Introduction

Ladies and gentlemen, good day i am by name _______i am here to present to you a
research topic but first let have the breakdown of the activities to be presented by
the group
Question 1: Explain intensely the principle of logic to distinguish between facts
and opinions.
Question 2: Define and explain what Reasoning is, and mention the types of
reasoning you know.

Firstly, we'll delve into the intricate world of logic. Our focus will be on the
principle of logic and how it intensively aids in distinguishing between facts and
opinions.

Secondly, we'll unravel the concept of reasoning. We'll define what reasoning is,
and I'll walk you through various types of reasoning that play a crucial role in
logical thinking.

Our exploration begins with an overview, tracing the origin of logic and guiding us
through the principles that help us discern facts from opinions, and also look into
the concept of reasoning. I'll define it in simple terms and walk you through various
types of reasoning that play a crucial role in logical thinking. So, without any more
delay, let's start this intellectual exploration.
 Question One
Explain intensely the principle of logic to distinguish between facts and opinions.

Overview of Logic
The term 'logic' comes from the Greek word 'logos' which can be translated into
reason, word, study or rationale (Ogbinaka, 2000:187) and logic is a branch of
philosophy that studies the art of intelligent speech or a well function reasoning it
is a tool of systematic reasoning or argument. Reasoning and argument are part of
everyday life of man. if a man’s speech or argument must be well understood by his
audience, the man must necessarily present his speech and argument in a logical
manner(MM shaaba(ph.D) 2003). But in the philosophic sense, the term 'logic'
denotes rationale, justification or reason. The term 'logic' was introduced in
philosophical discourse by a man called Zeno. Logic is the science of thought. It is
the study of the laws of correct reasoning. It is the art that guides reason on the path
of truth. The term 'logic' connotes reason, rationale, justification and study because
reasoning is all about providing justifications or rationales. Reasoning is done with
words and communicated in words.

Aristotle, the first thinker to devise a logical system, introduced syllogistic

reasoning in the Organon. The Megarian-Stoic School engaged with propositional
logic, and in the twelfth century, Peter Abelard formulated semantic principles. His
teachings significantly influenced the development of supposition theory in the
thirteenth century.

In the history of philosophy, Parmenides, the first ancient Greek philosopher to

develop logical principles, formulated the principles of identity and non-
contradiction. His metaphysical ideas became the basis for Aristotelian and modern
logic, laying the foundation for the evolution of logical thought.

Having discuss a little on the origin of logic, it is important to point out that unlike
philosophy itself, logicians seem to agree on what logic means or what it is about.
Although, logic has been variously defined by different scholars. But then all this
definition points towards the same subject matter of logic. For instance, Aristotle
sees logic as the scientific study of fundamental principles of human thoughts and
the laws that underline valid thought processes and discourse (Uduigwomen &
Ozumba, 1995:155). Copi defines logic as the study of the methods and principles
used in distinguishing good (correct) from bad /incorrect reasoning (1972). On the
other hand, Nancy sees logic “as the science that appraises reasoning as correct or
incorrect” (1990:3.4). Kahane on his part defines logic as “an attempt to distinguish
between correct (valid) from incorrect (invalid) arguments” (1968:2). For Moses
 Oke, logic primarily “is the study of methods and principles used to assess the
strength of the evidential link between the premises (supporting reasons) and
conclusion (Claims) or arguments” (Oke, 1999:165-166). Basically, you can notice
that in the above definitions the words which stand out clearly are reasoning and
argumentation. Therefore, we can say that the study of logic is the study of correct
and incorrect reasoning and arguments or that logic is the science of reasoning.

Furthermore, Logic is a systematic process of reasoning that establishes the cause of

a conclusion or the justification for truth. Logic is the science that studies reason.
Every field of science is the study of the logic that particular field. That is, the
product of logic as applied to that field. That is why almost every field of science
has the suffix '-logy' affixed to it. Suffix '-logy' stands for logic. It is the application
of logic to that field that makes it scientific.

While logic can be divided into various branches, for the purpose of our
presentation, I will focus on two main categories:
1. Material logic
2. Formal logic
Formal logic is otherwise known as deductive logic and material logic as inductive
logic.
1. Material logic: - deals with the logic that obtains when the conclusion obtained
from the process of reason is correct and also true as things are in the world.
Material logic demands that the conclusion be correct and also factually true.
For instance, All mammals reproduce Man is a mammal Therefore, man
reproduces.

2. Formal logic: - deals only with the correctness or coherence of the conclusion
arrived from the process of reasoning. Unfortunately, an argument can be correct
without being true. For instance,
All US presidents live in the Whitehouse.
Michelle Obama lives in the Whitehouse.
Therefore, Michelle Obama is a US president.

The argument above is coherent but untrue. Formal logic is solely concerned with
the conformity to the rules of logic. But material logic is concerned both with the
rules of logic and the truthfulness of the products of logic.

What are Facts and Opinions?

Facts
 Facts: is something concrete that can be proven. You can find facts in legal records,
scientific findings, encyclopedias, atlases, etc. In other words, facts are the truth and
are accepted as such.
Philosophers consider facts to be things that actually exist; they are aspects of what
is real. Whether you have stated a fact is an all or nothing thing: if the statement is
about something that describes how the world might be, it either expresses a fact,
and is true, or, on the other hand, it expresses something that is not a fact and is
false.

David Hume, in "An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding," explores two

meanings of the term "fact," particularly in the phrase "matters of fact." Here, facts
are considered contingently true, subject to empirical or a posteriori knowledge.
Hume's distinction aligns with the broader categorization of human reasoning into
"Relations of Ideas" and "Matters of Fact," where the term "fact" is applied to both
emotional and logical statements, as exemplified in "Sam is sad" and "2 + 2 = 4.

Opinions
Opinion is less concrete. It is a view formed in the mind of a person about a
particular issue. In other words, it is what someone believes or thinks, and is not
necessarily the truth. Also, note in the examples below how facts are the same for
everybody, but opinion: can differ quite widely.
Examples of an opinion:
 Ahmad can have the opinion that Italian food tastes best, while Joe has the opinion
that French food is ideal.
 Sue can have the opinion that reading is boring, while Mike can have the opinion
that reading is fun.
 Penny can have the opinion that cold weather is better, while Tim can prefer hot
weather.
According to Aristotle, Opinion applies to what, being true or false, may be other
than it is: in fact, opinion is the apprehension of an immediate and unnecessary
premise.

Logical Processes
Simple apprehension, judgment, reasoning and argument constitute what we call
logical processes.
1. Simple Apprehension
Simple apprehension is the act by which the mind forms the concept of something
without affirming or denying anything about it. For instance, if I say “look at that
Ship” and stop there. This is a simple apprehension because I have not said
anything about the Ship. I have neither affirmed nor denied anything about the Ship.
 Some philosophers and logicians have denied the possibility of a simple
apprehension. According to them, there is nothing like simple apprehension.

2. Judgment in logic
Judgment is known as the act by which the mind affirms or denies something of
something else. For instance, if I proceed to say “look, that ship is big” then I have
made a judgment by affirming the “bigness” of the Ship.

3. Reasoning and Argument

Reasoning and argument constitute the third and last stage of any logical process. It
is also known as the act by which the mind passes from one, two or more judgments
to a further judgment distinct from the preceding ones but implicitly contained in
them. Besides simple apprehension and judgment, logic is strictly concerned with
reasoning and argument.

The Principle of Logic

Logic is a branch of philosophy that is based on certain fundamental principles like
the 'law of identity', the 'law of excluded middle', the 'law of non-contradiction', and
the ‘principle of sufficient reason'. These fundamental principles assist in
formulating true statements in a linguistic discourse.
1. Law of non-contradiction.
One of the most fundamental principles of logic is the law of non-contradiction.
According to this law, something cannot simultaneously exist and not exist in the
same way and under the same conditions. For example, a car cannot be both red and
not red at the same time and in the same respect.
2. Law of identity.
Another important principle of logic is the law of identity. This law states that
something is what it is, and it is not anything else. For example, a dog is a dog, and
it is not a cat or a tree.
3. Law of excluded middle
This law states that something must either be true or false; there is no middle
ground. For example, a coin toss will either result in heads or tails; it cannot be both
or neither.
4. Principle of Sufficient Reason
The principle of sufficient reason posits that everything has a reason or cause, and
events do not occur without a proper explanation. It underlines the idea that nothing
happens arbitrarily or without a purposeful cause. This principle is often invoked in
discussions about causation, explanation, and the search for understanding in
various fields.
 These principles of logic provide a foundation for clear and rigorous thinking. They
allow us to identify and avoid fallacious arguments, recognize patterns and
relationships between ideas, and systematically analyze and solve problems.
For example, let’s say you’re trying to decide whether to invest in a particular
stock. You might use logic to evaluate the evidence and arguments for and against
the investment. You might consider factors like the company’s financial
performance, market trends, and economic conditions. By using logic to evaluate
these factors and draw conclusions based on evidence and reason, you can make a
more informed and sound investment decision.

Principles for Distinguishing Facts from Opinions Or Why Distinguish Facts

from Opinions?

1. Evidence Clarity: Factual statements rely on clear, well-established evidence, such

as legal records, scientific findings, encyclopedias, etc. Conversely, opinions may
involve more complex and interpretive arguments based on personal beliefs or
preferences.
2. Subjective Realms: Facts are considered objective, representing aspects of what is
real and universally accepted. In contrast, opinions express subjective preferences
or feelings, varying among individuals.
3. Harmony or Discord: There is generally higher agreement on facts than on matters
of opinion within a given community. While matters of opinion can differ widely
among individuals.
4. Support Structure: Factual statements can be decisively supported with clear
evidence and justification. Opinions however, often lack such decisiveness and may
rely on personal perspectives without clear supporting evidence.
5. Shades of Belief: Facts present themselves as concrete and universally
acknowledged truths, forming the bedrock of shared understanding. Opinions, on
the other hand, exist on a nuanced spectrum of belief, ranging from widely accepted
paradigms to more contentious borderline cases.
6. Dynamic Nature: Factual statements are grounded in well-established evidence,
contributing to a stable understanding of reality, While opinions may evolve over
time as perspectives and beliefs change, influencing the distinction between facts
and opinions..

Moreover, scholars contribute valuable insights to help us distinguishing between

facts and opinions, offering diverse perspectives on these distinct types of
statements.
Scholars such as Montgomery College (2022) and Freeman (2022) emphasize that
facts are statements grounded in verifiable evidence and can be proven true or false.
 Montgomery College defines facts as statements that are objective, containing
information that can be verified. They underscore that facts are valid across all
circumstances and for all people, representing universal truths. Freeman further
reinforces this, stating that factual claims are valid and can be proved right through
evidence.
Scholars like Plato, Aristotle, and Leibniz delve into the nature of opinions. Plato
and Aristotle position opinion as an intermediary between knowledge and
ignorance. Leibniz associates opinion with the probable, indicating its nature of
being based on likelihood rather than certainty. Hobbes (1651) highlights that
opinions may give truth to words that might be absurd or impossible to understand.
Wojcicki (2021) adds a practical dimension, defining opinions as expressions of
belief about something, highlighting their subjective and unverifiable nature.

In summary, facts are objective, universally verifiable statements grounded in

evidence, providing a reliable representation of reality. On the other hand, opinions
are subjective expressions of personal beliefs, feelings, or likelihoods, lacking
universal validation and residing in the realm of individual perspectives.

Why is it important to distinguish between facts and opinions?

1. Clarity in Communication: Distinguishing between facts and opinions ensures
that communication remains precise and clear, preventing potential
misunderstandings arising from the conflation of objective truths and subjective
beliefs.
2. Critical Thinking: The distinction cultivates critical thinking skills, empowering
individuals to scrutinize information based on its objective veracity or subjective
interpretation. This skill is invaluable in navigating complex and diverse sources of
information.
3. Decision-Making: In areas where objective information is paramount, such as
scientific research or financial decisions, the ability to discern between facts and
opinions plays a crucial role in making informed decisions, minimizing risks
associated with unfounded beliefs.
4. Intellectual Integrity: Fostering intellectual integrity, the differentiation between
facts and opinions promotes honest and transparent discourse. This
acknowledgment of the distinction contributes to building a foundation for
respectful and constructive dialogue.

How do these principles contribute to logical reasoning?

1. Logical Consistency: By adhering to the principles of distinguishing facts from
opinions, logical consistency is maintained in the evaluation of statements. This
consistency is essential for constructing robust and reliable logical arguments.
2. Fallacy Avoidance: These principles serve as a guide in recognizing and avoiding
fallacies. Fallacy avoidance is critical in ensuring that reasoning processes align
with logical principles, preventing the introduction of flawed or deceptive
arguments.
3. Objective Evaluation: The principles contribute to objective evaluation by
emphasizing evidence-based reasoning in logical processes. This approach
reinforces the importance of relying on verifiable information rather than subjective
perspectives, enhancing the reliability of logical assessments.

In summary, our exploration covered the historical roots and branches of logic,
emphasizing key principles like the law of non-contradiction and the principle of
sufficient reason. We delved into distinguishing facts from opinions, highlighting
their roles in communication, critical thinking, and decision-making. The logical
processes and insights from scholars provided a comprehensive understanding of
logic's applications. Overall, the journey unfolded the intricate interplay between
philosophy and practicality in the realm of logical reasoning.
 Question Two
Define and explain what Reasoning is, and mention the types of reasoning you
know.
Introduction
The word "reasoning" has its origin in the Old French term "raisonner," which
means "to talk" or "to speak." It stems from the Latin word "rationare," which
means "to reckon" or "to calculate." Over time, the concept evolved to encompass
the mental processes of forming conclusions and making judgments based on
logical thinking.
Aristotle is considered the father of logic. He was the first to formalize the rules of
reasoning in his theory of syllogism. His attention towards inductive versus
deductive reasoning also influenced the definition of the scientific method.
Definitions
According to Angell (1964), reasoning means 'the kind of mental activity in which
an individual is trying to arrive at a conclusion on the basis of reasons'. Reasoning
is the word used to describe the mental recognition of cause-and-effect
relationships. It may be the prediction of an event from an observed cause or the
inference of a cause from an observed event (Skinner, 1968).
Reasoning is best defined as problem solving in the form of symbolic activity. It is
the organization of all relevant experiences or relationships with reference to a
particular problem or situation.
Reasoning Is the cognitive process of thinking logically and systematically to make
sense of information, draw conclusions, and solve problems. In other words,
Reasoning is the ability to assess things rationally by applying logic based on new
or existing information when making a decision or solving a problem.
According to Nancy Sherman, Reasoning is a process of thinking during which the
individual is aware of a problem, identifies, evaluates, and decides upon a solution.
Garrett and Gates define reasoning as stepwise thinking with a purpose or goal in
mind. Additionally, they regard reasoning as "the term applied to highly purposeful,
controlled, and selective thinking.
Explanation
As Munn (1967) explained that "Reasoning is combining past experiences in order
to solve a problem, which cannot be solved by mere reproduction of earlier
solutions." Too much cannot be said for the importance of past experience in
reasoning. Past experience furnishes the vast majority of the material with which we
think.
Reasoning is a form of thinking in which concepts are reorganized in such a way
that a new understanding of meaning emerges from previously established
knowledge. No one can think in a vacuum! One has to think about something. And
 if one has not a ready stock of information on many subjects, he lacks the essential
materials with which to think (Guilford, 1965).

The great American Philosopher John Dewey (1933) has formalized reasoning as a
five step process:
1. Awareness of a problem (and motive to solve it).
2. Collection of facts needed to solve it.
3. Formulation of hypotheses or possible solutions.
4. Evaluation of these hypotheses against the facts collected.
5. Verification or actually trying out a solution which seems valid.
In the activity of reasoning, a man makes new judgments and decisions on the basis
of his old judgments and decisions. With the help of reason or logic he tries to
examine the existing situation and on the basis of the experiences acquired and
arrived at, he / she tries to reach certain conclusions.

The process by which the human intellect passes from what it already knows to
what it does not yet know, without having recourse to new information is referred to
as Reasoning. Since knowledge is expressed in propositions, reasoning may be
characterized also as the process by which the mind passes from two or several
propositions, called the premises or the antecedent, to another proposition, called
the conclusion or the consequent.

In reasoning there are two aspects to consider, namely, matter and form. The matter
is the content with which the reasoning is concerned, i.e., the objects and properties
mentioned in the propositions involved in the reasoning. The form is the manner in
which the elements of the reasoning are linked together; it is what characterizes the
reasoning when abstraction is made from its content. Corresponding to the
distinction between form and matter is that between the validity and the truth of a
reasoning process; a consideration of validity and truth may thus assist the
understanding of form and matter as they are applied to the reasoning process.
Validity of Reasoning
Reasoning is valid, or correct, when the consequent follows necessarily (with a
logical necessity) from the antecedent, i.e., when the antecedent cannot be true
without the consequent being true also. It is then said that the consequent is inferred
from the antecedent or that there is an inference (in the strict sense) from the
antecedent to the consequent. Valid reasoning thus expresses an inference. The
validity of reasoning depends only on its form. In other words, the validity is
independent of the objects and properties about which the reasoning is concerned,
and is solely contingent on the adherence to logical principles
Truth of reasoning
 The reasoning process that establishes the truth of a proposition is called
demonstration. A proposition is demonstrated to be true only if it expresses the
conclusion of a valid reasoning process all of whose premises have been previously
recognized as true, i.e., as being evident in themselves or as having in turn been
demonstrated. According to Aristotelian doctrine, a distinction must be made
between demonstration in the strict sense, which concerns what is necessarily true,
and demonstration in the improper sense, which concerns what is only probable.
The first leads to science (scientia ) as such, which is knowledge of the necessary,
whereas the second pertains to dialectics, which is concerned with probable
knowledge.
Important of Reasoning
1. Reasoning makes us more rational than other animals.
 When we reason well, we are likely to arrive at a justifiable truth.
 By getting to the truth, we acquire knowledge.
2. Reasoning helps us in the acquisition of knowledge.
 Reasoning helps us to avoid vagueness and ambiguity.
 Reasoning helps us to avoid unnecessary conflicts.
 Reasoning helps us to communicate logically.
3. Enhances Decision-Making:
 Sound reasoning contributes to informed decision-making.
 It enables us to evaluate options and choose the most suitable course of action.
4. Critical Thinking Development:
 Engaging in reasoning fosters the development of critical thinking skills.
 It encourages a systematic approach to problem-solving and analysis.
5. Problem-Solving Ability:
 Reasoning equips individuals with the ability to analyze problems systematically.
 It facilitates the identification of effective solutions through logical processes.
6. Promotes Intellectual Growth:
 Regular engagement in reasoning promotes intellectual growth and cognitive
development.
 It encourages individuals to explore and expand their understanding of various
subjects.
7. Effective Communication:
 Reasoning enhances communication skills by promoting clear and logical
expression of ideas.
 It aids in conveying thoughts and arguments persuasively.
8. Conflict Resolution:
 Through reasoned discourse, conflicts can be addressed more constructively.
 It facilitates negotiation and mutual understanding in resolving disputes.
 Reasoning as a Mental Process
Reasoning as a process taking place in the mind, involving certain activities:
1. Simple Apprehension:
 Grasping the nature of the reality upon which to reason.
 Giving meanings (defines) to certain realities.
 Abstraction is the process by which the mind separates essential attributes from
accidental aspects of a reality.
2. Judgments:
 Once we have understood the nature of a reality, we can judge it.
 Judgment is expressed in the form of propositions.
3. Inference or Reasoning:
 Inference is the next step in the mental process of reasoning.
 It involves drawing logical conclusions based on apprehension and judgment.
 Reasoning connects judgments, leading to the formation of new conclusions.

Types of Reasoning
Reasoning may be classified into following two types such as deductive and
inductive reasoning.
1. Deductive reasoning: In deductive reasoning the individual applies a general
principle to a particular fact. Therefore it is said to be deductive reasoning when a
particular problem has been solved on the basis of
Certain principles. In order to solve the problem we look at our past experience and
try to lay down theories. Thus, with the help of this principle we are able to solve a
problem.
Example: A. 'Everything in this world disappears'.....
(General principle).
(1) 'Table is a thing, therefore it will also disappear ...
(Particular Fact).
(2) 'Box is a thing, therefore it will also disappear'
(Particular fact).

2. Inductive reasoning: Inductive reasoning consists of deriving a general principle

from particular observed facts. This system of reasoning is just a reverse of
deduction. In the inductive way of reasoning we do not start with principle. On the
other hand we collect the data and observe them with the help of the experiments,
we try to verify the theory to reach a particular principle.
example . 'A' school has got classes,
'B' school has also classes,
'C’ School is also having classes.
Therefore "all the schools have classes"
In summary, our discussion covered the origin and evolution of reasoning, its
definitions from various perspectives, Aristotle's influence, and John Dewey's five-
step process. We delved into the distinctions between validity and truth, the types of
reasoning (deductive and inductive), and the impact of reasoning on critical
thinking, decision-making, and communication. Additionally, we explored its role
in conflict resolution and its overall significance in problem-solving and cognitive
development.
References
Angeles P. A. Dictionary of Philosophy New York: Barnes & Noble, 1981.
Muhammad Mann Shaaba (ph.D) introduction to philosophy of education fce
kontagora 2003
Copy I. M. Introduction to Logic (New York: Macmillan, 1986, 7th ed.).
Corcoran J., Meanings of Inference, Deduction, and Derivation, Bulletin of
Symbolic Logic. 12, 2006, 353-354.
Dunn, J. M. Intuitive semantics for first-degree entailment and "coupled trees",
Philosophical Studies. - 1976. - Vol.29. - P.149-168.
Dunn, J. M. The algebra of intensional logics : PhD diss. University of Pittsburgh. -
Ann Arbor, 1966. - 177 p.
Roberto D. Abella, M.Div., D.Min. (2016). Introduction to the Philosophy of the
Human Person. Philosophical_methodology
Anand, M.V. (1995). A study of abstract reasoning among the tenth standard
students in Warangal district.
Unpublished M.Ed dissertation, Kakatiya University, Warangal, A.P, India.
Cervantes, Miguel de. (1998). Don Quijote de la Mancha (B. Raffel, Trans.). New
York: W. W. Norton. (Original work published 1605, 1615).
Copi, I. M., & Cohen, C. (1990). Introduction to logic (8th ed.). NY: Macmillan.
Creighton, J. E., & Smart, H. R. (1932). An introductory logic (5th ed.). NY:
Macmillan.
Simon, H. A. (1999). Production systems. In R. A. Wilson & F. C. Keil (Eds.), The
MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences (pp. 676-677). Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.