Logic -(from the Greek "logos", which has a variety of meanings including

word, thought, idea, argument, account, reason or principle) is the study of

reasoning, or the study of the principles and criteria of valid inference and demonstration.
It attempts to distinguish good reasoning from bad reasoning. (
https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_logic.html)

Aristotle defined logic as "new and necessary reasoning", "new" -because it

allows us to learn what we do not know, and "necessary" because its conclusions are
inescapable. It asks questions like "What is correct reasoning?", "What distinguishes a
good argument from a bad one?", "How can we detect a fallacy in reasoning?" Logic
investigates and classifies the structure of statements and arguments, both through the
study of formal systems of inference and through the study of arguments in natural
language. It deals only with propositions (declarative sentences, used to make an
assertion, as opposed to questions, commands or sentences expressing wishes) that are
capable of being true and false. It is not concerned with the psychological processes
connected with thought, or with emotions, images and the like. It covers core topics such
as the study of fallacies and paradoxes, as well as specialized analysis of reasoning using
probability and arguments involving causality and argumentation theory. (
https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_logic.html)
That's a great addition to the description of logic! Aristotle's definition of logic as "new
and necessary reasoning" captures the essence of logical inquiry and its importance in
understanding correct reasoning and identifying fallacies. Let's expand on some key
points mentioned:
1. Learning the Unknown: Logic allows us to go beyond what we already know by
providing a systematic approach to acquiring knowledge. It helps us discover new
information, make connections, and draw valid conclusions based on evidence and
reasoning.
2. Inescapable Conclusions: Logical reasoning leads to conclusions that are
inescapable if the premises are true and the reasoning is valid. This means that if
an argument is logically sound, its conclusion cannot be denied without
contradicting oneself.
3. Evaluating Arguments: Logic helps us distinguish between good and bad
arguments by providing a framework for assessing their validity and soundness. It
 enables us to analyze the structure of statements and arguments to determine if
they are logically consistent and coherent.
4. Fallacies: Logic investigates and exposes fallacies, which are errors or flaws in
reasoning that can lead to incorrect or misleading conclusions. By studying
fallacies, we can identify common pitfalls in argumentation and avoid making them
ourselves.
5. Formal Systems and Natural Language: Logic encompasses the study of formal
systems of inference, such as propositional and predicate logic, which use symbols
and rules to represent and manipulate logical relationships. It also analyzes
arguments in natural language, which is the language we use in everyday
communication.
6. Propositional Nature: Logic focuses on propositions, which are declarative
sentences capable of being true or false. It is concerned with the logical structure
of propositions and how they relate to each other.
7. Exclusions: Logic does not delve into the psychological processes associated with
thinking, such as emotions or images. Instead, it concentrates on the abstract
study of reasoning and argumentation itself.
8. Core Topics: Logic covers a range of core topics, including the study of fallacies
and paradoxes, as well as specialized analysis of reasoning involving probability,
causality, and argumentation theory.
By exploring these aspects of logic, we gain a deeper understanding of its scope, purpose,
and applications. Logic equips us with the tools to think critically, construct cogent
arguments, and engage in rational discourse across various domains of knowledge.
Logical systems should have three things:
• consistency (which means that none of the theorems of the system contradict one
another);
• soundness (which means that the system's rules of proof will never allow a false
inference from a true premise); and
• completeness (which means that there are no true sentences in the system that
cannot, at least in principle, be proved in the system).
(https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_logic.html)

LOGIC AND JUDGEMENT

• THE NATURE OF JUDGEMENT
Meaning is grasped by the act of judgement. Through judgement, we form concepts.
According to Kenneth Gallagher, judgement is the process of seizing a present object in
terms of the ideas we associate to it. Meaning, therefore is the concept we assign to the
reality of an object. But the validity of a concept does not rely alone in our senses. The
senses serve as a link to the reality of the world, but the world exists as a disorganized
set of raw data. In the process of thinking, therefore the mind organizes the data that
pass through the senses. This results to the formation of an insight. An Insight is a
meaning that one arrives at after relating or associating the data that enter the mind.
The mind, in this regard is a kind of an instrument. It synthesizes the data to form
concepts. Concepts help us picture out reality. Logic provides the mechanism, or in
computer parlance, the software that systemizes the act of judging.

LOGIC MEANING JUDGEMENT IDEA- MIND THROUGH SENSES CONCEPT

According to Kant, a “judgment” (Urteil) is a specific kind of “cognition” (Erkenntnis)—

which he generically defines as any conscious mental representation of an object
(A320/B376)—that is the characteristic output of the “power of judgment” (Urteilskraft).
The power of judgment, in turn, is a cognitive “capacity” (Fähigkeit) but also specifically
a spontaneous and innate cognitive capacity, and in virtue of these it is the “faculty of
judging” (Vermögen zu urteilen) (A69/B94), which is also the same as the “faculty of
thinking” (Vermögen zu denken) (A81/B106). (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-
judgment/)

Indeed, the nature of judgment plays a crucial role in understanding how meaning is
grasped and concepts are formed. Let's examine the points you mentioned and further
elaborate:
1. Grasping Meaning: The act of judgment is fundamental in grasping meaning. When
we engage in judgment, we connect ideas and concepts to the objects or realities
we encounter. Through this process, we assign concepts to the perceived reality,
allowing us to make sense of it.
2. Organization of Data: Our senses serve as a bridge to the external world, providing
us with raw data from our observations and experiences. However, this raw data
is often disorganized and lacks structure. The mind, through the process of
thinking, organizes and synthesizes this data into meaningful insights. It forms
connections and associations between different elements, resulting in a coherent
understanding of the observed reality.
3. Insight Formation: Insights are the meanings or concepts we arrive at through the
association and relation of the organized data in our minds. They represent a
 deeper understanding and interpretation of the information we have gathered.
Insights allow us to go beyond the immediate sensory experience and develop a
more comprehensive view of reality.
4. Role of the Mind: The mind, in this context, can be viewed as an instrument or a
cognitive faculty that organizes and synthesizes the data received through the
senses. It actively engages in the process of thinking, forming concepts that help
us comprehend and depict reality.
5. Logic and Judgment: Logic provides the framework or software that systemizes
the act of judging. It offers principles, rules, and tools for reasoning, enabling us
to evaluate the validity and soundness of judgments and arguments. Logic guides
our thinking processes, ensuring that our judgments are coherent, consistent, and
grounded in rationality.
6. Kant's Perspective: Immanuel Kant emphasized the concept of judgment within
his philosophy. He defined judgment as a specific form of cognition or conscious
mental representation of an object. For Kant, judgment is an innate cognitive
capacity and a spontaneous faculty of thinking. It involves the power of organizing
and connecting concepts to form coherent understandings of the world.
By recognizing the role of judgment in forming concepts and assigning meaning, we gain
insight into how our minds construct knowledge and comprehend reality. Logic serves as
a valuable tool in refining our judgments and ensuring they are well-founded, leading to
a more accurate and coherent understanding of the world around us.

LOGIC AND THOUGHT

• By definition, logic is the process by which we systematize our way of knowing the
thruth. Science requires the existence of some evidence or proof to validate its
claims. Logic, as science, determines the accuracy of our judgements, and uses in
a systematic way certain principles, rules and methods. The physicist Niels Bohr,
who helped create the atom bonb, once said, “no, you are not thinking, you are
just being logical.

LOGIC AS PHILOSOPHY

LOGIC AND METAPHYSICS

METAPHYSICS-The word ‘metaphysics’ is notoriously hard to define. Twentieth-century
coinages like ‘meta-language’ and ‘metaphilosophy’ encourage the impression that
metaphysics is a study that somehow “goes beyond” physics, a study devoted to matters
that transcend the mundane concerns of Newton and Einstein and Heisenberg. This
impression is mistaken. The word ‘metaphysics’ is derived from a collective title of the
fourteen books by Aristotle that we currently think of as making up Aristotle's
Metaphysics. Aristotle himself did not know the word. (He had four names for the branch
of philosophy that is the subject-matter of Metaphysics: ‘first philosophy’, ‘first science’,
‘wisdom’, and ‘theology’.) At least one hundred years after Aristotle's death, an editor of
his works (in all probability, Andronicus of Rhodes) titled those fourteen books “Ta meta
ta physical”—“the after the physicals” or “the ones after the physical ones”—the “physical
ones” being the books contained in what we now call Aristotle's Physics. The title was
probably meant to warn students of Aristotle's philosophy that they should attempt
Metaphysics only after they had mastered “the physical ones”, the books about nature or
the natural world—that is to say, about change, for change is the defining feature of the
natural world. This is the probable meaning of the title because Metaphysics is about
things that do not change. In one place, Aristotle identifies the subject-matter of first
philosophy as “being as such”, and, in another as “first causes”. It is a nice—and vexed—

question what the connection between these two definitions is. Perhaps this is the
answer: The unchanging first causes have nothing but being in common with the mutable
things they cause. Like us and the objects of our experience—they are, and there the
resemblance ceases. (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/)

Logic and metaphysics are interconnected branches of philosophy that deal with
fundamental questions about reality, knowledge, and reasoning. Let's explore the
relationship between logic and metaphysics in more detail:
1. Metaphysics: Metaphysics is a branch of philosophy that examines the
fundamental nature of reality and the underlying principles that govern it. It
explores questions about existence, causality, identity, time, space, and the nature
of being itself. Metaphysics delves into the realm of abstract concepts and seeks
to understand the ultimate nature of the world and our place within it.
2. Logic: Logic, on the other hand, is the study of reasoning and argumentation. It
provides a framework for evaluating the validity and soundness of arguments,
analyzing the structure of statements, and identifying fallacies. Logic focuses on
the principles of valid inference, deduction, and coherent reasoning.
3. Connection between Logic and Metaphysics: Logic and metaphysics are
interconnected because logical reasoning is often employed in metaphysical
inquiry. Metaphysics involves asking fundamental questions about the nature of
 reality, and logic provides the tools for analyzing and evaluating the coherence
and validity of those questions and their corresponding arguments.
4. Role of Logic in Metaphysics: Logic helps in formulating and assessing
metaphysical claims and arguments. It ensures that the reasoning is coherent,
consistent, and logically valid. By employing logical principles, metaphysicians can
identify fallacies, avoid circular reasoning, and construct more robust and
persuasive arguments.
5. Application of Logic in Metaphysical Topics: Logic is applied in various metaphysical
topics, such as the nature of time, causality, identity, and existence. For example,
logical reasoning is used to explore the coherence of concepts like necessary
existence, the nature of abstract entities, or the relationship between mind and
body.
6. Limitations: While logic can assist in clarifying and evaluating metaphysical claims,
it has its limitations. Metaphysical questions often deal with abstract and complex
concepts that may go beyond the reach of formal logical analysis. Metaphysics
may involve intuitive or speculative reasoning that is not strictly bound by logical
rules but still aims to provide insight into fundamental aspects of reality.
In summary, logic and metaphysics are intertwined branches of philosophy. Logic
provides the tools for evaluating and constructing arguments within metaphysics,
ensuring coherence and logical validity. By employing logical reasoning, metaphysicians
strive to explore the fundamental nature of reality and gain deeper insights into
philosophical questions.

LOGIC AND COMMON SENSE

• Common Sense refers tour capacity to make judgement based on perceived
knowledge. This knowledge is naturally and universally accepted. Common sense
dictates that data and facts do not lie, and so, as the senses picture them out, a
valid judgement is arrived at.

• GE Moore, a pioneer in 20th century analytic philosopy and who is also famous for
his essay , “ A Defense of common sense”, lists some very obvious thruths, such
“There exist at this time a living human body which is my body”, “My Body has
existed continuously on or near the Earth, at various distances from or in contact
with each other existing things, including other living human beings”, and may
others. He asserts in his essay that these statements are obvious to the human
intellect and ae held to be generally and naturally true

• Any logical Judgement must always consider the laws of common sense, for
instance, when scientist consider venturing into space, they need to understand
the data and the laws of physics in designing the best possible space craft. A
mistake, a lapse in common sense could result to a lapse in judgement. Scientist
need to consider the pull of the earth, the gravitational force of heavenly bodies,
the absence of oxygen in the atmosphere, etc. mistakes occur because of man’s
inability to make a correct judgement on what seems to be obvious; that to much
 heat can destroy any object, that the absence of oxygen can annihilate any life
for, that the pull of gravity can cause any object to fall, among others.
Reference: CHRISTOPHER RYAN B. MABOLOC AND ATTY. EDGAR B. PASCUA II;
REVISED EDITION ELEMENTS OF LOGIC, AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH; PAGES
2-7, PUBLISHED BY REX BOOKSSTORE MANILA PHILIPPINES ;2012
LOGIC AS SCIENCE

LOGIC AS SCIENTIFIC METHOD

• Logic is the science of correct argument.

A good example of an argument is a prosecuting attorney's summation to a
jury. The prosecutor will suppose that the jury, at the end of the trial, having
heard the testimony and seen the evidence, is convinced of certain
propositions. The prosecutor will suppose that the jury already accepts that the
gun identified by the ballistics expert as the murder weapon was registered in
the defendant's name, that Mrs. McIvers, the cleaning lady, overheard the
defendant quarreling with the deceased an hour before the shooting, and so
on. These propositions that the prosecutor supposes that the jury already
accepts are the premisses of the prosecutor's argument. The prosecutor's job
is to convince the jury that these premisses give them compelling reason to
accept the conclusion that the defendant is guilty of murder. The purpose of
the argument is to lead the jury from the premisses to the conclusion, to
persuade them that, having accepted the premisses, they ought to accept the
conclusion as well. https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/linguistics-and-philosophy/24-
241-logic-i-fall-2005/readings/chp01.pdf

• It is noteworthy to cite Galileo, the father of modern science, who championed the
important role of scienticfic investigation to human knowledge. For him, modern
science entail’s the logic of discovery.

• Sir Isaac Newton, the greatest scientist before Einstein, for instance also suggested
that modern science must befreed from speculative nature of metaphysics.
Knowledge, Newton argues, must be based on firm ground. To achieve this aim,
any scientific investigation must be based on mathematics. In order to produce
legitimate results, the scientist must put nature to experiments, systems and
methods.

CHAPTER 2: TERMS, MEANINGS AND DEFINITION

TERMS, DEFINITION AND MEANINGS

Language, according to Wittgenstein, is a picture of the world. He argues, “The limits

of my language show the limits of my world”. Logical thinking deals with language, for
the world and for our thoughts are represented linguistically. Terms denote meaning, and
they reflect what truth is. Sense perception generates ideas in our minds. Ideas, simply
put are concepts. Concepts picture out “what sort of thing a thing is”. They reveal the
truth of things.

Concepts, as expression of truths, need to be clear. A definition fulfils this task. Any
definition yields the meaning of objects, and that meaning explains the nature of an
object. Terms, on the other hand, are the pillars of propositions. Understanding their
nature and use is crucial in order to know the functions of propositions. To learn how to
do operative logical methods like interference, it is important to know the basic principles
governing the nature and use of terms.

MEANINGS
THE MEANING OF THE CONCEPT

• Consider two persons working on a building, and person A tells person B, Slab! What
do you think does person A mean with the word “slab”? Is he trying to define a slab,
is he pointing to a slab, or is he saying that such is the name of a particular object?
Person A is trying to communicate to person B, suggesting that it is the thing that he
needs. What is the meaning of this? This means that the word “slab” is assigned to a
thing in actual existence, and thus, to name that thing generates a certain action. In
this sense, meaning is communicated.

• But to understand the meaning of a term, the nature of meaning must be explained
first. Meaning is a mental phenomenon. It serves as a copy of an instance of any
particular object. Meaning denotes the object. The object, therefore is represented
mentally by way of this meaning. When the meaning is uttered, it becomes a term.
• Meaning is designed by way of terms. In this regard, a term is a label for something.
The term carries the meaning of the entity it represents. Consider terms such as
galaxy, volcano and disaster. Actual objects are designated by these terms. Ideas
make apparent whatever appears to the senses.

Types of Meaning

In terms of types, meanings can be classified into the following:

• Intuitive
• Abstractive
• Contrary
 • Contradictory.
Intuitive meaning- Direct observation result to the meaning that are intuitive, it is a
type of perception that is immediate. The meaning, therefore, directly points to the
object. This means that this kind of idea is something that is readily available after one
sees or feels something. The senses get a direct experience of the object. For instance,
we see the color of flowers, we feel the heat of the lava flow, we hear the melody of a
song, and we smell the fragrance of a rose. Meaning can also be abstractive.

Abstract meanings are those borne out of concepts that the mind gives birth to. Such
concepts emerge after the process of judgment. Judgment on the nature of an object in
relation to other entities results to abstractive meanings. These meanings are produced
from the process of reasoning. We usually make an association of our different
experiences and come up with a certain judgment by way of deduction. For example, we
judge certain people and places as a great. We judge that certain things are valuable.

Meanings can also be contradictory or contrary.

Contradictory meanings are ones that exclude each other. This suggests that a given
meaning is the exact opposite of another. We say that if one is true, the other is not; if
one is false, the other is true. The examples we have are existence and nothingness, evil
and non-evil, and violence and nonviolence.

Contrary meanings- We also hear expression like “contrary or claims …”, “contrary of
facts …” and “contrary to public perception …” which suggests opposition to perceived
notions or ideas. Contrary meanings express or represent the two extremes among
objects of the same type, not necessarily the exact opposite. They are not totally
opposed, but belong to the same kind of genus. For instance, “joy and suffering” are
extremes of feelings, “success and failure” are limits of the result of an undertaking, and
“beautiful and ugly” are at the both ends of an appearance.

DEFINITIONS
Definition as Explanation

• Definitions have been said to be limiting concepts. They are at such for they mark the
limits of any attribute that is applicable to any given concepts. Concepts capture
reality. Concepts, in this sense, are meanings established by empirical observation or
cultural designation. Logic ideas with the former. To understand and know the
meaning of a concept, one needs to define it. The definition of a concept, therefore,
explains the nature of what a concept represents. Concepts are mental expressions
of things. Definitions explain what concept are.
Two Parts of Definition

There are two parts of a definition. A definition consists of the symbol being defined
and the symbol or group of symbols used to express the meaning of the symbol being
defined. The definiendum refers to the word being defined while the definiens is the
word or group of words used to explain the meaning of the definiendum. Thus, to say
that “p is q” means that “p” possesses the attribute of “q” and that “q” explains what
“p” is as an object.

Definitions in Use

• Definitions depend in use. If one wants to identify what a thing really is, then one
uses a real definition. A real definition explains the essential nature of a thing. It tells
us what a thing really is. We actually use a real definition in daily conversations. A
real definition presents the meaning if the definiendum in its actual function. It shows
the current use of the word.

Examples are ‘spectrum” as “the range of different colors produced when light passes
through something” and “ligament” as “the bands of strong tissue which connect
bones at the joints”.

• When meaning is something is that is intentionally put forward, definitions are

stipulative in nature, which is a definition that results from deliberately assigning some
meaning to a word due to some intended purpose, either for secrecy or convenience.

For example, “ The Manhattan Project” was the name assigned to the work of
scientists tasked to make the first atom bomb.
• When scientific clarity is required and so that all forms of ambiguities are erased,
terms are given a precising definition. It is a type of definition that seeks to totally
eliminate blases against terms si that their application becomes clear. Vagueness and
ambiguity are sources of disputes due to misinterpretation. Precising definitions make
the meaning of the term articulate, coherent,and conspicuous. Thus, disagreements
in meaning are avoided. Precising definitions seek to settle disputes in meaning.

Examples of words that need precise definitions are autism spectrum disorder or ASD,
AH1N1, Lou Gebrig’s disease, among others.
• To change what one feels about something, i.e., a concept or an experience,
persuasive definitions are used. This type of definition seeks to stir emotion or
influence human behavior so that change may be expected from people in terms of
their attitude toward certain claims. This definition does not only inform, but strives
to convince people.

Example: To picture the evil that is abortion, the said term has been defined as the
“murder of an innocent unborn child”.
• Lastly, as its name suggests, a theoretical definition expresses a generalization about
the nature of physical reality. It tries to capture an all embracing explanation about
physical events. Moreover, a theory unifies verifiable principles or laws of phenomena.

For instance, we can mention the theory of multiple intelligences, string theory, chaos
theory, and the big bang theory.

TERMS
Russell’s suggestion in is monumental essay “On Denoting” in 1905 that terms are names
that express the meaning of entities, such as “The present King of France is bald ”further
shed light on the problem of meaning. For Russell, meaning is a true or false question.
But Peter Strawson of Oxford, almost half a century later in 1950, argued against Russell,
saying that meaning does not exist in its assignment, but on the speaker who assigns the
meaning. Thus, sentences don’t mean, people do. The meaning of the sentence ins in
the use. Thus, if there is no real King of France, the sentence is of no use. We shall not
extend this debate, but the following sections will give us a basic insight into the nature
and meaning of a term. (CHRISTOPHER RYAN B. MABOLOC AND ATTY. EDGAR B.
PASCUA II; REVIED EDITION ELEMENTS OF LOGIC, AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH;
PUBLISHED BY REX BOOKSSTORE MANILA PHILIPPINES ;2012)

The Nature of a Term

(CHRISTOPHER RYAN B. MABOLOC AND ATTY. EDGAR B. PASCUA II; REVIED EDITION
ELEMENTS OF LOGIC, AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH; PUBLISHED BY REX BOOKSSTORE
MANILA PHILIPPINES ;2012)

• Andrew BachHuber defines a term as “a sign of a concept”. “From the point of view
of the structure of the language, he states further that a term is the most basic part
of proposition”. As a sign of concept, a terms represents an idea or an object. A term
is a word that denotes a particular object. By denoting, a term brings us an object or
idea.
 For example, the term mortal denotes such entities as man, flowers,
animals, and others. On the other hand, as the basic part of proposition, the
term acts as the subject or predicate of a proposition. It is the ground upon
which a proposition is resolved. In the proposition, “Mt. Mayon is the most
active volcano in the Philippines”, the term “Mt. Mayon” is the subject and
the term “the most active volcano in the Philippines” is the predicate.

It must be noted that the terms of representation, the term “Mt. Mayon”, which is of
course represented by a clear symbol, refers to a volcano. The term in this sense signifies
the existence of something actual. A term, therefore, is a representative of an object.

Use of a Term

• In the proposition, “Jesus is the greatest person to have walked the planet”, there
exists several words, i.e., Jesus, person, walk, and planet. When the term used
consists of a word, for instance, Jesus, such is called a simple term, while when
multiple words are used, like the greatest person to have walked in the planet, such
is called a complex term.
• Terms and words are not equivalent concepts. When a term is composed of more
than one word, we call that term a complex term. Think of terms like black hole,
biggest object in the solar system, most hawkish political figure, and the best Beatles
album. If one examines it carefully, each term above through consisting of many
words, signifies one reality.
• On the other hand, a simple term is a one-word term. Consider terms like space, sun,
Martian, and lunar.
• Moreover, terms can be used either as a significant or non-significant term. When a
term is used to directly express a concept, it is called a significant term. A significant
term shows the nature of a thing and explains what kind of thing a thing is

For example, the term logy comes form the Greek word logos, meaning
“word”, suggesting the importance of language in the nature of logical
thinking.

• Other instances of significant terms are leader, government, peace, territory, etc. We
can see that these terms directly point out that reality or entity which they represent.
The term directly expresses the nature of the entity. On the other hand, there are
terms that simply point out the thing without signifying what that thing is. This
includes demonstrative pronouns such as this, that, those, etc.
 For example, in the statement “That is valid”, the “that” does not express
directly what is actually means but merely points out something. We call
these terms nonsignificant.

Furthermore, terms can also be distributive and collective.

1. A term is distributive when it shows the essence of entity singularity.

Examples of these are robot, manifesto, democrat, spelunker, centrist,

etc.

2. A term is collective when it shows the essence of entities as a group, for instance,
company, cluster, union, etc. Collective terms signify the essence of entities as a unit,
individuals taken as a unit have something in common. A company, cluster, and union
express a group of individuals unified by a common vision or interest.

In logic, a term is a word or group of words that refers to a concept or

object. A term can be either distributive or non-distributive.

When a term is distributive, it expresses the essence of entity singularity,

which means it refers to each individual instance of the concept or object
being discussed. For example, in the proposition "All nurses are caring," the
term "nurses" is distributive because it refers to each individual nurse and
their caring nature.

On the other hand, a non-distributive term refers to the concept or object

as a whole, rather than to individual instances. For example, in the
proposition "Nursing is a caring profession," the term "nursing" is non-
distributive because it refers to the entire profession of nursing as a whole,
rather than to each individual nurse.

Understanding the difference between distributive and non-distributive

terms is important in logic because it affects the interpretation and validity
of propositions and arguments.

From the point of view of meaning, terms are univocal, equivocal, and
analogical.

1. First, a term is said to be univocal when it has the same meaning when applied in
different instances.
 For example, the term oval is used in the same sense when applied to “an
oval office”, “an oval table”, and ‘an oval field”, suggesting the meaning of
such figure. Other examples include the term pentagon, hydrogen, ion,
heredity, and others.
2. Secondly, a term is said to be equivocal when it is used in an entirely different sense.
The term graft can mean “surgically attaching a healthy tissue to replace a damage one
in a person’s body” and “obtaining money dishonesty by misusing a position of authority”.

3. A term is said to be analogical when it is used in distinct but related senses. When
applied to something, the meaning is neither totally the same or totally different.
Poetry, for instance, is a good source of analogical terms. This is because poetic lines
use metaphors,

For example, in Shakespeare’s Soliloquy from Hamlet, “The slings and arrows
of outrageous fortune”, “Or take to arms against a sea of troubles”, and “The
pangs of despised love”. The real lexical meaning of the term is beautifully
used to express some overflowing emotion.

In logic, a term is a word or phrase that refers to a specific concept or object.

Terms can be classified based on their meaning, which can be either univocal,
equivocal, or analogical.

A term is univocal when it has only one meaning that applies to all instances
of its use. For example, the term "triangle" always refers to a three-sided
polygon with three angles, regardless of its size or orientation. Univocal terms
are precise and consistent, making them ideal for use in logical arguments.

On the other hand, a term is equivocal when it has multiple meanings that are
not related to one another. For example, the term "bank" can refer to a
financial institution, the edge of a river, or a maneuver in a plane. When a term
is equivocal, it can create confusion and ambiguity in logical arguments.

Lastly, a term is analogical when it is used to refer to multiple related but

distinct concepts. For example, the term "health" can be used to describe
physical health, mental health, and social health. Analogical terms are useful
for expressing complex or nuanced ideas, but they can also be difficult to use
in logical arguments because their meanings can be subjective and dependent
on context.