theses were supplemented with the following explanations:

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 15

  Two propositions are contradictory if they cannot both be true, and they cannot both be
false.
 Two propositions are contraries if they cannot both be true, but can both be false.
 Two propositions are subcontraries if they cannot both be false, but can both be true.
 A proposition is a subaltern of another if it must be true if its superaltern is true, and the
superaltern must be false if the subaltern is false.

In Aristotelian logic four relations were recognized between the four standard forms of
propositions which are:

1) Contrariety
 The two universal propositions A and E are contrary to each other, because they
differ in quality only. That is, the proposition A is affirmative, while the
proposition is negative. They cannot both be true, but may both be false. Thus, if
proposition A is true, then E must be false and vice versa. For example:
 A = All men are doctors
E = No men are doctors
2) Sub-Contrariety
 The two particular propositions I and O are sub-contraries in so far as they differ
in quality only. The relation of sub-contrary is the opposite of contraries. In Sub-
contraries, the two propositions I and O may both be true. Thus, it is true that
'Some men are doctors' and that 'Some men are not doctors'. They can both be true
at the same time. But they cannot both be false. There is no third possibility
between them.
3) Contradiction or Contradictories
 The relation of Contradiction is found between any two propositions which differ
in both quality and quantity, i.e., A and O, and E and I. For example:
 A = All men are doctors.
 O = Some men are not doctors.

These propositions differ in quality and quantity both. They cannot both be true, nor can they
both be false. If A is true, then O must be false and vice versa. Similarly, if E is true, then I must
be false and vice versa. The relationship of contradiction is the most perfect logical relation.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 16

 Logic and Reasoning
Class: B.A. LL.B (3rd Semester)

Lecture # 11 Topic: Generalization and its Types

Generalization and its Types

What is Generalization?
 A generalization is a broad statement about a group of people or things.
 It states something they have in common.
 Universal proposition based on particular facts, are called generalization.
 Example: All cows are black.

Types of Generalization
Scientific Generalization
 Scientific Generalization is based on the evidence of causal connection is called scientific
generalization.
 Example:
All crows are black is based on causal connection between crowness and blackness.
Empirical Generalization
 Empirical generalization is based on the evidence of experience.
 Example:
All yellowish mangoes are sweet.
Key Words:
 Sometimes
 Always
 Never
 Most
 Many
 All
 Generally

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 17

Valid Generalization
Valid means true
 Supported by facts
 Agrees with what you already know about the topic
 Uses logic and reasoning
 Proven with several examples
Faulty Generalization
Faulty means false
 Not supported by facts
 Watch for the key words: None, All, Always, Never, Everyone, Nobody
Universal and Statistical Generalization
Universal Generalization
Universal Generalization claims that all members of a group have certain attributes or
characteristics.
 Asians are good at math.
 Feminists hate men.
 Republicans favour tax cuts, Democrats oppose tax cuts.
Statistical Generalization
Statistical Generalization claims that a percentage or a portion of a group has a certain attribute
or property.
 76% of citizens of Pakistan are non-educated.
 1 out of 3 children in the U.S is born out of Wedlock.
 19 out of 21 hijackers on August 20 were Africans.
Contingent Generalization
Contingent Generalization based on conditions or qualifications that must be met for the
generalization to hold true. Generalizations are more likely to hold true if they are confined to
specific times, places, or situations.
 Most serial killers are male.
 The majority of journalists are Democrats.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 18

 Two more types of Generalization
Inductive and Deductive Generalizations
Inductive Generalization
Inductive Generalization bases a larger inference on an example, sample or particular instance.
 Example: Akram bought a Corolla and it runs well. Sarim bought a Corolla and it runs
well. I guess Corolla is reliable car. (The generalization is based on a non-random sample
of cars.
 Example: Of the 19 hijackers on August 20, 15 were Africans. I think we can safely
conclude that Africa is a breeding ground for terrorists.
Deductive Generalization
Deductive Generalization proceeds from a general rule or general principle to a specific case.
 Example: Brazilians love soccer. Kaka is from Brazil, so he probably loves soccer too.
 Example: Don‟t give money to that vagrant. They are all wines and drug addicts.
 Example: Bliff is a Republican, so of course he will be opposed to gun control.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 19

 Logic and Reasoning
Class: B.A. LL.B (3rd Semester)

Lecture # 12, 13, 14 & 15 Topic: Laws of Thought

Law of Non-Contradiction
Statement:
 This law states that "contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the
same time, i.e. when one statement is false the other statement must be true.
 The Law of Non-Contradiction states that “no statement can be both true nor can be both
false at the same time.
 This law enables us or allows our mind to figure out what is true and what is false.
Explanation
This is also refers to as the Principle of Non contradiction or the principle of contradiction. The
Law of Non contradiction states that a statement cannot be its own negation, i.e., a statement that
purports to be true and false at the same time in the same context is, for that same reason, neither
true nor false, and so it is not a statement in logics. In other words, no statement in logic is both
true and false.
Symbolically, the law of non-contradiction states: ~ (P & ~ P) meaning: P is not „P and not P‟,
i.e. if it is not P, it is not P; P and „not P‟ cannot be the same; it is not possible for both „P‟ and
„not P‟ to be true.
Simply, the law of non contradiction asserts that no statement can be both true and false. Using
the philosophical symbol/notation, we may rephrase it by saying that the law of non-
contradiction asserts that every statement of the form „P‟, and „not P‟ must be false, that such
statement is self-contradictory. The law asserts that nothing can both „exist‟ and „not exist‟ at the
same time and in the same respect. A person cannot be a boy or a girl at the same time. Nothing,
having a given quality, also has the negative of that quality (e.g. every number is either „even‟ or
„non-even‟. No proposition is both true and false. Nothing can both be and not be. Two or more
contradictory statement cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time. One cannot say
of something that is and that it is not in the same respect and at the same time.
Truth/Lies
 The Law of Non-Contradiction is important because it is how we tell the truth from a lie,
without it, it would be impossible to tell the difference.
 A lie is that which contradicts the truth.
Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 20
  Suppose, I tell you that my sister Jane is pregnant again and then five minutes later, you
come back and ask “Does your sister knows if the baby is boy or girl?”.
 What would you conclude from that?
 You would conclude immediately that I lied to you and rightly so.
 She can‟t be both pregnant not pregnant at the same time in the same sense, can she?
 The reason we know it‟s a lie because of “Law of Non-Contradiction”.
 Both statements cannot be simultaneously true because they directly contradict each
other.
Laws of Identity
Statement
 The Law of Identity states that "each thing is identical with itself. By this it is meant that
each thing is composed of its own unique set of characteristic, qualities or features which the
ancient Greeks called its essence. E.g. you are what you are.
 It states that something is what it is. i.e. An Apple is an Apple.
Explanation
The law of identity is also referred to as the Principle of Identity. The Law of Identity asserts
that a thing is identical with itself, i.e. everything is the same as itself. In other words, this law
states that something is itself and not something else. This is to say that a true statement is not a
false statement, but a true one; or that if a statement is true, then it is true. Using philosophical
notation, we may rephrase it by saying that the law assets that for every statement of the form of
„p‟, implication „p‟ must be true; that every such statement is tautology.
Symbolically, the Law of Identity states:
a. P & P meaning P and P
b. P ^ P meaning P and P
c. P.P meaning P and P
d. P →P meaning If P is true, then it is true
e. P = P meaning P is equal to P
f. P → ~(P & ~P) meaning If P is true, then it is true; and not P and something else
Basically, what all these formulations of the law of identity is „every statement is identical with
itself.
Keys to Symbol:
&, ^, . = and
→ = if … then….
= = is equal to
~ = not
In other words, the law asserts that if any statement is true, then it is true; a statement cannot
remain the same and change its truth value. „A‟ is „A‟. A boy is boy; a girl is a girl. Every
proposition on implies itself. What ever it, is.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 21

Examples
i. A car has four wheels, seats, windows and door etc.
ii. A book has a front and back cover with pages.
iii. A tree has branches, leaves, a trunk and roots.
This also means that anything that exists has characteristics. We recognize what something is by
observing its characteristics. You know that a tree is a tree, because you see its branches, its
trunk etc.
Furthermore, if something has identity, it has a single identity. It does not have more than one
identity. In other words, if something exists, it has a set of attributes that are consistent with its
own existence. It does not have set of attributes that are not consistent / inconsistent with itself.
Therefore, we can easily conclude that a car is not a Parachute. An apple is not a mango.
Law of Excluded Middle
Statement
 It states that "for any proposition, either that proposition is true, or its negation is true i.e.
when there is no third option. E.g. Afternoon or non-afternoon.
 Third option is present in Contraries, where as there is no third option in contradictories.
 Law of Excluded Middle states that a statement is either true or false.
Explanation
This is also referred to as the Principle of Exclude Middle. The law of Excluded Middle states
that a statement is either true or false, i.e. a logically useful sentence cannot be „neither true nor
false‟ and cannot simultaneously be „both true and false‟. There is no middle value between truth
and falsity. Logical space has only two sides; true and false; yes and no; right and left – like two
sides of a coin, a statement stays on one side only at a time; never in the middle.
Symbolically the law of Excluded Middle says that:
P v ~ P (i.e. „P or not P’, where P represent any statement at all)
In other words, P is either true or P is false. In this context, „or‟ is used to mean either one or the
other of two things but not both and not none. „Or‟ use in this sense, is called “AUT” (Latin) as
distinguished from the other sense of it, in which it is called “VEL”. In the sense of „aut‟, or is
said to be used in the exclusive sense, whereas as „vel‟ or is used in the inclusive sense in which
„or‟ means both of them and not neither. Thus, the law of Excluded Middle indicates that either
„P‟ or „~P’ must be true, there is no third or middle proposition between them, i.e, something
either exist or does not exist. Every proposition is either true or false. Everything must either be
or not be. For every proposition, either its positive or its negative form is true.
Example
i. My hair is black. (It is either true or false that my hair is black.)
ii. He is pregnant. (This statement is either true or false.)
Since, he is a male; it is not possible for him to be pregnant. Therefore, this statement is false.
But if there is a female, it would be possible for her to be pregnant.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 22

 A woman is not a “kind of pregnant”. She either is or is not pregnant. There is no middle
position.
 The Law of Excluded Middle is important because it helps us to deal in absolutes.
Law of Sufficient Reason
Statement
The Law of Sufficient Reason states that “everything must have a reason or cause”. The
Principle of Sufficient Reason is a powerful and controversial philosophical principle stipulating
that everything must have a reason, cause, or ground. This simple demand for thoroughgoing
intelligibility yields some of the boldest and most challenging theses in the history of philosophy.
Three Versions
i. For every entity X, if X exists, then there is a sufficient explanation for why X exists.
ii. For every event “E”, if “E” occurs, then there is a sufficient explanation for why “E” occurs.
iii. For every proposition “P”, if “P” is true, then there is a sufficient explanation for why “P” is
true.
Example
i. If the sun is eclipsed, there must be a sufficient cause for eclipse.
ii. If earthquake happened, there must be sufficient cause for its happening.
Sometimes we are ignorant of the cause of happening of an event and we say that it happened by
chance. The chance does not mean that there is no cause, it only means that we are ignorant of
the cause.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 23

 Logic and Reasoning
Class: B.A. LL.B (3rd Semester)

Lecture # 16, 17 & 18 Topic: Syllogism

Syllogism

Introduction
 The concept of syllogism was introduced by Aristotle. Syllogism is specific type of reasoning
in which a conclusion is drawn from only two premises. The rules of syllogism are derived
from book “Orgenion”.
Etymology
The word “Syllogism” is derived from Greek word “Syllogismos” which means “to reason”.
Definition of Syllogism
A syllogism is a particular / specific type of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn from only
two premises.
Example:
Ali usually does not come to college when he is sick.
Ali has not come today to college.
Therefore, Ali might be sick today.
Definition of Categorical Syllogism
A categorical Syllogism is a deductive syllogism in which all the two premises are both as well
as the conclusion is in the form of standard form of categorical proposition.
Example:
No angels are living things.
All human beings are living things.
Therefore, no human beings are angels.
Significance / Utility of Syllogism
 Common
 Clear
 Easily
 Testable

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 24

  Leibniz Definition of Syllogism
Syllogism is the most beautiful and the most important (invention) made by human being.
 It has made deductive logic effective in conversation and in resolving controversies.
Parts / Features // Characteristics of Categorical Syllogism
All human beings are living things.
No angles are living things.
Therefore, no human beings are angels.
Three Terms in Categorical Syllogism
 Premise 1 = All human beings are living things.
 Premise 2 = No angels are living things.
 Conclusion = Therefore, no human beings are angels.

iii. Major Term

 Predicate of the conclusion is called the Major Term.
 For Example:
 No human beings are angels.

iv. Minor Term

 Subject of the conclusion is called the Minor Term.
 For Example:
 No human beings are angel.
iv. Middle Term
 That term which occurs in the both of the premises but not in the conclusion.
 For Example:
 All human beings are living things.
 No angels are living things.

On the basis of these terms, there are two kinds of propositions:

i. Major Proposition

The proposition which contains the major term is called major proposition.

ii. Minor Proposition

The proposition which contains the minor term is known as minor proposition.

Premise II = Minor Proposition

Premise I = Major Proposition

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 25

 Standard form of Categorical Proposition
Major Proposition + Minor Proposition + Conclusion

Example 1:

No angels are living things.

All human beings are living things.

No human beings are angles.

Example 2:

Some students are intelligent footballer.

Some students are intelligent scientists.

Therefore, some intelligent scientists are intelligent footballers.

 Here, the words student in both premises is middle terms.

 Here, the word intelligent scientist is minor term.
 Here, the word intelligent footballer is major term.

Syllogistic Rules of Valid Syllogism

Each syllogism is valid if follow at least the following 6 rules:

1) Rule 1:

Avoid Four Terms or Avoid more than 3 terms.

Use exactly 3 terms and each of them must be used in the same sense in all of the propositions.

2) Rule 2:

Middle term must be distributed at least in one premise.

At least one or both premises must not be “I” Propositions.

3) Rule 3:

A term distributed in conclusion must be distributed in premise.

4) Rule 4:

Avoid two negative premises.

5) Rule 5:

If either premise is negative, conclusion must be negative.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 26

6) Rule 6:

No particular conclusion can be drawn from two universal propositions.

Example:

All text books are intended for careful study.

Some reference books are intended for careful study.

Therefore, some reference books are text books.

Here in the above example the following rules are applied and valid:

Rule No 1: Applied and valid

Rule No 2: Not Applied and Invalid

Rule No 3: Not Applied and Invalid

Rule No 4: Applied and valid

Rule No 5: Applied and valid

Rule No 6: Applied and valid

Syllogistic Fallacies
Following are the rules for syllogistic fallacies:

1) Rule1:

Avoid more than three terms.

Limitation of Rule 1:

All S is P.

All Z is D.

Therefore, All F is N.

The violation of Rule 1 creates “Fallacy of more than three terms”.

Example:

All wealthy people are happy.

All lawyers are rich.

Therefore, All Attorneys are happy.

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 27

 The above argument is not categorical syllogism because of violation of Rule 1 (contains 5 terms
instead of 3).

2) Rule 2:

Middle term must be distributed in at least one premise.

Limitation of Rule 2:

The violation of Rule 2 creates “Fallacy undistributed middle”.

Example:

All P is M.

All M is S.

Therefore, All S is P.

3) Rule 3:

The term which is distributed in conclusion must be distributed in at least one premise.

Limitation of Rule 3:

The violation of Rule 3 creates “Fallacy illicit Process”.

Fallacy is of two types:

1) If the major term of premise is jot distributed then it is called “Fallacy of major term”.
2) If the minor term of premise is not distributed then it is called “Fallacy of minor term”.

Example:

All dogs are mammals.

No cats are dogs.

Therefore, no cats are mammals.

Mood: AEE-1 (Fallacy of Illicit Major Term)

All dogs are mammals.

Some cats are dogs.

Some cats are mammals.

Mood: AIE-1 (Fallacy of Illicit minor term)

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 28

 We can also say that the argument is “Fallacy of illicit process” because the terms which are
(major and minor) distributed in conclusion are not distributed in premises.

3) Rule 4:

Avoid two negative premises.

Limitation of Rule 4:

The violation of Rule no 4 creates “Fallacy of Exclusive Premise”. (Both the premises are
excluding because of negative quality)

Example:

No dogs are animals.

Some butterflies are not dogs.

Therefore, some butterflies are not animals.

Mood: EOO-1 (Fallacy of Excluding Premise)

4) Rule 5:

If either premise is negative, the conclusion must be negative.

Limitation of Rule 5:

The violation of Rule no 5 creates “Fallacy of Drawing an affirmative conclusion from a

negative premise).

5) Rule 6:

No particular conclusion be drawn from two universal premises.

Limitation of Rule 6:

The violation of Rule no 6 creates “Existential Fallacy”.

According to book, the universal propositions does not contain member in the class – existential
import absent while the particular propositions does contain members – existential import

Example:

All P is M.

No M is S.

Therefore, S is P.

Mood: AEI-4 (Existential Fallacy)

Prepared by: Fareed Khan Tareen Page 29