The Opposition of Propositions

The Rules of Truth and Falsity

 Introduction
Opposition between propositions occurs when we
relate two propositions to each other.
We have already seen how to distinguish the parts
of a proposition (subject, predicate, and
copula), as well as the use of words within the
proposition (supposition and distribution).
Now we will consider the ways of relating
one proposition to another.
 Opposition of Propositions
In general, opposition between two propositions
occurs when one affirms and the other denies
the same predicate of the same subject.
Example: All dogs are cats.
No dogs are cats.
These two propositions are said to be opposed
because one affirms and the other denies “cats”
of “dogs”.
If a different predicate is used (or a different
subject), then there is no opposition between the
two propositions; they are merely different.

Example: All dogs are carnivorous.

No dogs are rational.
Because we are not affirming and denying the
same subject of the same predicate, these
propositions are not opposed to each other in
any way
 Furthermore, in order to have opposition
between two propositions, not only must the
same subject and same predicate be used in
each, but also they must have the same
meaning and the same supposition. Nor is it
permissible to use equivocal or analogous
words.
Kinds of Opposition
There are different ways of affirming and
denying the same predicate of the same subject,
which gives rise to different kinds of opposition
between propositions.
The distinction of the kinds of opposition
has to do with both the quality (affirmative or
negative) and the quantity (universal, particular,
indefinite, or singular) of the two propositions.
1. Contradictory Opposition
When there is contradictory opposition between two
propositions, one denies absolutely
everything that the other affirms. They are as
opposed as can be.

Example: All men are honest.

Some men are not honest.
 At first glance, we might be tempted to think
that the contradictory of “All men are honest” is
“No men are honest”, as it seems that they are
more opposed than the two mentioned previously.
Yet this is not so; in order to refute the truth of the
proposition “All men are honest”, it would be enough
to show that some men are not honest, or even that
one man is not honest. One exception would
disprove the truth of the universal affirmative
proposition.
Thus, in order to contradict the proposition,
“All apples are red”, all we need to show is that
“Some apples are not red”, or even “This apple
is not red”.

The contradictory proposition of a universal

affirmative proposition is a particular negative
proposition (using the same subject and the
same predicate, of course.)
The same applies in the case of a universal
negative proposition, whose contradictory will
be a particular (or singular) affirmative
proposition that uses the same subject and the
same predicate.

Example: No exam is difficult.

will be contradicted by
Some exams are difficult.
or even by
This exam is difficult.
Contradictory opposition is opposition in
truth and falsity.

This means that whenever we know that

one of the two propositions with this kind of
opposition is true, the other must necessarily
be false. It is impossible that both be true or
that both be false.
All men are honest.
Some men are not honest.

If the first proposition is false, the second

must
necessarily be true.
All apples are red.

This apple is not red.

No exam is difficult.

Some exams are difficult.

This exam is difficult.

 2. Contrary Opposition
Contrary opposition exists between two
propositions when both have universal
quantity
but one affirms and the other denies its
predicate of the subject.

Example: All men are honest.

No men are honest.
 At first glance, it might appear that this is
a more radical type of opposition than
contradictory opposition because “all” and
“none” are extremes.
However, contrary opposition is in fact
not as great as contradictory opposition
because the contraries are opposed only in
truth.
That is, it is impossible for both
propositions to be true, but both may be false.
To say that contrary opposition between
propositions is an opposition only in truth
is to say that when one of the contrary
propositions is true, its contrary must
necessarily be false.

But if we only know that one of the two

contrarypropositions is false, we cannot by
that fact alone know that its contrary is
true; it could be true or it might also be
false.
Sometimes when one contrary is false, the
other is
true.

Example:
No man is rational. (False)

All men are rational. (True)

But other times, the contrary of a false
proposition is also false.

Example:
All men are honest. (False)

No man is honest. (False)

In other words, when one of the
contrarypropositions is false, the
other may be true or it may be
false. In this case its truth is
unknown.
 Contrary propositions do not have as
absolute an opposition as is found between
contradictory
propositions.
Contradictory propositions are opposed in
truth and in falsity, but contrary propositions are
only opposed in truth.
Also, contrary propositions are both universal.
With contradictory propositions, one is universal
and the other is particular or singular. Thus,
contradictory propositions differ in quality and
quantity, whereas contrary propositions only
differ in quality.
 3. Sub-contrary Opposition

Two propositions are in sub-contrary opposition

when they differ in quality but are both
particular.

Example: Some dogs are black.

Some dogs are not black.

Propositions in sub-contrary opposition are
opposed in falsity only. That is, if one is false,
the other is necessarily true.
However, it may be that both are true, as in
the example just given.

Example: Some dog is black.

Some dog is not black.
 Example:

Some dogs are cats. (False)

Some dogs are not cats.(True)

 Summary of Opposition
To have opposition between two propositions,
they must use the same subject and the same
predicate.

1. Contradictory Opposition:
One proposition denies the other absolutely.
Opposition in truth and falsity.
The propositions differ in both quality and
quantity.
2. Contrary Opposition

Opposition in truth only.

Both propositions are universal (one
is affirmative, the other negative.)
3. Sub-contrary Opposition

Opposition in falsity only.

Both propositions are particular
(one is affirmative, the other is
negative)
 The Relation of Sub-alternation

There is another possible relation between

two propositions that use the same subject and
the same predicate, but this is not a relation of
opposition.
This relation, called sub-alternation, occurs
when the propositions differ in quantity but not
in quality (which is why there is no opposition
between them.)
 Example:

All men are brave.

Some men are brave.

When the universal proposition is true, its
subalternate must also be true.
If all we know is that the particular is true,
this tells us nothing about the truth of the
universal.
But if the particular is false, the universal
must also be false.
Since subalternation is not a kind of
opposition, there is no opposition in truth or
falsity.

Yet we can conclude from the truth of the

universal to the truth of the particular, or
from the falsity of the particular to the falsity
of the universal.
Example:

All strawberries are sweet.

Some strawberries are

sweet.

If the universal is true, the particular is

necessarilytrue as well.
And if it is false that:

Some children are not human beings.

then it must necessarily be false that:

No children are human beings.

 The Square of Opposition

The Square of Opposition is a very useful

visual aid to understanding the
consequences of the various relations of
opposition and sub-alternation of
propositions using the same subject and
the same predicate.
It uses vowels to represent the main
types of propositions:

A stands for the universal affirmative.

E stands for the universal negative.
I stands for the particular affirmative.
O stands for the particular negative.
 The Square of Opposition

All men are honest. No men are honest.

A E

I O
Some men are Some men are not honest
honest.
The lines of the Square represent the three types
of opposition and the relation of subalternation.

AO and EI (the diagonals) represent the

propositions in contradictory opposition.
AE represents the propositions in contrary
opposition.
IO represents the propositions in sub-contrary
opposition.
AI and EO represent the relation of sub-
alternation.
The Rules of Truth and Falsity in
the Square of Opposition

To use the Square of Opposition, the propositions

must use the same subject and the same
predicate with the same meaning, the same
supposition (personal or simple) and must
respect the difference between true universal
names and collective names.
1. Two propositions in contradictory
opposition cannot simultaneously be
true, nor simultaneously false.

If one is true, the other will be false,

and if one is false, the other will be true
2. Two propositions in contrary opposition
cannot be simultaneously true.

When one is true, the other will be false, but

if one is false, the other will be unknown.
3. Two propositions in sub-contrary
opposition cannot be simultaneously false.

If one is false, the other must be true, but if

one is true, the other is unknown.
4. In the relation of subalternation, when the universal is
true, the particular must also be true, and when the
particular is false, the universal must also be false.

If the particular is known to be true, this tells

us nothing about the truth of the universal (its truth is
unknown.)
Similarly, when the universal is known to be false, the
particular is unknown.

This is sometimes summarized by saying that we can descend

with truth and rise with falsehood.
 In this entire discussion, we have been examining
what can be concluded from the formal relationship
between propositions. To have a starting point (to know
that a proposition is true or false), we need knowledge
from some science outside of Logic. Logic can help us
arrive at valuable consequences from the formal
relationship between propositions once we have that
starting point.
We can be quite sure that these consequences follow
from the mere fact that propositions are related in this way,
no matter what the subject matter being discussed.
 We are always forced to distinguish
between the matter and form of the
propositions we use, between the subject
matter and the form we use to express our
knowledge of it. Elementary Logic is
necessarily a consideration of the form of our
expressions. Knowledge of the subject matter
comes from other branches of knowledge.
 Whenever we use words we are necessarily
considering the “subject matter” of the proposition,
that is, what the proposition means as well as what
form it is expressed in.
In order to avoid being distracted unnecessarily
by the content of propositions, we could merely use
letters in place of actual subjects and predicates,
to bring out more clearly the formal aspects of
the propositions.
For example, we could avoid considering the
specific subject matter by using expressions such
as “All S is P” or “Some S is not P.”
All S is No S is P.
P.

Some S is P. Some S is not P.