Introduction to Philosophy

with Logic and Critical

Thinking
PHL 104
 Course Description
 This course attempts to acquaint the students
with the fundamental principles and methods
of correct thinking and reasoning so as to
equip the students with the logical tool
required to their battle against falsehood and
inconsistencies.
 The course serves as an introduction to the

subject Logic; therefore; it is neither

comprehensive nor exhaustive.
 Course Objective
 Understand the rules of logic that serves as guide in
the process of distinguishing correct from incorrect
arguments and drawing valid conclusion.
 Recognize some fallacy-hidden arguments

 Learn the importance of the study of logic as

philosophical discipline and as basic knowledge

necessary in communications
 Make the students to communicate effectively using

correct language use and reason out correctly.

 Allow the students to communicate effectively

through debates and arguments with several topics

on current events.
 PHILOSOPHY?
 Familiar with the real connotation of the term
or word “Philosophy”?

 What is your philosophy in life?

 How to philosophize?
 The Greek Philosophy
 How did philosophy come about?
◦ According to tradition of the western philosophy
◦ Birthplace – seaport town of Miletus located across the
Aegean Sea from Athens on the western shores of Ionia
in Asia Minor
◦ The first philosophers called MILESIANS or IONIANS
◦ Miletus was the center for commerce
 People gave them the luxury of time for thinking and
reflection
 Later on the merchants and the rich people did not only
trade their merchants but also their ideas and their beliefs
brought about by their own reflections
 The caused of arts and philosophy to flourish
 Milesians
 They gathered and talk about their curiosity
 Started to ask question

◦ Where does everything come from?

◦ What is the source of the existence of everything
 It answer by the different Greek philosophers
 Background of Philosophy
 LOGIC
◦ One of the subject of Philosophy that
emulates/imitates not material things or physical
phenomena but
 IDEAS or CONCEPT
 PROPOSITION or PREMISES
 And their inferential relations to attain the truth value
of the conclusions.
 Definition of Philosophy
 A definition is a statement that gives the
meaning of a term.
 It comes from the Latin word ‘definire’ – to

enclose within limits.

 2 common kinds of definition;

- etymological
- real
 Etymological Definition of
Philosophy - PHILOSOPHIA
 Philia (Greek word) – meaning LOVE
 Sophia (Greek word) – meaning WISDOM

 THE LOVE OF WISDOM

 The Philosopher – lover of wisdom

 PHILOSOPHIA
 LOVE  WISDOM
◦ Agape – highest form of love
(GOD’s love to humanity –
unconditional)
◦ Philia – Brotherly love
(appreciation)
◦ Eros – Erotic/Romantic love

 John 21:15-17
 Jesus and Peter
◦ Do you love me?
◦ Family/Brotherly love

PHILIA SOPHIA
 THE LOVER OF WISDOM –
FRIENDSHIP OF WISDOM
 Philosophers are lovers
of wisdom according
to Pythagoras
(Fremantle 1954, 13)
◦ Ancient Greek
Mathematical formula
(Pythagorean Theorem)
◦ Pythagoras preferred to
be called philosophers
rather than sophist (wise
man or one who knows)
 SOPHIST - one who is wise
sophisticated - fancy
 Group of intellectuals who taught oratory (art of public
speaking) for a fee to individuals aspiring to have a
successful career in politics. ELOQUENT SPEAKERS
 The belief then was that a successful career in politics

would require skills in public speaking and influence.

 Believe that all truths are relative in that all truths are

determined by or based on human interests – human

interest vary from one person to another or from group
of person to another, there is no truth that holds for
all humans. (The goal is to win or to be truthful – use of
fallacious arguments) TO DECIEVE THE PEOPLE - Plato
 PRACTICAL TEACHERS
 The sophists
 PHYTAGORAS 6th century BC
 PRODICUS 465 – 395 BC
◦ theory on the origin of religion (we used to worship
useful things – paganism)
◦ We worship the inventors (Greek goddess)
 HIPPIAS (late 5th century)
◦ Law is contrary to our nature
◦ Law is our tyrant (dictator)
 GORDIAS (485-380 BC)
◦ Nothing exists because nothing is eternal and
nothing can come into being – YOU ARE NOTHING!
 LOVE OF WISDOM

 The Greek Philosophers

Socrates and Plato also
noted for their early usage
of the term philosophers –
lover of wisdom

 Socrates (Gadfly / annoying

person of Athens) go to
Agora listening and keep
asking questions to the
people.
 LOVE OF WISDOM
 The kind of love directed to wisdom
 Philosophy is not purely intellectual activity

for it is a kind of attitude or emotion.

 But isn’t just a simple desire to know to be

wise.
 Being characterized as love, the pursues of

wisdom with great passion and seriousness.

 What is Wisdom?
 Socrates – “men can  Distinction between
acquire wisdom but knowledge and
never accomplished wisdom
 We can know many
complete wisdom”.
things but we cannot
always be wise
 We can know how to

develop certain
technology but do we
know how to use it
(wisdom) ex. weapon
 The Nature of Philosophy
 Philosophy as WISDOM
 The desire to know is innate in man because of his
intellect (capacity to know truth – the meaning of life –
act in an upright way) and his happiness is closely
linked to wisdom.
 The term “wise man” is usually applied to a person who
has certain and well founded knowledge of the deepest
truths, for wisdom, in general terms, is defined as a
certain knowledge of the deepest cause of everything.
 It helps man the truth in the deepest causes and
reason of reality.
 Differences of love of knowledge and love of wisdom
 LEVELS OF WISDOM
 Natural Wisdom – It is a level of wisdom
which acquired by reason alone. Natural
wisdom is classified as internal and external
senses.

 Supernatural Wisdom – It is a level of wisdom

which is acquired by reason illumined by
faith. This is the wisdom that transcends
natural wisdom and fully understands the
spiritual truths of God.
 WISDOM
 Essentially includes knowledge of the truth
 The elements of wisdom can be gathered

from the traits that someone would have if he

or she were a wise person.
 Summary: TRAITS OF A
WISE PERSON
 Knows one’s ignorance
 Have justified true beliefs
 Knows what is valuable in life
 Puts knowledge into practice/actions
 Knows what should be done and acting

accordingly
Real meaning of Philosophy refers to:

◦Ideas, views, principles,

perspective s or beliefs

◦The activity of reasoning

◦An academic course or

degree
 PHILOSOPHY
 The search for knowledge
 The source of knowledge
 The source of belief
 Using of reason and logic

◦ Stages of knowledge / beliefs

 Philosophy as Ideas, views, principles,
perspective s or beliefs
 Held either by individuals or groups of individuals,
regardless of the specific nature of these ideas, views,
principles, perspectives, or beliefs.
 By their specific nature, we mean whether they are
religious, cultural, scientific, historical or psychological
among others
 These beliefs and principles are conveniently referred to as
constituting a person’s philosophy of something, regardless
of the specific nature of these beliefs and principles.
 eg. The formula of success
 “Philosophy of Life”
 “Philosophy of management”
 “Philosophy of coaching”
Philosophy as The activity of Reasoning

 Relates to the way, we Filipinos, originally use or

understand the meaning of the word “pilosopo”
or “philosophers” is the one who likes to reason
out or to engage in the activity of reasoning.
 Philosophers is the one who likes to reason.

 Reasoning or pamimilosopo is part of a defensive

strategy.
 Pilosopo is one engages in reasoning for the

purposes of covering up an obvious truth,

annoying someone and engaging someone in an
unwelcome argumentation.
Real Definition of Philosophy
 Searching for meaning and  Is a discipline in
truth
 Is the knowledge of all
which questions
things through their are more
ultimate causes acquired important than
through the use of the answer and
reason.
 The science of things when every
naturally knowable to answer leads
man’s unaided power further questions
insofar as those things are
known or studied in their – KARL
ultimate cause and reason. JASPHERS
Philosophy as an Academic Course or Degree

 Refers to an academic subject or course that is

taught usually in colleges, universities and
seminarians.
 The course studies reasoning skills and

different theories about the nature of reality,

morally, society and justice, religious beliefs
and knowledge among others.
 The academic degree in philosophy can be

pursued either on the bachelor’s master’s or

doctoral level – intention of becoming a lawyer,
a priest or a teacher in philosophy.
 The Term Philosophy
 It dealt with neither as a personal belief nor a
simple reason for something,
 But as a particular field of

DISCIPLINE or as a
QUEEN OF SCIENCES (natural and social)
 The Nature of Philosophy
 Philosophy as SCIENCE
 It is a science in an eminent (well known) way
 Which inquires into ultimate causes,
reasons and principles of all things in the
light of human reason alone.

 Science may be defined principally in 2 ways;

a. As a certain knowledge through causes
b. As a knowledge attained by way of
demonstration, starting from some principle
 PHILOSOPHY - SCIENCE
 ALL SCIENCES ARE BUILT IN PHILOSOPHY
◦ Math
◦ Grammar/rhetoric
 PHILOSOPHY - DISCIPLINE
 IT TEACHES WHAT IS RIGHT FROM WRONG
◦ Ethics
 PHILOSOPHY
The fundamental nature of human existence
◦ Certain questions that philosophers searching for:
 who are we as human being/person?
 Why human beings are different from other creation?
 Where did we come from?
 Who and What is God?
 How do we know what we know?
 What is right from wrong?
 Is lying is wrong? Killer looking for your classmate….
Asking where is she…. And you said I don’t know even
though you know where is she… is it a sin?
 PHILOSOPHY
REASON VS FAITH
 Genesis 17:4-4
◦ Story of ABRAHAN to sacrifice his son
 Philosophy – Reason it is non sense
 But faith make sense

 John 6:35, 41, 48, 60-66

◦ Jesus said I am the bread of life… those who will
eat my flesh will live forever..
 Philosophy make no sense – cannibalism
 But faith make sense
 PHILOSOPHY IS BASED ON
SKEPTICISM (always in doubt)
 Like a persistent child that always ask the
question WHY? WHY? and WHY?
 Digging and digging to know the real answer

and to believe on it.

 Types of Philosophy
 Speculative/Theoretical Philosophy
 Practical Philosophy
 DIVISION OF PHILOSOPHY
Philosophy
Practical
Logical…Logic
Ethics
Knowledge
General
Special
Nature
God
Man
Bio Ethics
Ethics
Cosmology
Ethics
 Speculative Philosophy
 Cosmology (Greek word Cosmos and Logos) means
philosophical study of being in the nonliving world.
 Metaphysics (Greek word Meta-ta-fusia) means something that
goes beyond or philosophical study of being in its most
general form.
 Theodicy Greek word God) philosophical study of being in its
highest form
 Anthropology (Greek word Antropos means man) philosophical
study of being with its body and soul
 Rational Psychology (Greek word Psyche means soul)
Philosophical study being with its soul.
 Speculative Philosophy
in relation to man
 Logic (Greek word Logos means thought)
science and art of correct thinking
 Epistemology (Greek word Episteme means

human knowledge) philosophical study of

human knowledge with regard to value of
thought
 Ethics (Greek word Ethos mans man’s will)

Philosophical study of the morality of the

human act that distinguishes good from evil
and right and wrong
 Applied Philosophy
 Specific topics and discussion in the different aspects
of individuals life such as society, history, education,
religion, etc.
◦ Philosophy of Man – the metaphysical dimension of man as a
person
◦ Social Philosophy – the study of interpersonal relationship
between man and society
◦ Philosophy of Religion – the meta-personal study of man with
God
◦ Axiology – philosophical study of man’s value
◦ Aesthetics – philosophical study of man’s beauty and
perfection
◦ Oriental Philosophy – philosophical study of Oriental ways of
life
◦ Philosophy of Education – Philosophical and methodological
approach of teaching and procedural learning process
 Branches of Philosophy
 Branches of Philosophy and Disciplinal
Philosophies
 Branches of Philosophy classified according to

the major topics of philosophical investigation.

 Areas of Philosophy

 The list of branches of Philosophy vary from

one scholar to another.

 Disciplinal Philosophies – classified according

to the discipline or areas of learning whose

foundations are being examined.
BRANCHES OF TOPIC OF SOME MAIN CONCERNS
PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHICAL
INVESTIGATION
1. LOGIC Reasoning The distinction between correct
and incorrect forms of reasoning
2. EPISTEMOLOGY Knowledge The kinds, sources, and
conditions of knowledge
3. METAPHYSICS Reality, existence Whether reality consist of
physical objects only or of both
physical and non physical
objects.
4. ETHICS Morality The appropriate moral
principles, meaning of moral
judgment
5. AESTETICS Beauty Criteria for judgment about
beauty
BRANCHES OF TOPIC OF SOME MAIN CONCERNS
PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHICAL
INVESTIGATION
6. SOCIAL AND The State Legitimizing the state, limits of
POLITICAL the state’s political power, social
PHILOSOPHY and distributive power
7. PHILOSOPHY OF Science Difference between scientific and
SCIENCE non-scientific statements,
induction
8. PHILOSOPHY OF Religious Belief Meaning of religious statements,
RELIGION existence of God, problem of evil
9. PHILOSOPHY OF Meaning of Meaning of proper names
LANGUAGE Linguistic definite descriptions and
Expressions psychological statements
10. PHILOSOPHY OF Mind Whether the mind is physical or
MIND not, properties of the mind,
possibility of artificial
 OTHER DISCIPLINE OF PHILOSOPHY
 PHILOSOPHY OF LITERATURE
 PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION
 PHILOSOPHY OF MATHEMATICS
 PHILOSOPHY OF LAW
 PHILOSOPHY OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
 PHILOSPHY OF HISTORY
 PHILOSOPHY OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCE
 PHILOSOPHY OF PSYCHOLOGY
 PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGY
 PHILOSOPHY OF MUSIC
 PHILOSOPHY OF SPORTS
 PHILOSOPHY OF ECONOMICS
 THE REGIONAL TYPES
 The most general level – REGIONAL or
GEOGRAPHICAL types of philosophy
 The 2 major kinds
THE REGIONAL TYPES
 WESTERN  EASTERN
PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHY
 THE REGIONAL TYPES
 Under each of these 2 major kinds are the
NATIONAL PHILOSOPHIES
 Referring to philosophical activities

happening in a particular countries or nations

 The 2 major kinds
THE REGIONAL TYPES - NATIONAL PHILOSOPHIES

 WESTERN  EASTERN
PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHY
◦ German Philosophy ◦ Indian Philosophy
◦ French Philosophy ◦ Chinese Philosophy
◦ Greek Philosophy ◦ Japanese Philosophy
◦ British Philosophy ◦ Filipino Philosophy
◦ American Philosophy
 THE REGIONAL TYPES
 It refers to philosophical activities that occurs
or flourish in a particular regions
 Some attach to regional types of philosophies

or some other that characteristic or belief in

unique to each of these philosophies
◦ They are brought about by;
 Culture
 Religions
 Nationalistic
 Ideological considerations or sentiments.
 Some distinguishes
features that considered unique to each type
 It emphasized  It emphasized
◦ Commonalities ◦ Distinction
◦ Harmonies ◦ Oppositions

EASTERN PHILOSOPHY WESTERN PHILOSOPHY

 NATIONAL PHILOSOPHIES
 Believe that a particular national philosophy has
certain unique features that differentiate it from
other national philosophies.
 This has made it possible to regard rightly or

not, certain types of philosophies that happen

in a certain region as alien or as not really
belonging to that region as when one say,
 Sample

◦ East is non eastern

◦ West in non western
◦ Philippines is non Filipino
 THE HISTORICAL TYPE
 The history of Philosophy in the WEST
◦ Divided into 4 period
 4 PERIOD OF WESTERN
PHILOSOPHY
1. ANCIENT PERIOD
Ancient Philosophy that flourish during the Ancient
Period
2. THE MEDIEVAL PERIOD
Medieval Philosophy flourish during the Medieval
Period
3. THE MODERN PERIOD
Modern Philosophy flourish during the Modern Period
4. CONTEMPORARY PERIOD
Contemporary Philosophy flourish during the
Contemporary Period
BRIEF HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY
 WESTERN PHILOSOPHY
 ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY - Cosmo centric
 MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY - Theo centric
 MODERN PHILOSOPHY - Antropho centric
 CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHY – Post modern
 ANCIENT PERIOD
 ANCIENT GREEK  ANCIENT ROMAN
Philosophers Philosophers
◦ Pre Socratics ◦ Seneca
◦ Socrates ◦ Marcus Aurelius
◦ Plato
◦ Aristotle
 THE MEDIEVAL PERIOD
529 A.D. – 1450 A.D.

 St. Augustine
 Boethius
 John Duns Scotus
 St. Thomas Aquinas
 MODERN PHILOSOPHY
1450 – 1799
 Grouped into 4 systems;
1. the renaissance
2. Subjectivism which includes rational and
empirical (gaining knowledge – direct or
indirect observation or experience)
subjectivism
3. The Enlightenment and the German
Idealism.
 RENAISSANCE
 Literally translated as re-birth
 Period that opens its horizon to free

intellectual enterprise.
 This period focused on the quest for the

origin of knowledge – an epistemological

quest.
 Philosophers; Nicholas Copernicus, Galileo

Galilee, Nicolo Machiavelli

 2 OPPOSING SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT
DURING THE MODERN PHILOSOPHY PERIOD
 RATIONALISM ( the  EMPIRICM (the theory that
philosophical view that
emphasizes the ability of
human reason to grasp
fundamental truths about
the world without the aid
of sense impression)
experience is the source of
all knowledge, which there
by denies that human beings
possess inborn knowledge
or that they can derive
knowledge through the
exercise of reason alone)

 Rene Descartes  Francis Bacon

 Nicholas Malebranche  Thomas Hobbes
 John Locke
 Benedict Spinoza
 George Berkeley
 Gottfried Leibniz  David Hume
 KINDS OF TRUTH
EMPIRICAL TRUTH
◦ Established by means of sense
experience
◦ Technically describe as A POSTERIORI
 It can only be known after some
relevant experience
 Sample
 It’s raining – use of sense of
sight
 KINDS OF TRUTH
RATIONAL TRUTH
◦ Established by means of reason
◦ Technically describe as A PRIORI
 It can be known before some
relevant experience
 Sample
 Triangle has tree sides
(mathematical truth)
 Five and five are ten
Period of Enlightenment during the
Modern Philosophy era
THE AGE OF REASON
 Francis Voltaire
 Jean Jacques

Rousseau
 Christian Wolff
 German Idealism the view that mind is the ultimate
reality in the world . It opposed materialism , which views material
things are the basic reality from which mind emerges and to
which mind is reducible.
 Johann Fitchte
 Friedrich Schelling
 Goerge Hegel

Immanuel Kant Metaphysical Idealism

 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 19th – 20th century –
PRESENT TIME
 Philosophical system

emerge
- The Dialectical
Materialism;
1. Ludwig Feuerbach
2. Karl Marx
3. Friedrich Engels

Marxism - communism
 CONTEMPORARY
 The Positivism
PHILOSOPHY
 The positivist have no
knowledge of anything but
phenomena, and our knowledge
of phenomena is relative, not
absolute/complete
 They know that not the essence,

not the real mode of production,

of any fact, but only its relations
to other facts in the way of
succession or of similitude.
 These relations are constant,

that is, always the same in the

same circumstance. AUGUST COMTE
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
refers to the viewpoint
that laws of nature (as
opposed to
supernatural ones)
operate in the universe,
and that nothing exists
beyond the natural
universe or, if it does, it
does not affect the
natural universe.

THE NATURALISM Charles Darwin

 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 In this view, an action is
considered good or right
if its consequence is the
greatest happiness
(pleasure) of the greatest
number.
 In that case, the action is
useful in producing as
much or more good than
any alternative behavior.

JEREMY BENTHAM &

THE UTILITARIANISM
JOHN STUART MILL
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 The death of God will
unavoidably be followed by
the rejection of absolute
values and the rejection of
idea of an objective and
universal moral law.
 The rejection of all
religious and moral
principles, often in the
belief that life is
meaningless.

ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER &

NIHILISM
Friedrdrich Nietszche
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 Phenomenology

 Edward Husserl
 Max Scheller
 Paul Ricoer
 Carl Rogers
 PHENOMENOLOGY
 Phenomenology, in Husserl's conception, is primarily
concerned with the systematic reflection on and
study of the structures of consciousness and the 
phenomena that appear in acts of consciousness.
 Phenomenology is a broad discipline and method of
inquiry in philosophy, developed largely by the
German philosophers Edmund Husserl  and Martin
Heidegger, which is based on the premise that
reality consists of objects and events ("phenomena")
as they are perceived or understood in the human
consciousness.
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 Existentialism
 Soren Kierkegard
 Jean Paul Sartre
 Martin Heidegger
 Karl Jasphers
 Maurice Merleau
Ponty
 Gabriel Marcel
 Martin Buber
 EXISTENTIALISM
 Existentialism is a philosophy that
emphasizes individual existence, freedom
and choice. It is the view that humans define
their own meaning in life, and try to make
rational decisions despite existing in an
irrational universe.
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 Analytic
Philosophy / Logical
Positivism
 Bertrand Russell
 Ludwig Wittgenstein
 Alfred Ayer
 Karl Popper
 Analytic philosophy/
Logical Positivism
 A broad philosophical tradition characterized
by an emphasis on clarity and argument
(often achieved via modern formal logic and
analysis of language) and a respect for the
natural sciences.
 CONTEMPORARY
 Is a method ofPHILOSOPHY
solving
various types of problems
such as; does God exist? or
is man’s will is free? By
looking at the practical
consequences by accepting
this or that answer.
 The pragmatic method tries
to interpret each notion
or theory by tracing its
respective practical
consequences.
WILLIAM JAMES &
THE PRAGMATISM
JOHN DEWET
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
is a theoretical paradigm that
emphasizes that elements of
culture must be understood in
terms of their relationship to a
larger, structure.
Structuralism is "the belief that
phenomena of human life are
not intelligible except through
their interrelations. These
relations constitute a structure, and
behind local variations in the
surface phenomena there are
constant laws of abstract culture

The structuralism Claude Levi-Strauss

 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 is any change across
successive generations
in the heritable
characteristics of
biological populations.

Henri Bergson &

evolution
Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 free association, dream
interpretation, and analysis of
resistance and transference are used
to explore repressed or unconscious
impulses, anxieties, and internal
conflicts, in order to free psychic
energy for mature love and work. The
theory of personality developed on
repression and unconscious forces
and includes the concepts of infantile
sexuality, resistance, transference,
and division of the psyche into the id,
ego, and superego.

Sigmun Freud &

psychoanalysis
Carl Jung
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 is the philosophical
school that arose as a
legacy of the work and
thought of
Saint Thomas Aquinas

Etienne Gilson &

Neo thomism
Jacques Maritain
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 Hermeneutics
 Jurgen Habermas
 Hans George
Gadamer
 Paul Ricouer
 Jacques Derrida
 HERMENUETICS
 the study of the interpretation of written texts,
especially texts in the areas of literature, religion
and law. A type of traditional hermeneutic is
Biblical hermeneutics which concerns the study of
the interpretation of The Bible.
 Modern hermeneutics encompasses everything in
the interpretative process including verbal and
nonverbal forms of communication as well as prior
aspects that affect communication, such as
presuppositions, pre understandings, the meaning
and philosophy of language, and semiotics
THE EASTERN PHILOSOPHY
Have their own ways of  INDIAN
delineating their PHILOSOPHY
own historical  CHINESE
period.
PHILOSOPHY
 ISLAMIC

PHILOSOPHY
 OTHERS
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 is the philosophical
school that arose as a
legacy of the work and
thought of
Saint Thomas Aquinas

Etienne Gilson &

Neo thomism
Jacques Maritain
 CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHY
 Hermeneutics
 Jurgen Habermas
 Hans George
Gadamer
 Paul Ricouer
 Jacques Derrida
 HERMENUETICS
 the study of the interpretation of written texts,
especially texts in the areas of literature, religion
and law. A type of traditional hermeneutic is
Biblical hermeneutics which concerns the study of
the interpretation of The Bible.
 Modern hermeneutics encompasses everything in
the interpretative process including verbal and
nonverbal forms of communication as well as prior
aspects that affect communication, such as
presuppositions, pre understandings, the meaning
and philosophy of language, and semiotics
THE EASTERN PHILOSOPHY
Have their own ways of  INDIAN
delineating their PHILOSOPHY
own historical  CHINESE
period.
PHILOSOPHY
 ISLAMIC

PHILOSOPHY
 OTHERS
Philosophers
 Eastern Philosophy
 Buddhism
◦ India – based on the teaching of Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha-Enlightened
One)
 Hinduism
◦ India - No founder (famous philosophers Mahatma, Mahatma Gandhi,
Romakrishna, Sarasvati and Vivekananda
 Taoism
◦ Sometimes also written Daoism,Taoism is a philosophy which later also
developed into a religion. Tao literally means "path" or "way", although it
more often used as a meta-physical term that describes the flow of the
universe, or the force behind the natural order.
 Islam
◦ Established by Mohammed. He did not claim to be the savior nor messiah, but
a prophet of Allah ,Koran / Qur’an – Islam Bible and other religious writings
 Confucianism
◦ China, Japan and Korea – This school was developed from the teachings of the
sage Confucius (551 - 478 B.C.)
Chinese Philosophers
 FILIPINO PHILOSOPHER
FR. Roque J. Ferriols, S.J.
 Promoting the study of philosophy
in Filipino, translate, edit, and
write various books. Among those
published are Mga Sinaunang
Griyego, a translation of selected
texts from the Pre-Socratics to
Aristotle; Magpakatao, a collection
he edited, containing translations
of texts exploring the theme of
being human; and his original
writings Pambungad sa Metapisika
and Pilosopiya ng Relihiyon. These
four books earned him National
Book Awards from the Manila
Critics' Circle. In 1989, the Ateneo
de Manila University conferred him
with the Gawad Tanglaw ng Lahi.
 "In six years, one comes to
know that, for human
thinking, North
Sampalokese is better than
Plato's Greek." And this
seems to be the spirit that
has animated Ferriols all
these years--the desire to
propagate real thinking and
to do away with the
misconception that thinking
is the ivory tower of the
elite--a spirit that his
students hope to keep alive.
FR. Roque J. Ferriols, S.J.
 The Nature of
Philosophy
A Quest for an explanation
What, why and how of philosophy
Searching can be taken into 2
types
 Searching or looking into taken slightly by
merely asking. To obtain answer to an
inquiry.
 Intense search that the philosopher gets too

engaged in his quest for finding what he

wants to know and does not stop at merely
knowing but has to go deeper into his search.
Elements of Philosophical search
 Search refers to the person who conducts an
inquiry and looks into the matter deeper and
wider at every angle.
 The manner of search pertains to the traits,

the searcher has, the intense desire and his

unquenchable thirst for his never ending
pursuit for meaning.
 The object in quest is one of the real worth to

the searcher.
THE VALUE OF PHILOSOPHY
THE CHANGE OF FUTILITY
 PHILOSOPHY
 Why we should philosophize or study
philosophy?
 What good will philosophizing do considering

that we are living in a world where life is hard

and largely dictated by scientific and
technological advances.
 What is the point of doing philosophy?
 Importance of philosophy in 2
ways
1. To show that the arguments supporting view
that philosophy is a useless or futile activity
are mistaken
2. To identify some of the major achievements
of philosophy.
 The value of philosophy
Bertrand Russell – essay 1980
 Russell’s ideas;
◦ 2 main reasons behind the change that philosophy
is a futile activity.
 1. indefiniteness of philosophy which regards to
answer that it provides to philosophical questions
 Philosophy does not provide final answer s to the
questions that it deals with, for the answers it differs from
one philosopher to another.
 Philosophizing would just lead to nowhere, and would be a
waste of time and energy.
 The value of philosophy
Bertrand Russell – essay 1980
 Russell’s ideas;
◦ 2 main reasons behind the change that philosophy is a futile
activity.
2. Impracticality of philosophy
* The activity of philosophizing has no practical benefits
* It does not help us in our efforts to satisfy our
material needs – the nourishment of our
body.
* Why waste our time then on something that will
not help us survive in this world?
 2 CHARACTERISTICS ATTRIBUTED TO
PHILOSOPHY – CONTRATS WITH SCIENCE
 Science – provides definite answers to the
questions that it deals with or an
objective/purpose means of resolving issues
that it handles.
◦ Through its inventions and technologies provides
with more efficient ways of satisfying our material
and survival needs.
◦ It is the ideal model of a valuable understanding
which philosophy fails to achieve or even
approximate.
 2 CHARACTERISTICS
ATTRIBUTED TO PHILOSOPHY – CONTRATS WITH SCIENCE

 Philosophy – is indefinite in its answer to

philosophical questions
◦ It is not the goal of philosophy to deal with the kind
of questions that science deals with.
 QUESTIONS IN SCIENCE
 The scientific questions
◦ Those questions that already known with some
degree of certainty to be capable of being answered
in a precise and definite way.
◦ Those questions that already been established that
there is a precise and objective means of answering
these questions
 QUESTIONS IN PHILOSOPHY
 The philosophical questions
◦ Questions in which it has not been established yet
whether there is a precise and objective means of
answering these questions .
 WHY PHILOSOPHY DO THIS?
WHERE IS THE VALUE IN THIS?
 Scientific questions starts with philosophical
questions, questions that were thought to be
indefinitely answerable.
◦ Reason for this unavailability of technology that
could test hypothesis.
 Prior to the invention of telescope – hypotheses about
the stars and the universe could not be tested.
◦ The imprecise formulation of the questions
 It was only when mathematics was used as the
language of science that certain questions have
become clearly scientific.
 WHY PHILOSOPHY DO THIS?
WHERE IS THE VALUE IN THIS?
 When philosophy deals with unscientific
questions (indefinitely answerable questions)
– primary goal is to determine whether such
questions can eventually become scientific
◦ Whether they could eventually be answered in some
definite way.
HOW DOES PHILOSOPHY DO THIS?
 Philosophy examines all possible angles to
these questions;
◦ Possible formulations of these questions
◦ Possible answers to these questions
 It engages;
 debates
 advancing
 criticizing arguments
 answering objections
 In order to ascertain which perspective is the most
promising or offers the best possible explanation (in terms
of coherence, comprehension and predicate power).
HOW DOES PHILOSOPHY DO THIS?
 The moment the philosophical question is
proven to be answerable in some definite way
, the question becomes scientific questions
and finishes to be a philosophical one.
 The questions is thus relegated to science to

conduct more detailed and methodical

researches to find the definite answer.
 Bertrand Russell
 Part of philosophy – science of psychology
 Recent times;

◦ Discipline of artificial intelligence – a branch of computer

science dealing with construction of intelligent machines)
◦ A question of whether there could be machine that could
think like humans was originally a purely philosophical
question
◦ Scientist started conducting researches on how to actually
construct those machines.
◦ At preset, the said question is still partly philosophical and
partly scientific.
◦ Philosophers and scientist are predicating that it will just be
a matter of time that it will be a purely scientific question.
BERTRAND RUSSELL
 PHILOSOPHY
waste of time
 The preliminary work for science – finding the
definite answer to certain questions
 If we value science for the definiteness of its

answer to the questions that it deals with the more

we should value philosophy for making it possible
for science to deal it with such questions.
 Simply wrong to think that just because there are

no definite answers to the philosophical questions

or that philosophers do not seem to agree on how
to answer philosophical questions, then
philosophy is just a waste of time and energy.
 Russell’s Philosophy
impractical activity
 It does not directly satisfy our material needs
◦ This is only because philosophy is focused on
satisfying another kind of valuable human needs,
the needs of mind – kind of needs that we value.
◦ Material needs is shown by the fact that once most
or all of our material needs have already been
satisfied we still have questions about how to
further improve the quality of our lives.
 RUSSELL’S EXAMPLE
REASON AND FAITH
 Supposed our society has already provided our economic
needs such as nobody among us is living in poverty, still we
will be confronted with questions about how to improve
quality of our lives.
 Such questions must surely then be about our non-physical
needs, the needs of our mind, which we value.
◦ non-physical needs concerns;
 better human relationship
 better spiritual life
 better and deeper understanding of our place or purpose in the world we
live in.
 These are the kinds of questions that religion and philosophy
address with their own particular means
◦ Faith and divine inspiration for religion and human reason for
philosophy
PHYLOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS
 Are human choices free or determined by natural laws?
 Are human embryos and fetuses moral persons?
 Is there really a God?
 Lot of important consequences will follow from how
these questions will be answered, which will greatly
affect the value that we give to human life.
◦ If human choices are not really free but are only determined by
the past events and natural laws, then we are not really
responsible for our actions and there really no good or bad
actions.
◦ If human embryos and fetuses are not moral person then there
would not nothing morally wrong in killing then as in cases of
abortion and scientific experimentation.
 PHILOSOPHY
 Addressees the needs of the mind – which are
valuable
 Some tools of philosophy

◦ Logic – skills of critical thinking – used to address

questions directly related to the satisfaction of our
material needs.
 A more efficient use of scientific inventions and
technologies to address our material needs would
require good decision making that turn to good
reasoning skills
 PHILOSOPHY CHARGES
EXERCISE IN FUTILITY
 IMPRACTICALITY – mistaken in 2 following ways
 1. Simply wrong to limit what is valuable in life to

the satisfaction of our material or practical concerns.

◦ Non-physical needs is the needs of our mind are valuable
 Material needs concerns physical existence and survival
 Non-material needs concerns the quality of our life and human
relations.
 2. Wrong to think that philosophy, though focused
on addressing our mental needs, cannot contribute
to how we can best satisfy our material needs.
◦ Satisfying our material needs would also require adequate
reasoning skills which can be provided by philosophy.
 RUSSELL’S CONCLUSION
 The idea that philosophy is a futile activity is
a consequence of a lack of understanding of
the goals of philosophy and a limited view of
what is valuable in life.
 GOALS OF PHILOSOPHY
◦ Provide a holistic view of life
◦ Supplements what is lacking in scientific
explanations
◦ Come up with holistic explanations of things or
events in the world.
 THE NECESSITY/IMPORTANCE OF
THE STUDY OF PHILOSOPHY
 Philosophy leads us to a broader understanding
of man and experience.
 Philosophy gives man pleasure or satisfaction.
 Philosophy serves man a better understanding of
himself and hi fellow human beings.
 Philosophy acquaints a person to the various
philosophical thinkers of the past and of his time.
 Philosophy will guide him in making day to day
decision of life and experiences.
 Philosophy gives other sciences a sense of
meaning.
THE WHAT, WHY
AND HOW OF
LOGIC
 HISTORY OF LOGIC
 The birth of LOGIC is attributed to ARISTOTLE of
Stagira in Thrace (384-322 BC)
 ARISTOTELIAN LOGIC – syllogistic logic
(arguments are evaluated as good or bad on the
basis of the arrangement of terms in argument)
 Successors
◦ Zeno of Citium (founder of Stoic School who gave name
as LOGIC)
◦ Chrysippus (develop rules on the basis of truth and
falsity of the proposition)
◦ Middle aged PETER ABELARD (first major logician of the
period- reconstruct and refined the logic)
 Definition of Logic
 IS A SCIENCE AND AN ART OF CORRECT
THINKING.
 Man is a thinking being.
 Endowed with the faculties of intellect

- capacity to know the truth and to do good)

 These faculties are the qualities that make

man distinct from other living beings.

 Theory of ARISTOTLE
IDEOGENESES
 Nothing into the mind without passing
through the senses.
 Sensitive cognition and appetition

- TABULA RASA – NOTHING IN THE MIND

 HEIRARCHY OF BEING
MINERAL
PLANT
ANIMAL
MAN
SPIRIT
GOD

 Body+Life+Senses+
Reason
 Body+Life+Senses

 Body+Life

 Body
 MAN – NATURAL LOGIC
 Ability to think (intellect) – distinguish truths
from errors even without special training, it is
innate or native to him.
 Child – early age always ask the question

WHY? – innate tendency to know the

explanations and reasons of things around
him.
 NATURAL LOGIC –
COMMON SENSE
 Natural Logic – incomplete knowledge but raw material
 Scientific Logic – to be studied and developed
 There is a need to train and to develop this

natural ability to expertness through the

study of the principles and laws of the
various operations of the mind.
 When our thinking ability is well grounded on

these laws and principles will this natural

logic be tuned to scientific logic.
 SCIENTIFIC LOGIC
 Very important to man as it helps him to
attain the truth.
 The truth is not something easy to know or

attain.
 Although it is simply the conformity of the

mind with reality of the mind.

ETYMOLOGICAL DEFINITION
 LOGIC - LOGICO (Greek word) – A treatise
(argument) pertaining to thought or thinking.
 REAL DEFINITION
 LOGIC- IS A SCIENCE AND ART OF
CORRECT THINKING.

 A SCIENCE

 AN ART
 LOGIC A SCIENCE
 A SCIENCE: Logic is a demonstrated
knowledge , an organized body of knowledge
based on facts and principles.

 It is not a mere opinion or hypothesis.

 It is certain, demonstrated and organized

knowledge.
 It investigate, discovers, expresses,

systematizes and demonstrates or explains

the law of correct thinking.
 LOGIC AN ART
-Art gives facility in reasoning and judging
correctly about things to be made. (statues,
paintings, chairs and syllogism)
-Logic is an art because it guides man’s
reasoning so he can proceed with order and
ease and without error in the constructive
activity or simply in attaining the truth.
 THINKING AND
CORRECT THINKING
 The word thinking does not include
absolutely all mental operations but only
those mental operations.
 A. that are directed toward the attainment

of truth
 B. by which we elaborate upon knowledge

previously possessed.
 DAY DREAMING
 Is not thinking because it is not directed
towards the attainable truth.
 The operations which we merely make things

present in our mind are not thinking, but a

prerequisite of thinking, since they involve no
elaboration upon knowledge previously
possessed.
 The operation by which we merely accept a

statement as true like 2+2 = 4, are not thinking

but a possible starting point of thought.
 THINKING
 Includes:
 Analysis
 Comparison
 Classification
 Definition
 Logical division
 Inferential operations of the mind
 These are the instruments of knowledge and

means of attaining truth.

 CORRECT THINKING
 When our mind conforms to the laws and
rules investigated by logic.
 A definition is correct if it conforms to the

rules of definition.
 OBJECTS OF LOGIC
 All things without  Not all things as they
exception are in themselves and
 All things that the independently of our
human mind can knowledge, but things
know as reproduced in the
 All that we can grasp mind, together with all
by simple attributes and
apprehension, relationships they get
judgment and as a result of mental
reasoning reproduction.

MATERIAL OBJECT FORMAL OBJECT

 LOGIC AND INFERENCE
 Logic is principally concerned with inference.
 Inference is any process by which our mind

proceed from one or more propositions to

another proposition, so related to original
propositions, that if they are true, it must also
be true.
 An inference (process – conclusion) or syllogism

(verbal presentation) is composed of two parts

 1. antecedent

 2. consequent
 PARTS OF INFERENCE
Every STUDENT’S is a thinking being
Antecedent
Michelle Cidney is a STUDENT
Therefore, Michelle Cidney is a
Consequent
thinking being

The two above example consist of 3 propositions so

related that if the first two
The antecedent, are true
The third proposition, the consequent must also be
true.
 THE TASK OF LOGIC
 The main task of logic is to establish general
norm for making this passage from premises
or antecedent to conclusion or consequent
legitimately valid.
 Importance of Logic
 It develops the habit of clear thinking. It
teaches us how to think, either we read or
hear correctly and logically. It is only when we
think that we commit mistakes and very
seldom to think if it is correct.
 It is a guide in the process of drawing out

conclusions. We have a lot of experienced

things to be considered and often wrong
decisions as well. The process of thinking will
instruct us to understand deeply.
 It emphasizes the importance of definition. It tells
us the real and nominal definition that confronts
to reality. It denotes clarify and precision in the
use of terms which is one of the most required
principles of the process of thinking.
 It helps us interpret the facts adequately. Genuine

and accurate facts’ interpretation is very important

when it comes to the conformity of truth. It trains
us analyzing, classifying and defining facts.
 It cultivates the habit of looking for the

assumptions presupposed in reasoning. Some

people are often confused by delicate and
unnoticeable arguments because of incorrect
reasoning that puts us on guard against mistake
 It trains us in the technique of determining
implications. It provides training in order to develop
the ability to comprehend implications and protect
us with the technique in determining assumptions.
 It helps us detect fallacies and avoid self deceptions.

It gives us an auxiliary to illogical reasoning. Every

person has a gift of common sense, but common
sense must be developed in order to make a
progress as an instrument of philosophical reason.
 It helps us persuade or convince others. No man is

an island. Loving oneself is to acknowledge and

share life with others. If therefore trains us in
various methods having a good and right decision in
thinking of others.
It stimulates scientific thinking and love truth.
An order person requires a clear reasoning.
Logic is important equipment in order to
comprehend sciences. The primary goal of
logic is truth in order to simplify the truth
statement, it seeks an argument of a perfect
quality which asserts itself.
 It familiarizes us with terminology and

problems in Philosophy. This is the question of

why, how and what is in reality. The assertive
curiosity gives us interpersonal relationship
between things and themselves. All of us think
because it is the right way to Philosophy.
 Types of Logic
 The structure,  The subject matter, the
correctness, sequence content and the truth .
that follows the rules.  It is the conformity of
 An argument must be the reality.
good and not only in
form but in content as
well.

Formal Logic Material Logic

 Based on validity of reasoning
 Materially valid that conforms to the reality of the
object
◦ Stone is a hard object
◦ Elephants are huge mammals
 Materially invalid does not conforms to the reality
of the object
◦ Stones are soft object
◦ Elephant is a small animals

◦ All statements and arguments are formally valid because

they follow the subject-predicate pattern or structure of a
DECLARATIVE SENTENCE
 Types of Logic Sample
 John Carlo is a Student
◦ Structure or built to
create a sound reasoning
◦ Subject
◦ Verb (3rd person singular
of the infinitive form of
the verb to be)
◦ Predicate
Formal Logic
 John Carlo is a man
◦ Is John Carlo really a man
 If that so the argument is
true
 Correct reasoning is
formally valid unless one
of the rules are violated
 A good sound reasoning
then is formally valid and
licit and materially valid
and licit
Material Logic
 Based on validity of reasoning
 Actual reasoning both matter and form are
involved.
 They are intimately intertwined and at times are
seemingly inseparable
 Here are the following statement/arguments
◦ Cats are animals
◦ Orchids are plants
◦ Humans are mortal beings
◦ Water is liquid substance.
 All statements are genuinely valid because in matter
and form or in thought content and structure.
 Types of Logic
Based on the validity of reasoning and approach
used in arriving at truth
 Based on the approach to attaining
knowledge
 Logic is either deductive or inductive

◦ Deductive Logic
 Is a system of reasoning whereby a person argues from
universal or general truth to particular (specific) by way
of middle term
◦ Inductive
 Reasoning starts from sufficiently enumerated
individuals or specific cases or observations and
moves to the universal or general truth
 TYPES OF REASONING
 DEDUCTION/DEDUCTIVE LOGIC
is the type of reasoning wherein the mind
proceeds from more universal or general
truth to a less universal truth or particular
truth.

Sample:
All material beings are corruptible.
But all dogs are material beings.
Therefore , all dogs are corruptible.
 TYPES OF REASONING
 INDUCTION/INDUCTIVE LOGIC
is the type of reasoning wherein the mind
proceeds from sufficiently enumerated individual
instances to a universal or general truth.

Sample:
This mother (Maricris) is a female human beings;
Claire who is a mother is a fem human being;
Karen who is a mother, is a female human being;
This one (Mary), this (Stella), and this (Portia);
Therefore, all mothers are female human beings.
 LOGIC AND THE OPERATIONS
OF THE INTELLECT
 Man, as a rational being is composed of;
 INTELLECT – the capacity to know the truth
 WILL – the capacity to do good

 In the thinking process, the intellect performs

three operations which come in sequence.
 3 MENTAL OPERATIONS
MENTAL MENTAL EXTERNAL
ACT PRODUCT EXPRESSION
Acts of the Linguistic
mind Expression
SIMPLE APPREHENSION IDEA OR CONCEPT TERM

JUDGEMENT MENTAL PROPOSITION PROPOSITION

REASONING MENTAL ARGUMENT SYLLOGISM

 THE FIRST
ACT OF THE MIND
SIMPLE APPREHENSION
IDEA/TERM
THE SECOND ACT OF THE MIND

JUDGEMENT
 REASON ING
THE THIRD ACT OF THE MIND
 Language
 Is the ability to acquire and use complex
systems of communication, particularly the
human ability to do so
 Music may be a language of the soul
 Our verbal response to others (lovers, hates,

indifferences, frustrations, joys delights)

 Efficacy of dialogue
 Conference table in solving problems of

modern man
 The Uses of Language
 3 Fundamental Uses of Language
1. Informative
2. Expressive
3. Directive
 INFORMATIVE
 The most common function (attested to by
textbooks and all other books on history,
literature, philosophy, science)
 In logic we see this function at work in

propositions and arguments, where

something is either affirmed or denied and
this in turn is either true or false, correct or
incorrect.
 EXPRESSIVE
 This function is best illustrated in poetry
where emotions and attitudes are expressed
beautifully.
 This function also seen in common

exclamations that express of different moods

and they are far from poetic. It is hardly ask if
it is true or false like;
◦ Oh no! Right!
 DIRECTIVE
 This function of language is mostly easily
seen in commands and requests
 It is that which prods or prevents an action to

be done.
 One cannot speak of each of these as either

true or false
◦ Sample:
 Write me a letter when you reach California
 Emy, please sing Nasaan ka Irog?
 SIMPLE APPREHENSION,
IDEA/CONCEPT AND TERM
 Simple Apprehension
 An act of conceiving an object
 A process through which the capacity of

thinking comprehends/understands the

objective of reality as it is outside the mind.
 Nature of Simple
Apprehension
 Simple Apprehension is the operation by
which we grasp the meaning of a term.
 (e.g.)

◦ TRIANGLE – three-sided figure and it attend to its

meaning
◦ MAN – MORTAL; Alden Richard

 The operation, which your mind performs is

none but simple apprehension.
 SIMPLE APPREHENSION WITH
REFERENCE TO TERM
 Is a mental operation by which we mentally
grasp a thing, making it present in and to our
mind, but without affirming or denying
anything about it.
 OBJECTS OF SIMPLE APPREHENSION

 The whole thing that is  The essence or

known by simple quiddity (whatness) of
apprehension. things
 Includes not only what  Simple apprehension is
we know about the an intellectual
thing grasped. grasphing of “what a
 (ie) its formal object), thing is”
but also all else that is
knowable in the thing.

MATERIAL OBJECT FORMAL OBJECT

 Concept
 Etymological meaning
◦ Latin – concepire
◦ Means to conceive

 Real meaning
◦ Mental image which is created by the process of
thinking on the process of conceiving/visualizing
an object.
◦ A representation of an object by the intellect
through which a student comprehend a thing
◦ It is attained through the process of abstraction
The Meaning of Concept or Idea
 A concept or idea is the mental expression of an
essence (quiddity) of a thing.
 It is the product that simple apprehension

produces within the mind as a means of knowing

the essence of a thing.
 Ideas are the building stones of knowledge.

 Man makes judgments, and judgments either

expresses a truth or an error.

 Ideas are the elements that constitute the

judgment we form in our mind, therefore they

(ideas) are the foundation of knowledge.
 The Formation of Ideas

“NOTHING

COMES INTO
THE MIND
WITHOUT
PASSING
THROUGH
ARISTOTLE
THE SENSES”
 FORMATION OF IDEAS

 Man’s first contact with the reality around

him is through the senses (the windows of his
being)
The Proper object of Senses

SENSES ORGAN OBJECT

Sight Eyes Color
Hearing Ears Sound
Smell Nose Odor
Taste Tongue Flavor
Touch Skin Texture
 SENSE IMAGE - PHANTASM
 The image or representation of a thing
formed in our mind.
 It is the first step in the formation of ideas

 Our phantasm always provides us all the

sensible differences we can find in things
around us, thus it is particular, concrete and
bears with accidental elements.
 A falling red, smooth,
and sweet apple
 Ideas are formed in his mind as such, for our
senses perfectly and faithfully mirror every
object we come in constant with.
The 10 Categories of Predicaments
according to ARISTOTLE
1. Quantity
2. Quality
3. Relation
4. Action
5. Passion
6. Time
7. Posture/ Space
8. Where/Place
9. Habit
10. Substance
 Sample of accidents
 QUANTITY (He is 5 kilos)
 QUALITY (Pedro has dark skin)

 RELATION (He is a student of Logic)

 ACTION (Gina is cooking pork adobo)

 PASSION (He is being humiliated in class)

 TIME (He is now in Las Vegas)

 WHERE/PLACE (He is coming in the Philippines)

 POSTURE / SPACE (He is standing)

 HABIT (He dressed well)

 SUBSTANCE (This table is brown)

 INTELLECT (MIND)
 Is the seat of idea, something immaterial and
phantasm or sense image is something
material.
 A phantasm is not proportionate to the

immaterial intellect.
 To become actually intelligible, the phantasm

has to be dematerialized, stripped of its

material conditions (accidents)
 Abstraction
 Abstrahere (Latin word)
◦ To separate or to move away
 A mental act by which the process of thinking
studies the physical characteristics with
regard to its color, size, material, etc. in
order to think of the purpose of an object.
 Attention
 Mental act by which the process of thinking
fixes its consideration upon on particular
object after having sense it.
◦ Example:
 Driving a car – need full attention
 Student – pay attention to your professor because a
good professor must be a good student, first.
 Mental Reflex Activity
 Reflection
 A mental act of having aware of an act itself

so that it looks things objectively, having

differences between the 2 given arguments
◦ Example:
 The face of the man and
 The face of cat
 Comparison
 Mental act by which the process of thinking
notices his similarities and differences in the
object having the same essence with the
same geneses or classes

◦ Sample
 Angela and Monkey
 They are both essence but
 Angela is a rational animal
 Monkey is a brute
 COMPREHENSION
 is the sum total of the intelligible elements
of the quiddity (whatness) signified by the
term or concept.
 These intelligible elements are referred to as

notes, which include basic elements that a

thing has and what ever is deductible
from the basic elements
 SAMPLE
Rational capable of speech
Sentient / Attentive social being risible
Animate / Alive or (funny)
Living tool-using
etc.
Corporeal / Physical
Substance / Matter -
Body

Man has the following comprehension: The following are those deducible from
man:
 MEMORY
 After Phantasm and the idea have been
formed, they are then passed into a mental
storage called the memory.
 Once in the memory, the idea stays

permanently.
 That is why we can have recollections of

things we know previously, for every idea that

we have leaves an imprint in our mind.
 FORMATION OF IDEAS
Sensible
order Intelligible order

IDEA
ABSTRACTED
PERCEPT PHANTASM NATURE or
THING--- CONCEPT MEMORY

product of Qualities/ Dematerialized Made up Store ideas

sensation accidents phantasm of a
sight of a essence
smell thing of a thing
taste
touch
 FROM THING TO IDEA
THING - PERCEPT
 Man’s first contact with reality around him is
through the SENSES – the window of his being.
 The outer senses distinguish the THING and all

these sensations are synthesized in the common

sense producing in the process the PERCEPT, which
is the impressed species of a sensible order.
 This percept activates the imagination, memory

and cognitive senses-internal senses.

 The percept does this directly because it is

material and therefore proportionate to the same

material nature of the internal senses.
 PHANTASM
 The action of the internal senses produces
PHANTASM, which expressed species of a
sensible order.
 Our phantasm always provide us all the

sensible differences we can find in things

perceived, thus it is particular, concrete and
bears with accidental elements.
 The intellect however is something

immaterial. Phantasm therefore is not

proportionate to the immaterial intellect.
 ABSTRACTED NATURE
 To become actually intelligible, the intellect,
leaving behind only the ABSTRACTED
NATURE, which is dematerialized.
 This is the impressed species of an

intelligible order.
 This now actuates the possible intellect and

the act produces the IDEA, which is the

expressed species of an intelligible order.
 IDEOGENESIS
 The mental operation by which ideas are
abstracted from an image, which in turn,
acquired by sensation of the things in reality.
Types of Concept
 4 Types of Concept
with different Classification
 Concept based on Intention
 Concept based on Subject and Form
 Concept based on Substance and Accident
 Concept based on Existence and Possession
Concept based on Intention
 First Intention
◦ It is a concept by which you know things in the
process of thinking independently
 Second Intention
◦ It is a concept by which we conceive a thing in
reality in so far as the process of thinking
understands
◦ It is not regardless of what reality but how it is in
the process of thinking
 Sample
 The dog in reality has  Los Angeles California
four legs and an animal is a city of angels
 Therefore understood  It is understood to be
that the dog is the place of the city of
according to what it is angels in so far as the
in reality regardless of mind says it.
what we think about it

1st Intention 2nd intention

 Concept based on
Subject and Form
 These subject and form are so called essence
and quiddity metaphysically.

◦ Subject is one of the spoken of and looked upon

having a perfection or attributes embodied in it.

◦ Form which an object exists as it is

 Sample
 Glass has quiddity of  Dog has an animality
glass’ness that makes dog animal
 Book has quiddity of or a real animal
book’ness

Subject Form
 Concept based on
Substance and Accident
 Substantia (Latin word)
 The existence in itself without requiring

another being as a subject of its inherence

 It is the existence of the form and not mere

modifications/adjustments of the subject

which they inhere to
 These are classified into 2

◦ Absolute concept
◦ Connotative concept
 Absolute Concept
 Denotes the meaning of a complete
substance endowed with its independent
reality.
 When it signifies something to the mind,

absolute concept becomes abstract

concept
◦ Sample
 Concept of moon in its brightness
 Concept of dog as animality
 Connotative Concpet
 Represents form without the subject
 In English grammar, it tells something about

the adjectives that being modified to the

subject
◦ Sample
 The wise man found Jesus in the manger
 Wise – modifier
 Man - subject
 Wise used as modifier that modifies to the subject man
 Concept based on
Existence and Possession
 It tells something about assertive or denial;
positive or negative
 Positive concept

◦ It signifies the possession on the existence or the

existence of something
 Sample: beautiful, happy love etc.
 Negative concept
◦ It denotes the non-existence or non-possession of
something
 Sample : non-beautiful, non-happy, non-love
Term
 Term
 External sign of a concept and last element of
a proposition
 A term is oral if it is expressed and written if

it is drafted
PROPERTIES OF IDEA
OR
TERM
 KINDS OF EXTENTION
includes the subjects
signified by the term

 ABSOLUTE EXTENTION
the sum total of the subjects of the actual
subjects as well as the possible subjects –
whose quiddity is signified by the term or
concept.
Sample:
Man is a social being
Every lilies is a flower
 EXTENTION
 FUNCTIONAL EXTENTION
includes only those subjects that are actually
set before the mind when is used in
discourse.
 FUNCTIONAL EXTENTION
 UNIVERSAL
If it sets before the mind each of the subject
whose nature it signifies.

e.g. every man

 FUNCTIONAL EXTENTION
 PARTICULAR
If it sets before the mind an indeterminate
designed portion of its total possible
extension.

e.g. some men

 FUNCTIONAL EXTENTION
 SINGULAR
If it sets before the mind one that is
definitely designed to the individual or group.

e.g. best man

 INVERSE PROPORTION BETWEEN
COMPREHENSION AND EXTENSION
 GENERAL RULE
 The greater the comprehension of a term or concept,
the lesser the extension.
 The greater the extension of a term or concept, the
lesser the comprehension.

e.g.
COMPREHENSION Man is rational being
(making definition)
EXTENSION Pedro, Teacher, etc.
These are the individual comprising the term or
classifying (making division)
 ILLUSTRATION
EXTENSION

SUBSTANCE Substance Angel Mineral Plant Brute

Man

BODY
Corporeal substance Mineral Plant Brute
Man
ORGANISM

Animate corporeal substance Plant Brute

ANIMAL Man

MAN Sentient animate corporeal substance Brute

Man
 5 PREDICAMENTS
of ARISTOTLE & AQUINAS

 The different modes or ways in which a

E
universal can be predicated of its subject. S
S
1. SPECIES (complete essence) E
N
2. GENUS (part of the essence which is common to others) T
I
3. SPECIFIC DIFFERENCE (part of the essence which makesA
L
it unique)
N
O
4. PROPERTY (not essence but flows from the very essence)
T
5. ACCIDENT
 2 KINDS OF SUBSTANCE
 VISIBLE material things which contains body

 INVISIBLE immaterial – no bodies

 TREE OF PORPHYRY
SUBSTANCE

CORPOREAL INCORPOREAL
(BODY) (SPIRIT)

ORGANISM MINERAL
(ORGANIC) (INORGANIC)

SENTIENT NON SENTIENT

(ANIMAL) (PLANT)

RATIONAL NON RATIONAL

(MAN) (BRUTE)
 KINDS OF TERM
According to concrete
comprehension abstract
singular
According to particular
extension
universal
 TERM univocal
According to the equivocal
manner of meaning
analogous

contradictory

contrary
According to the
manner of relation privative

relative
 FIRST ACT:
SIM PLE APPREHENSION
IDEA or CONCEPT
Properties:
Kinds:
CONCRETE (+)
COMPREHENSION

ABSTRACT (-)
TERM
SINGULAR (S)
EXTENSION PARTICULAR (P)
UNIVERSAL (U)
 ACCORDING TO COMPREHENSION
1. CONCRETE
 Is a term which pertains to the expressions of
a form and a subject
 It can be perceived by the senses
 ACCORDING TO COMPREHENSION
2. ABSTRACT
 Is a term which pertains to the abstract
quality in form only, thus it cannot be
perceived by the senses.
ACCORDING TO EXTENSION

1. SINGULAR
if it stands for one individual or group and
designates that individual or group definitely.
 ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
 SINGULAR TERM – PROPER NAMES
are singular in their extension

e.g. Ma. Katrina Mendoza

Peter John Lising

San Sebastian College – Recoletos

 ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
 SINGULAR TERM – SUPERLATIVES
in their strict sense are singular by their very
nature.

e.g. Tallest

Most Handsome

MVP (most valuable player)

 ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
 SINGULAR TERM – DEMONSTRATIVE
PRONOUNS
“this” and “that” are singular inasmuch as
they definitely designed a single individual or
group.

e.g. This student

That classroom
 ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
 SINGULAR TERM – PERSONAL PRONOUN
“I” is always singular.

e.g. I am a sebastinian
 ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
 SINGULAR TERM – COLLECTIVE NOUNS
(teams or group) are singular if they stand for a definite
group that they designate definitely.
Nouns that are grammatically plural are singular from
the point of view of logic if they definitely designate one
group.

e.g. The Lady Stags is a volleyball team to

beat.

Those five men make up a basketball

team.
 ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
 SINGULAR TERM – DEFINITE ARTICLE
“the” takes both singular and universal
extension depending upon its use.

e.g. The man is studying (singular)

The man is rational being (universal)

ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
2. PARTICULAR
if it stands for an indeterminately designated
portion of its absolute extension.
* if it stands for one individual or group
without designating it.
* if it stands for more than one, but not all, of
the individuals or group to which it can be
applied.
 A TERM IS PARTICULAR IF…
1. It uses the positive quantifier like;

e.g. a number of
few
many
most
several
 A TERM IS PARTICULAR IF…
2. It uses the negative quantifier not all
(normally placed before the subject term)

e.g. Not all students are diligent.

 A TERM IS PARTICULAR IF…
3. It uses the indefinite articles “a” and “an” as modifiers
- use of “a” followed by the consonant (b,c,d,f,…)
- use of “an” followed by the vowel (a,e,I,o,u)

e.g. A man is walking (particular)

A man is a risible being (universal)

An animal is wild (particular)

An animal is a mortal creature (universal)
ACCORDING TO EXTENSION
3. UNIVERSAL
It stands for each of the subjects to which it
can be applied

e.g. Every Sebastinian,

students without exception.
 Universal Terms may be:
 IMPLICIT
when a term is not being modified by without
the use of any qualities.

e.g. Men are mortal beings.

Angels are supernatural creatures.

Whales are mammals.

 Universal Terms may be:
 EXPLICIT
When a term is being modified by a quantifier.

e.g. All men are mortal beings.

Every angel is a supernatural creature.

Whales without exception are mammals.

 A Term is Universal if….
1. It uses the positive quantifiers like;

ALL
EVERY
WITHOUT EXCEPTION
 A Term is Universal if….
2. It uses the negative quantifier “NO”
(normally placed before the subject term)

e.g. No sebastinian student is lazy in his

studies.
 A Term is Universal if….
3. If it uses the definite article “the”

e.g. The dog is barking (Singular)

The dog is an animal (Universal)

 A Term is Universal if….
4. If it uses the indefinite article “a”

e.g. A dog is barking (Particular)

A dog is an animal (Universal)

 KINDS OF TERMS ACCORDING TO THE
MANNER OF MEANING

 UNIVOCAL TERM
 Unus (Latin word) – infinite verb of Latin word
 Vocare – to call (to call one)
 A term with exactly the same or one meaning.

e.g. Jay, Jesus and Judas are men.

 ACCORDING TO THE
MANNER OF MEANING
 EQUIVOCAL TERMS
The term has entirely different meanings as
applied to a number of things.
 ACCORDING TO THE
MANNER OF MEANING
 ANALOGOUS TERMS
are terms/words that express partly the same
and partly different meaning.
An Analogy maybe by reason of:
A. PROPORTIONALITY
when the application is based on a similarity
of two relationships.
An Analogy maybe by reason of:
B. ATTRIBUTION
when the application is based on a
relationship of a secondary analogue to a
primary analogue.
 ACCORDING TO
MANNER OF RELATION
1. CONTRADICTORY
are concepts so related that the one is the
simple negation of the other.

e.g. Man and non-man

Being and non being

Contradictory term are easily formed by simply

prefixing to the word the negative particle “non”
 ACCORDING TO
MANNER OF RELATION
2. CONTRARY
are concepts that belong to the same genus
but differ from one another as much as
possible within that genus.

e.g. hot and cold

expensive and cheap

 Contrary term may be:

 IMMEDIATE OPPOSED
if there is no middle ground between them and
if collectively they embrace the entire
extension of the genus to which they belong.

e.g. rational and irrational

creatures are either with reason or without
male and female
man’s gender is either masculine or
feminine
 Contrary term may be:
 MEDIATELY OPPOSED
if there is a middle ground between them

e.g. hot and cold

in between them there is such a thing
as lukewarm.
small and large
in between them, there is a medium
size.
 ACCORDING TO
MANNER OF RELATION
3. PRIVATIVE
are concepts that include like
DEATH
BLINDNESS
DEAFNESS
DEFECT
Walk – Lame
Intelligence - Stupidity
 A Concept is privative if…
1. If presents a thing to the mind according to
what the thing was, or had, or would be
expected to have and without the thing is
defective.

e.g. Blindness
is the lack of sight in subject that
ought to have it.
 A Concept is privative if…
2. It expresses such a defect in the abstract.

e.g. Blind
a defect expressing the abstract
blindness.

* It means lack of something in the subject that

ought to have or posses it.
 ACCORDING TO
MANNER OF RELATION
4. RELATIVE
are concepts mutually exclusive and so
related that neither of them can be thought
of without reference to the other.
e.g. husband and wife
master and servant
are concept that are impossible to be realized
in the same subject at least in the same
respect.
e.g. parent and offspring
 Supposition
 Latin word
◦ Sub – under
◦ Ponere – to put
 It is to put under
 Property of term that acquires from its use in
the proposition
 2 kinds of supposition

◦ Formal Supposition
◦ Material Supposition
 Formal Supposition
 Word for its real meaning
◦ Sample
 Manila is the capital city of the Philippines
 Material Supposition
 Supposition that uses a word for itself alone
◦ Sample
 GC stands for Gordon College
 Definition
 Latin word of DEFINIRE (enclose within a limit)
 Signifies an act of defining a term
 2 kinds of definition

◦ Real
◦ Nominal
 Real
 Definitio rei (Latin word)
 Definition of things
 The nature of things that manifest structure

of the thing explicitly by the term to be

defined
◦ Essential definition
◦ Distinctive definition
◦ Genetic definition
◦ Causal definition
◦ Accidental definition
 Essential Definition
 Definition that is complete
 It is equivalent of species, wherein it is

constructed by genus and specific difference

 It explain the essence of a thing
◦ Sample
 Man is a rational being
 A triangle is a three sided polygon
 Distinctive Definition
 Definition that explains what a thing is
 It is noted for the attributes or properties of a

thing
◦ Sample
 Man can drive automobile
 Oxygen is a tasteless, odorless gas
 Genetic Definition
 Definition that pertains to the process of
origin or the production of a thing
◦ Sample
 Dengue is a tropical transmitted by the mosquito,
causing fever and pain in the joins
 Causal Definition
 Definition that pertains to;
◦ Efficient and
◦ Final cause
 ARISTOTLE’S
DIVISION OF CAUSES INTO FOUR KINDS

1. MATERIAL
2. FORMAL
3. FINAL
4. EFFICIENT
sample
 KINDS OF CAUSES
◦ Sample
 Wooden table in front of us and want to explain why?
 1st qualities of table – wood = material
cause of the table
 Material cause refers to composition
of something what a thing is made of.
 KINDS OF CAUSES
◦ Sample
 Wooden table in front of us and want to explain why?
 2nd table is there because of wood that has been form or shape of
a table. For had this wood been shaped as a chair, there would
not be a table there.
 This table form or shape is a formal cause
of the table
 A formal cause refers to the design of form
of something that makes it what it is.
 KINDS OF CAUSES
 Sample
◦ 3rd the table is there because
someone needs it there, to put
his/her things on
 To have something to put things on
is the final cause of the table.
 Final cause refers to the purpose of
something.
 Accident Definition
 Refers to a thing that may be contingently
connected with its properties
◦ Sample
 The table is made by wood
 A good marriage is a product of Faithfulness and Love
for each other
 KINDS OF TRUTH
CONTINGENT/CONDITIONAL TRUTH
 Is not true in all possible situations
 Empirical truth are contingent truth

◦ Sample
 THE TABLE IS BROWN
 Only true in a situation where there is a table that happens
to be brown in color - TRUE
 Another situation where there is table that is black in color
- FALSE
 Nominal Definition
 Nominis (Latin word)
 Definition of names
 It denotes ownership
Nominal definition by Etymology
 From the origin of the word in infinitive verb
 Sample

◦ Philosophy
 Philia
Sophia
 Nominal definition by
Example
 Denotes a definition by giving a term to be
defined;
 It denotes its example

◦ Sample what is a laptop?

◦ By telling an example
 Nominal definition by
Synonym
 Defines a word with similar meaning
◦ Sample:
 Big – Huge -Large
Nominal Definition by Description
 Denotes by describing the thing signified by a
term in order to indicate what a thing is that
is being spoken of
◦ Sample:
 Pen – used for writing
 Rules of Good Definition
 Term to be defined is really appropriate for
defining term or not
◦ Clarity
◦ Adequacy
◦ Positive
 Clarity
 A definition should avoid vagueness or ambiguity
 A highly theoretical definition and figuratie
language must be avoided
 It must be presented in a terminology that can
average person is likely to understand
 It must be misleading as well
◦ Sample
 Figurative definition
 A clock is a time that heals and erases the memories of a painful
yesterday
 Obscure definition
 Net is the reticulated fabric decussated at regular intervals with
interstices and intersections
 Adequacy
 A definition must be specific
 It must not be to narrow or too broad
 Narrow if it prevents us from applying a term to all
the things to which it cannot be applied
 Broad if it allows us to apply a term things to which
cannot be applied
 It must also be interchangeable
◦ Sample
 A wolf is a sheep killing animal
 Wolf is a narrow (does not include wolves that not all wolves eat
sheep)
 Sheep killing is too broad (sheep killing is applicable to animals other
than wolves)
 Positive
 A definition must not be needlessly negative
 As a rule, opposition is not an adequate way

of defining terms
 A definition most state what a thing is, not

what a thing is not

◦ Sample
 A male is not a female
 Brief
 A definition must be not be circular
 It should be specific and precise

◦ Sample
 A preacher is the one who preaches
 PART 2
THE SECOND ACT OF THE
MIND
JUDGMENT
 Judgment
Refers to that act wherein the mind affirms or
denies anything about the subject.

* MENTAL PRODUCT: Mental Proposition or

Judgment – simply refers to an articulation of
the mind’s affirmation or denial of the thing
grasped.
* EXTERNAL SIGN: Proposition – a kind of
statement/discourse which expresses truth or
falsity.
 The Nature and
Meaning of Judgment
 Ideas, as we have previously discussed, are formed
and produced in the mind through its first act called
simple apprehension.
 Truthfully, ideas are the building block of knowledge,

that it is, they are the first step towards attaining

knowledge.
 However, ideas in themselves do not express truth or

falsehood.
 Ideas are neither true or false.

 Ideas may appear every now and then in our minds,

but unless we start to compare an idea with another

idea or ideas, truth will remain to be lacking.
 How to attain the truth?
 Our mind must take at least two ideas,
compare them with each other, then express
their agreement or disagreement; only then
can arrive at either a truth or falsehood.
 Sample
 I have the idea ‘PEN’
 And the idea “BLACK”
 There is nothing true or false (yet) in pen or

black.
 But when I start to compare the two and

eventually articulate or pronounce their

agreement, and say for instance The pen is
black or The pen is not black, can we only
then talk about truth and or falsehood.
 MENTAL ACT
 The mind pronounces the agreement or
disagreement of two ideas is called judgment.

 Sample;
 The mind compare ‘this pen and black’ and

then makes a pronouncement that ‘this pen is

black’ or ‘this pen is not black’
 THIS PEN is called the subject idea
 BLACK is the predicate idea
 3 THINGS NECESSARY IN
JUDGMENT
 Understanding of the 2 ideas at question
The mind must first have an understanding of the 2 ideas
about which it intends to make a judgment.
 Comparison of the 2 ideas

The mind must compare the 2 ideas in questioning; study

the comprehension of each which would be needed in the
pronouncement of the agreement or disagreement of the
said ideas.
 Mental pronouncement of the agreement or disagreement

of the 2 ideas at question

After having compared the said ideas, the mind is now
ready to articulate or pronounce the agreement or
disagreement between them.
MANNER AND FORM OF JUDGMENT
 Refers to materials or
objects which enter
into composition in the
judgment.
 The pen is black
 THE PEN - subject idea
 BLACK - predicate idea
 Refers to the
pronouncement of the
agreement or disagreement
between 2 compared ideas
 THE PEN IS BLACK
 Pronounced agreement
between The pen and black
 Pronounced disagreement
The pen is not black, is a
disagreement between The
pen and black

MATTER OF JUDGMENT FORM OF JUDGMENT

 POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE
JUDGMENT
 POSITIVE JUDGEMENT -Shows agreement
between compared ideas .

 NEGATIVE JUDGMENT -Shows disagreement

between compared ideas.
PROPOSITION
 Second Act:
Judgment
Mental Proposition
Parts: Elements: Properties: Kinds:

SINGULAR (S)

SUBJECT (S)
MATTER - QUANTITY PARTICULAR (P)

PROPOSITION PREDICATE (P) UNIVERSAL (U)

AFFIRMATIVE (+)
COPULA (C) - FORM - QUALITY ( am, are is)

NEGATIVE (-)

Regular –am, are , is not

Irregular : "Not all" before the S (P)
“No" before the S (U)
THE MEANING OF PROPOSITION
 Is the external expression of judgment.
 Is a sentence that expresses a judgment.

 It may defined also as;

1. A statement in which anything is either affirmed or

denied
2. A judgment expressed in a sentence

3. A sentence which is expressive of the argument or

disagreement between two or more terms.
 Are sentences, but not all sentences are necessary

propositions.
 Propositions are limited only to DECLARATIVE

SENTENCES
 English Grammar
4 kinds of sentences
 Declarative or proposition
◦ It is one that states a fact. It asserts or denies something.
 Logic is the science and act of correct thinking.
 Imperative
◦ It is one that gives a command or one which makes a request
 Please closed the door
 Interrogative
◦ It is one that asks a question
 When is your birthday
 Exclamatory
◦ It is one that express a strong feeling
 What an awesome God he has
 BASIC ELEMENTS OF A
PROPOSITION
1. Subject idea 1. Subject term
2. Predicate idea 2. Predicate term
3. Mental 3. Copula
pronouncement of
the agreement or
disagreement

ELEMENT S OF JUDGMENT ELEMENTS OF PROPOSITION

 The matter of judgment
 The subject idea and predicate idea are
expressed in a proposition by the subject
term and predicate term respectively.
 While the mental pronouncement of the

agreement, is expressed in a proposition by

what we call a copula.
 COPULA
 Is expressed by the present tense of the
indicative mood (is used for factual
statements and positive beliefs) of the verb
“to be” [am, are is if showing agreement; am
not, are not if showing disagreement]
 It expressed in the present tense because it

expresses a present act of the mind.

 Judgment is a present act of the mind. The

mind may judge about a past or even a future

event, but the judgment about said things is
done at the present moment.
 Sample of proposition
Athletes are healthy Saints are not sinners

Athletes – subject term Saints – subject term

Sinners – predicate term
Healthy – predicate term
Are not – copula
Are – copula

agreement disagreement
 THE LOGICAL FORM OF THE
PROPOSITION
 Presentation of the proposition
 Every proposition may be transformed into its

logical form.
 The Logical form of the proposition is
 S - subject
 C - copula
 P - predicate
 THE LOGICAL FORM OF THE
PROPOSITION
 Not all propositions are presented in its
logical form, sometimes the copula is hidden,
meaning, not expressed.
 However if it is a proposition, then it can be

transformed in the logical form .

PROPOSITION in the PAST TENSE
 A proposition which is expressed in the past
tense;

Original Proposition
Miguel ate ice cream
 PROPOSITION in the
FUTURE TENSE
Original Proposition
Logic student will past the course.
 CLASSIFICATION OR
KIND OF PROPOSITION
 Proposition can be classified from the
different points of view.
 From the point of view of its quality, a

proposition is either affirmative or negative,

 While from the point of view of its quantity or

extension, it may be singular, universal or

particular.
 QUALITY
AFFIRMATIVE
 When the subject is affirmed of its predicate

or when what is expressed is an agreement

between the subject and predicate terms.
 The copula used is either am, are or is.

 Sample;
Some students are prayerful.
 QUALITY
NEGATIVE
 When the subject is denied of its predicate or

when what is expressed is a disagreement

between the subject and predicate terms.
 The copula used is either am not, is not or

are not.

 Sample;
Some students are not prayerful.
 QUANTITY or EXTENSION
SINGULAR
 When the subject term of the proposition is a

singular term

 Sample;
Dr. Ediric D. Gadia is the Dean of CEAS.
singular term
 QUANTITY or EXTENSION
UNIVERSAL
When the subject term of the proposition is a
universal term.

Sample;

All logic students will be given a passing mark.

universal term
 QUANTITY or EXTENSION
PARTICULAR
 When the subject term of the proposition is a

particular term.

 Sample;
Some priests are holy.
particular term
 SINGULAR PROPOSITION
 For purposes of simplicity, however singular
proposition shall also be considered under
the category of the universal proposition,

 This is because the very definition of a

universal concept or term would already
encompass that of the singular concept term.

 Dr. Ediric Gadia is the Dean of CEAS

is classified as a universal proposition
 THE A,E,I AND O
PROPOSITION
 All proposition possess their quality and
quantity extension.
 Therefore the proposition ;

All lawyers are professionals

– both universal and affirmative
*Universal in terms of quantity – All lawyers
*Affirmative proposition in terms of quality –
agreement between the subject and the
predicate or the copula used “is”
 4 TYPES OF PROPOSITION
1. Universal affirmative proposition
2. Universal negative proposition
3. Particular affirmative proposition
4. Particular negative proposition
Samples of 4 types of proposition
1. Universal affirmative proposition
All fruits are sweet.

2. Universal negative proposition

No fruit is sweet
All fruit are not sweet

3. Particular affirmative proposition

Some fruits are sweet

4. Particular negative proposition

Some fruits are not sweet
IMMEDIATE IDENTIFICATION
A Universal Affirmative

E Universal Negative

I Particular Affirmative

O Particular Negative
 The Letters A,E,I and O
 Affirmo and Nego– Latin word
 Affirmo - I affirm and
 Nego - I deny or negate
Basis: A ff I rmo
nEgO

 A and E universal A – Affirmo

E – nEgo

 I and O particular I – affIrmo

O - negoO
 A,E,I and O
QUALITY

AFFIRMATIV NEGATIVE
E
Q
SINGULAR/
A E
U
A
N
T
UNIVERSAL
I
PARTICULAR
I O
T
Y
 THE QUANTITY OR EXTENSION OF
THE PREDICATE TERM
 Apart from the knowledge of the quality and quantity or
extension of the proposition, another necessary matter to
consider for the complete understanding of the
proposition is the determination of the quantity or
extension of the predicate term.
 Such will be needed in leading us o the correct analysis of
a proposition.
 As mentioned is the previous discussion, the quantity or
extension of both the subject and the proposition itself,
where the subject contained, is analyzed in the same way,
so that, if the subject term of the proposition is singular,
the proposition will also be considered as singular, In the
same manner with universal and particular.
THE QUANTITY OR EXTENSION OF
THE PREDICATE TERM
 The predicate term though also one of the
elements of the proposition like the subject
term, is different from the latter, and is
analyzed separately and differently.
Venn Diagram – analyze and determine
the particular term of the proposition
A Every Filipino is honest
S P

P - predicate
S - subject

The entire set of the subject (Sebastianian) is shaded, while from

the perspective of the predicate term (honest), the shaded area
is only seen as a part of the said term (honest).
Thus from the diagram we can conclude that the subject
(Sebastinian) is used as universal, while the predicate is used as
particular.
Venn Diagram – analyze and determine
the particular term of the proposition
E No Filipino is honest
S P

S P

The whole of the subject (Sebastinian) is separated from

the whole of the predicate (honest).
It means that no member of the group of the subject
(Sebastinian) belongs to the other group (honest).
As such both the subject and the predicate terms are used
as universal.
Venn Diagram – analyze and determine
the particular term of the proposition

I Some Filipinos are honest.

S P
p

Only a part of the subject (Sebastinian) is shaded which

illustrate that such is used as particular, while from the
perspective of the predicate term (honest), what is
shaded is only a part thereof which demonstrated that
the predicate term (honest) is used as particular.
Venn Diagram – analyze and determine the particular term of the proposition

O Some Filipinos are not honest

S P

s P
Only a part of the subject (Sebastinian) is shaded thus used
as particular. Also seen in the diagrams is the seperstion of
the said part of the subject (Sebastinian) from the whole of
the predicate (honest), thus we can see that the predicate
(honest) is used as universal.
RULES IN QUALITY AND QUANTITY
OF PREDICATE
 We have seen that A and I propositions give a
particular predicate term.
 While E and O propositions give a universal

predicate term.

 A and I Affirmative - PARTICULAR

 E and O Negative - UNIVERSAL
 Thus we can infer that the predicate of an

affirmative proposition is particular while the

predicate of a negative proposition is universal.
 PRINCIPLES
1. Generally, the extension of the predicate
term of an affirmative proposition is
particular, unless otherwise indicated as
singular.
2. Generally, the extension of the predicate
term of a negative proposition is universal,
unless otherwise indicated as singular
 PREDICATE

Affirmative = Particular

 PREDICATE

Negative = Universal
LOGICAL OPPOSITION
AND EQUIVALENT
 The Laws of Thought
 All truths are based on the three (3) Basic
Laws of Thought.

 These are;
1. The Principle of Identity.
2. The Principle of Contradiction
3. The Principle of Excluded Middle
 THE PRINCIPLE OF IDENTITY
 This principle can be stated variedly as:
1. “A thing is according to what it actually is.”

2. “Everything is identical to what it is.”

3. “A thing is whatever it is.”

4. Whatever is, is,”

• If a thing is, then it is; if a thing is not, then it is not.
• This simply implies that one and the same thing
cannot be different from its own self, for whatever is,
is.
• Say, if this thing is a pen then this is a pen; or it this
pen is black, then this pen is black, for it cannot be
otherwise.
 THE PRINCIPLE OF
CONTRADICTION
 This principles states that “a thing cannot be and
not be at the same time under the same respect.”
 One and the same thing cannot be and not be at

the same time.

 If a thing is, then it cannot be is not.
 Say if a thing is black, then it cannot be not

black.
 Conversely, if a thing is not black, then it cannot

be black at the same time, for there will exist a

contradiction.
 THE PRINCIPLE OF
CONTRADICTION
 At a different perspective, we will see that this
principle is but the Principle of Identity
expressed in a different manner.
 According to the Principle of Identity, whatever
is, is.
 Thus, it cannot be is not.
 This is also what the Principle of contradiction is
stating, whatever is, is; it cannot be is not,
because it will be impossible for one and the
same thing to be and not to be the same time
under the same respect.
 THE PRINCIPLE OF
EXCLUDED MIDDLE
 This principle states that;
 Two contradictories cannot be both true or false

together.
1. “A thing either is or is not”
2. “Everything must either be or not be”
 If one is true, its contradictory must be false and vice

versa.
 It must be one or the other.

 There can be no middle ground.

 Between being and not being, there can nothing be in

between.
 Between is not there can be no middle ground.
 THE PRINCIPLE OF
EXCLUDED MIDDLE
 Identity tells us that whatever is, is.
 It cannot be is not, as put forward by Contradiction.
 And between is and is not, there is nothing in
between, as put forward by Excluded Middle.
 These principles (Principles of Identity,
Contradiction and Excluded Middle) are the
fundamentals in correct thinking and truth.
 To have them readily present in the mind will give
anyone ease in understanding the properties of
propositions when place in opposition to with each
other.
 THE LOGICAL OPPOSITION
 It refers to the relationship existing between
propositions with the same subject and
predicate terms but differ terms of quality or
quantity or both.
 The propositions A, E, I and O differs in terms

of quality and quantity;

 DIFFERENCES OF LOGICAL
PROPOSITIONS
 A and E in terms of quality (affirmative and negative)
 A and I in terms of quantity (universal and particular)
ON THE OTHER HAND
 A and O in terms of in terms of quality (+ & -) and
quantity (U & P)
 A paired with E, I and O in terms of quality and
quantity
 E and I
 E and O in terms of quantity (U & P)
 I and O in terms of quality (+ & -)
 TWO PROPOSITIONS CAN BE
OPPOSED IN A NUMBER OF WAYS
1. (A) Every dog is an animal. – (E) No dog is an
animal.
2. (A) Every dog is an animal – (O) Some dog is not n
animal.
3. (A) Every dog is an animal – (I) Some dog is an
animal.
4. (E) No dog is an animal – (I) Some dog is an animal.
5. (E) No dog is an animal – (O) Some dog is not an
animal.
6. (E) Some dog is an animal – (O) Some dog is not an
animal.
Sub-Alternation (A – I; E – O)
 This type of opposition exist between
proposition that have the same subject and
predicate terms and the same quality, but
differing in terms of quality.
 The involved propositions are called sub-

alterns and their relation is known as sub-

alternation.
Sub-Alternation (A – I; E – O)
 A and I (affirmative)sub-alterns
 E and O (negative sub-alterns

 The universal sub-altern – SUB-ALTERNANT

 The particular sub-altern – SUB-ALTERNATE

 All men are mortal beings. A proposition (U/+)

 Some men are mortal beings. I proposition (P/
+)
 Contradiction (A – O; E – I)
 This type of opposition exist between
propositions that have the same subject and
predicate terms but differing in terms of both
quality and quantity.
 The involved propositions are called

contradictories and their relation is known as

contradiction.
 Contradiction (A – O; E – I)
 Contradictories A and OE and I

 All men are mortal beings. A proposition (U/+)

 Some Men are not mortal beings. O proposition (P/-)
 All men are not mortal beings. E proposition (U/-)
 Some men are mortal beings. I proposition (P/+)
 Logicians call this perfect type of opposition for is an example of
total exclusion.
 The relation between contradictory proposition is similar to the
relation of contradictory ideas or terms (white –non white).
 It is the relation of mutual exclusion.
 Contrariety (A – E)
 This type of proposition exist between
universal propositions that have the same
subject and predicate terms but differing in
terms of quality.
 The involve propositions are called contraries

and their relation is known as contrariety.

 Contrariety (A – E)
 CONTRARIES A and E (+/-)

 All men are mortal beings. A proposition (U/+)

 All men are not mortal beings. E proposition
(U/-)
 Sub-Contrariety (I – O)
 This type of proposition exist between
particular propositions that have the same
subject and predicate terms but differing in
terms of quality.
 The involved propositions are called sub-

contraries and their relation is known as sub-

contrariety.
 Sub-Contrariety (I – O)
 SUB CONTRARIES I and O (+/-)

 Some men are mortal beings. I proposition (P/+)

 Some men are not mortal beings. O proposition
(P/-)
4 OPPOSITIONS OF CATEGORICAL
PROPOSITIONS
 A – Ocontradictory
 E – I contradictory

 A – E contrary

 I – O subcontrary

 A – I subaltern
 E – O subaltern
THE SQUARE OF OPPOSITION
A E CONTRARIES

S S
U U
B B
A A
L CONTRADICTORIES L
T T
E E
R R
N N
S S

SUBCONTRARIES
IO
 LAW OF SUB-ALTERNATION
 “The truth of the universal involves the truth of
the particular, but the truth of the particular does
not involve the truth of the universal.”

 “The falsity of the particular involves the falsity of

the universal, but the falsity of the universal does
not involve the falsity of the particular.”

 If the statement is Doubtful it is definitely false

Sub-alternation law

U=T P=T

U=F P=?

P=T U=?

P=F U=F
 LAW OF SUB-ALTERNATION
 The relation of the universal to the particular
is similar to the relation of the whole to its
parts.
 The truth about the whole involves or

includes the truth of the parts.

 Whatever is true to the whole must also be

true to each and every part of the whole;

whatever is true to all is therefore , also true
to some.
 LAW OF SUB-ALTERNATION
 If the sub-alternant (universal) is true, then
the sub-alternate (particular) is also true.
 It is because the particular is involved or
included in the universal.
 However the truth of the particular does not
necessarily involve or include the truth of the
universal.
 What is true to some need not be true to all.
 The law says that the truth of the particular
does not involve the truth of the universal.
 LAW OF SUB-ALTERNATION
1. If A is true, then I is also true.
If E is true, then O is also true.

2. If I is true, then A is doubtful (may be true, may be

false).

If O is true, then E is doubtful (may be true, may be

false).
 LAW OF SUB-ALTERNATION
 The second phase of the law of sub-alternation, on the
other hand, is telling us that the falsity of the particular
would necessarily involve or include the falsity of the
universal.
 What is false about the certain part of the whole would
inevitably be false if applied to the whole which involves
or includes the same (certain) part.
 What is false to some necessarily false to all.
 However, if a certain fact is false as applied to the whole,
the same cannot necessarily be said about each part of
the same whole.
 What is false to all may not necessarily be (also) false to
some.
 LAW OF SUB-ALTERNATION
1. If I is false, then A is also false
If O is false, then E is also false.

2. If A is false, then I is doubtful

(may be true, may be false).
If E is false, then O is doubtful
(may be true, may be false).
 LAW OF CONTRADICTION
 Contradiction is considered by most logicians
as a perfect form of opposition because of a
formal exclusion of the contradictories from
each other.

 “Contradictories cannot be true together nor

can they be false together.”
 LAW OF CONTRADICTION
 As contradictories would formally exclude
each other, both cannot be affirmed at the
same time or even be denied at the same
time.
 Consequently, if one is true, its contradictory

must be false and if one is false, then its

contradictory must necessarily be true.
 LAW OF CONTRADICTION
1. If A is true, then O is false.
If O is true, the A is false.
If E is true, then I is false.
If I is true, then E is false.

2. If A is false, then O is true.

If O is false, then A is true.

If E is false, then I is true.

If I is false, then E is true.
Contradiction Law

T F

F T
 LAW OF CONTRARIETY
 Contrariety refers to the relation of universal
propositions that have same subject and
predicate terms, but differing in terms of quality.
 Proposition involved herein are A and E

propositions.
 They are, therefore, contrary to each other, or

simply, contraries.

 “Contraries cannot be true together, but they can

be false together.”
 LAW OF CONTRARIETY
 As contraries refers to the extremes among objects of a
series that belong to the same class or genus, both cannot
be true at the same time but may be false at the same
time.
 If one extreme is applicable, then the other extreme

cannot anymore be applied.

 Thus, if one is true, then the contrary must be false.
 However, if one extreme is not applicable, then we may not

necessarily conclude whether the other extreme is

applicable or not.
 It may or may be applicable.
 Thus, if one is false, then the contrary is unknown,

because it may be true or false.

 LAW OF CONTRARIETY
1. If A is true, then E is false.
If E is true, then A is false.

2. If A is false, then E is doubtful

(may be true, may be false).
If E is false, then A is doubtful
(may be true, may be false).
Law of Contrary
T F

F ?
 LAW OF SUB-CONTRARIETY
 Sub-contraries (or under the contraries) are those
in between the contraries.
 A and E are contraries.
 A refers to all, while E refers to none.
 Between all and none may be (I = some – are; O =
some - are not).
 Thus contraries have some thing in between and
they are the sub-contraries.

 “Sub-contraries cannot be false together, but they

can be true together.”
 LAW OF SUB-CONTRARIETY
 Sub-contraries cannot be false together, because it
is already possible for the contraries to be false
together.
 4 propositions A, E, I and O.
 A and E – contraries can already be false together.
 I and O – impossible to be both false otherwise no

truth is had.
 Among the 4 propositions, one at least, must be

true.
 Thus, sub-contraries cannot be both false

together.
 LAW OF SUB-CONTRARIETY
 However, sub-contraries can be true together
(but not necessarily).
 If the extremes or the contraries are both

false at the same time, then it would mean

that the all and none cannot apply.
 If all and none are both false, it may be

because some – are (I), and or

some – are not (O).
 LAW OF SUB-CONTRARIETY
1. If I is false, then O is true.
If O is false, then I is true.

2. If I is true, then O is doubtful

(may be true, may be false).
If O is true, then I is doubtful
(may be true, may be false)
Sub Contrary Law
F T

T ?
 Equivalent Proposition
 In the immediate equivalent inference, also
known as eduction, he 2 propositions speak
of the same truth, and either one is directly
inferred/indirect from the other
 2 kinds of eduction
 Formal Eduction
◦ Based on it’s validity on the quality of the
propositions and the quantity of terms

 Material Eduction
◦ Based it’s validity on the meanings of terms or the
special character of their matter or thought content
 FORMAL EDUCTION
 Is the formulation of a new proposition by
either interchanging the subject and the
predicate terms of an original proposition
and/or by the use or removal of negative.
 4 KINDS OF EDUCTION
1. CONVERSION
2. OBVERSION
3. CONTRAPOSITION
4. INVERSION
 CONVERSION
 Is the formulation of a new proposition by
interchanging the subject and the predicate
of an original proposition but leaving its
quality unchanged.
 RULES IN SIMPLE
CONVERSION
E–E;I–I
sample: (E) All rabbits are not birds.
Su Pu
(convertend – original proposition)
1. Interchange the S and P birds rabbits
2. Retain the quality birds are not rabbits.
3. Maintain the quantity
All birds are not rabbits.
Su Pu
(converse – new proposition)
 RULES IN SIMPLE
CONVERSION
E–E;I–I
sample: (I)Some students are lazy
Sp Pp
(convertend – original proposition)

1. Interchange the S and P lazy students

2. Retain the quality lazy are students.
3. Maintain the quantity
Some lazy persons are students.
Sp Pp
(converse – new proposition)
 Note
 A and O propositions
 Cannot be converted by simple conversion

because of the quantity of the predicate term

is not equal/the same
RULES IN PARTIAL CONVERSION
A–I;E–O
sample: (A) All men are living creatures
Su Pp
(convertend)

1. Interchange the S and P living creatures men.

2. Retain the quality living creatures are men.
3. Reduce the quantity Some living creatures are men.
Sp Pp
(converse)
RULES IN PARTIAL CONVERSION
A–I;E–O
sample: (E) No human being is a monkey.
Su Pu
(convertend)

1. Interchange the S and P monkey human being

2. Retain the quality NO monkey is a human being
3. Reduce the quantity Some monkey is not a human being.
Sp Pu (converse)
 Note
 Partial conversion is applicable only for A and
E propositions (Universal)
 Cannot deduct to a (Particular) quantity
 OBVERSION
 Is the formulation of a new proposition by
retaining the subject and quantity of an
original proposition, changing its quality and
using as predicate the contradictory of the
original predicate

 Eduction by the use of removal of negative (S)

 RULES IN OBVERSION
A – E; E – A; I –O; O – I
sample: (A) All dolphins are mammals.
(obvertend –original proposition)

1. retain the S dolphins

2. maintain the quantity All dolphins
3. Change the quality (+/-)All dolphins are not
4. Put the predicate in itsAll dolphins are not non-mammals.
contradictory (obverse – new proposition)
 CONTRAPOSITION
 Is the formulation of a new proposition whose
subject is the contradictory of the original
predicate.
 Is a combination of obversion and

conversion.
 The original proposition is called

contraponend, while the newly formed

proposition is called contraposit or
contrapositive.
 RULES IN PARTIAL/SIMPLE
CONTRAPOSITION
A – E; E – I; O-I

How to get?
1. obvert. (rules in obversion will be applied)
2. then, simple/partial convert the obverse. (applicable rules in
conversion will employed).

How to check?
3. the S is the contradictory of the original P
4. the quality is changed.
5. the P is the original S
 Sample
 A–E
◦ Obvert
◦ Simple Conversion

A= Slander is an evil act (contraponend)

Su Pp
Obvert Slander is not non-evil act
Convert (Simple)
E= No non-evil act is a slander (contraposit)
Su Pu
 Sample
 E–I
◦ Obvert
◦ Partial Conversion

E= No hero is a coward (contraponend)

Su Pu
Obvert All hero is a non-coward
Convert (Partial)
I= Some non-coward person is a hero (contraposit)
Sp Pp
 Samples
 O–I
◦ Obvert
◦ Simple Conversion

O= Several forests are not protected (contraponend)

Sp Pu
Obvert Several forests are non-protected
Convert (Simple)
I= Several non-protected places are forests
(contraposit)
Sp Pp
 Note
 I propositions do not have contraposit
 The obversion of I propositions are O

propositions
 After the obversion, the next step in

conversion but O proposition cannot be

converted
 Therefore I propositions cannot be subjected

to contraposition
 RULES IN COMPLETE
CONTRAPOSITION
A – A; E – O; O–O

How to get?
1. obvert.

2. then, simple convert the obverse.

3. then, obvert the converse of the obverse.

How to check?
4. the S is the contradictory of the original P
5. the quality is not changed
6. the P is the contradictory of the original S
 Sample
 A–A
◦ Obvert
◦ Simple Conversion
◦ Obvert

A= All cyclones are natural phenomena's (contraponend)

Su Pp
Obvert All cyclones are not non-natural phenomena’s
Convert (Simple) All non-natural phenomena’s are not cyclones
Obvert
A= All non-natural are non-phenomena’s (contraposit)
Su Pp
 Sample
 E–O
◦ Obvert
◦ Partial Conversion
◦ Obvert

E= All parishioners are not boastful.(contraponend)

Su Pu
Obvert All parishioners are non-boastful
Convert (Partial) Some non-boastful are parishioners
Obvert
O= Some non-boastful persons are not
non-parishioners (contraposit)
Sp Pu
 Sample
 O–O
◦ Obvert
◦ Simple Conversion
◦ Obvert

O= Some endangered species are not protected

(contraponend)

Sp Pu
Obvert Some endangered species are non-protected
Convert (Simple) Some non-protected are endangered species
Obvert
O= Some non-protected animals are not non-species (contraposit)
Sp Pu
 INVERSION
 Is the formulation of a new proposition whose
subject is the contradictory of the original
subject.
 The original proposition is called inverted

while the newly formed proposition is called

inverse.
 Only A and E propositions have the inverses.
RULES IN PARTIAL INVERSION
A – O; E – I

1. reduce the quantity

2. quality is changed
3. S is contradictory of the original S
4. P is retained.
 Sample
 A=O
A= All terrorists are criminals (invertend)
Su Pp
Convert (partial) Some criminals are terrorists
Obvert Some criminals are not non-terrorists
Convert (simple)
O= Some non-terrorists are not criminals
(Inverse) Sp Pu
 Samples

 E=I
E= No reckless man is prudent. (invertend)
Convert (partial) Some prudent are reckless man
Obvert Some prudent are not non-reckless man
Convert (simple)
I= Some non-reckless man are prudent person
(Inverse) Sp Pp
RULES IN COMPLETE INVERSION
A – I; E – O

1. reduce the quantity

2. quality is retained
3. S is contradictory of the original S
4. P is contradictory of the original P
 Samples
A=I
A= All martyrs are saints (invertend)
Su Pp
Convert (simple) All saints are martyrs
Obvert All saints are not non-martyrs
Convert (partial) Some non-martyrs are not saints
Obvert
I = Some non-martyrs are non-saints
(Inverse) Sp Pp
 Sample
E=O
E= No X is Y (invertend)
Su Pu
Convert (simple) No Y is X
Obvert All Y is non-X
Convert (partial) Some non-X are Y
Obvert
O = Some non-X are not non-Y (Inverse)
Sp Pu
 Formal ST, PT Subject Predicate Quality Quantity
Eduction Placemen term (ST) term (PT)
t
Simple Interchanged Retained Retained Retained Retained
Conversion
E-E
I-I
Partial Interchanged Retained Retained Retained Changed
Conversion Reduced
A-I
E-O
Obversion Retained Retained Contradictory Changed Retained
A-E of the
E-A original PT
I-O
O-I
 Formal ST, PT Subject Predicate Quality Quantity
Eduction Placemen term (ST) term (PT)
t
Partial Interchanged Contradictory Original Changed A and O
Contraposition
of the ST Retained
original PT E
Changed
Reduced
Complete Interchanged Contradictory Contradictory Retained A and O
Contraposition
of the of the Retained
original PT original PT
Partial Retained Contradictory Retained Changed Change
Inversion of the Reduced
A-O original PT
E-I
Complete Retained Contradictory Contradictory Retained Change
Material Eduction
 Eduction by added
determinant
 This type of material eduction is arrived at by
formulating a new proposition in which some
modifier is added to both the subject and the
predicate terms of the original proposition
thereby limiting their extension
 The added modifier has exactly the same

meaning in relation to both propositional

 Sample
 Voters are 18 years old persons
 Therefore, principled voters are principled 18

years old (valid)

 Principled has exactly the same meaning

when used as added modifier to both voters
and 18 years old persons
Eduction by complex conception
 It obtained by formulating a new proposition
whose subject-term is a term modified by the
subject term of the original proposition and
whose predicate-term of the original proposition
 While in eduction by added a determinant a new
term modifies the original subject and predicate
terms, in eduction by complex, conception a
new term is modified by the subject and
predicate terms
 Negative propositions cannot be reformulated by
way of eduction by complex conception
 Sample
 If mother are loving are loving persons
 The hearts of the mothers are the hearts of

loving persons
 And the caring of mothers is the caring of

loving persons
Eduction by omitted determinant
 This type of material eduction is attained by
formulating a new proposition in which a
modifier of the original predicate-term is
omitted
 In effecting this care should be taken so as

not to change the meaning of what is left of

the original predicate-term
 Negative propositions cannot be reformulated

by means of eduction by omitted determinant

 Sample
 This is genuine gold
 Therefore, it is gold
 Eduction by converse
relation
 This type of material eduction is obtained by
formulating a new proposition in which a
relationship is the very opposite of the one
stated in the original proposition
 Sample
 Venna is the dauther of Erlina
 Therefore, Erlina is the mother of Venna
FINAL TERM
 REASON ING
THE THIRD ACT OF THE MIND
 THE SIMPLE
CATEGORICAL
SYLLOGISM
 Gottfried Leibniz
German Mathematician and Philosopher
I consider the
invention of the
form of syllogisms
one of the most
important, made by
the human mind.
 Review on the definition of the
third act of the mind
 REASONING - The act wherein the mind,
from truths already known, proceeds to the
knowledge of another truth.

 MENTAL PRODUCT: ARGUMENT – the mental

contention on the truth or falsity affirmed or
denied.

 EXTERNAL SIGN: SYLLOGISM – the inferential

presentation of an argument.
 NATURE OF REASONING
 Among the physical beings , man alone has the
ability to reason by virtue of being rational.
 To reason is the supreme operation of man.
 This power to reason is subject to progressive
phases from infancy to adulthood.
 Man has to undergo the proper stages of
thinking by using first his common sense until
he develop it to correct thinking by using the
scientific logic to form a persuasively valid
argumentation.
 NATURE OF REASONING
 In reasoning, the mind reaches its perfection.
 First, it connects the idea to create knowledge

in a form of judgment to express truth or

falsity of something.
 The fullness of knowledge is not contained in

judgment, hence the mind has to go further

to reach it.
 This advance in knowledge is accomplished in

the mind in the third act of the mind.

 TYPES OF REASONING
 DEDUCTION
is the type of reasoning wherein the mind
proceeds from more universal or general
truth to a less universal truth or particular
truth.

Sample:
All material beings are corruptible.
But all dogs are material beings.
Therefore , all dogs are corruptible.
 TYPES OF REASONING
 INDUCTION
is the type of reasoning wherein the mind
proceeds from sufficiently enumerated individual
instances to a universal or general truth.

Sample:
This mother (Maricris) is a female human beings;
Claire who is a mother is a fem human being;
Karen who is a mother, is a female human being;
This one (Mary), this (Stella), and this (Portia);
Therefore, all mothers are female human beings.
 MEDIATE INFERENCE
 It derives the conclusion (consequent) from two
propositions (antecedent).
 The inference is called mediate because of the

following reasons;
1. It connects or separates the conclusion’s
subject and predicate through the mediation of
the middle term in the categorical syllogism.
2. The major premise is the cause of the
conclusion through the mediation of the minor
premise in the hypothetical syllogism.
Sample of Hypothetical Syllogism
If HE IS HIRED, he is a Sebastinian.
Antecedent
But HE IS HIRED.
Therefore, he is a Sebastinian
Consequent
Sample of Categorical Syllogism
Every DOG is an animal Major Premise
But every poodle is a DOG. Minor Premise
Therefore, every poodle is an animal Conclusion
 Review of the Inference
 Is any process by which our mind proceeds
from one or more propositions (from one or
more statements, in which anything
whatsoever is affirmed or denied) to another
proposition, so related to original
propositions, that if they are true, it must be
also true.
 A (old proposition) - B (new proposition)
 2 PARTS OF INFERENCE OR
SYLLOGISM
 ANTECEDENT – is that from which something
is inferred (secondary/indirect).
 CONSEQUENT – is that which is inferred from

the antecedent.
 MEDIATE INFERENCE
 Sample:

Every HUMAN BEING is a thinking being.

Antecedent
But every Sebastinian is a HUMAN BEING.
Therefore, every Sebastinian is a thinking being
Consequent
 IMMEDIATE INFERENCE
Sample

Every HUMAN BEING is not non-thinking being

Antecedent
Therefore, every HUMAN BEING is a thinking being
Consequent
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEDIATE
AND IMMEDIATE INFERENCE
 Mediate Inference is a discussion falling
under the third act of the mind.

 Immediate Inference is a topic is still under

the second act of the mind
 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEDIATE
AND IMMEDIATE INFERENCE
MEDIATE INFERENCE IMMEDIATE INFERENCE

a. Derives the conclusion from a. Derives the conclusion from

two propositions one proposition.

b. Has a medium or mediation b. Has no medium or mediation

(through the use of middle
term in Categorical Syllogism;
and use of minor premise in
the hypothetical Syllogism)

c. Results to a new proposition c. Results to a new proposition

d. Results to a new truth d. Does not result to a new

proposition
 SYLLOGISM
 Is a mediate inference wherein the conclusion
(third proposition) is derived from the
premises (two propositions) that contain a
medium.
 The conclusion is so related to the premises

that if they (premises) are true, the former is

also true.
 Conclusion-indicators
 Therefore - for these reasons
 Hence - it follows that

 Thus - we may infer

 So - I conclude that

 Accordingly - which shows that

 In consequence - which means that

 Consequently- which entails that

 Proves that - which implies that

 As a result - which allows us to infer that

 For this reason - which points to the conclusion that

 2 KINDS OF SYLLOGISM
1. Categorical Syllogism
2. Hypothetical Syllogism
Definition of Categorical Syllogism
 Is a deductive argument which has a set of
three categorical propositions that are so
related to make the conclusion’s subject and
predicate connected or separated through the
mediation of the middle term.
Sample of Categorical Syllogism
Every DOG is an animal Major Premise
But every poodle is a DOG. Minor Premise
Therefore, every poodle is an animal Conclusion

 We can observe that “poodle” and “animal” are

connected through the mediation of the term “dog”.
 The same example illustrates the standard from
meaning:
 (a) It contains three categorical propositions
 (b) The major premise is first asserted, followed by
the minor premise and, lastly, by the conclusion.
 Basic Structure of a Syllogism
first element - TERM
 MAJOR TERM
must occur in the conclusion as the predicate
and in one of the premise, generally in the
first proposition.

Let us use T to label the major term or

rectangle to display it more
graphically.
 Basic Structure of a
Syllogism
 MINOR TERM
must occur in the conclusion as the subject
and in one of the premises, generally in the
second proposition

Let us use t to label the minor term, or ellipse

to display it more graphically.

 Basic Structure of a
Syllogism
 MIDDLE TERM
occurs in both premise but not in the conclusion.

Let us use M to label the middle term or M-

shape box to display it more
graphically.

It is the medium that connects the minor and

major term in an affirmative syllogism and
separates those terms in negative syllogism.
Second element - PROPOSITION
 MAJOR PREMISE – is the proposition
containing the major term, generally, the first
premise. It has greater extension than the
other proposition of the syllogism.
 MINOR PREMISE – is the proposition

containing the minor premise, generally the

second premise.
 CONCLUSION – is the proposition containing

both the major and the minor terms.

 Third element -
CONSEQUENCE
 This formal element is the form of syllogism
wherein there is mutual dependence of the
proposition on each other.

 The conclusion is dependent on premises.

 This expressed externally by the words but

and therefore.
 Sample
SUBJECT COPULA PREDICATE

Every margay is a cat. T a M

But some animals are cats. t i M
Therefore, some animals aremargays t i T

MargayT Major Term

Cat M Middle Term
Animal t Minor Term

OTHER SYMBOLS:
u Universal
p Particular
+ Affirmative
- Negative
 Sample 2
Arranging the statement into a logical form
 Some Filipinos are not overseas workers because
some dollar earners are Filipinos and all overseas
workers are dollar earner.

Major Premise: All overseas worker are dollar earner

Minor premise: Some dollar earners are Filipinos.
Conclusion: Therefore, some Filipinos are not overseas
workers.

Major term: Overseas workers

Minor term: Filipinos
Middle term: Dollar earners
 RULES OF
CATEGORICAL
SYLLOGISM
Chapter VIII
 THE RULES OF THE TERMS
Their Number and Arrangement
RULE 1
There must be three (3) and only three (3)
terms
 THE MAJOR TERM
 THE MINOR TERM
 MIDDLE TERM

Every margay is a cat. T a M

But some animals are cats. t i M
Therefore, some animals are margays t i T
 THE RULES OF THE TERMS
Their Number and Arrangement
RULE 2
Each term must occur in two propositions.
The major term must occur in the conclusion,
as predicate, and in one of the premises,
which is therefore called the major premise.
The minor term must occur in the conclusion,
as subject, and in the other premise, which is
therefore called the minor premise.
The middle term must occur in both premises
but not in the conclusion.
 Sample in rule 2

All politicians are sociable people.

All councilors are politicians.
Therefore, all councilors are sociable people.
 THE RULES OF THE TERMS
The Quantity or Extension of the Terms
RULE 3
The major and minor terms may not be
universal (or distributed) in the conclusion
unless they are universal (or distributed) in
the premises.

Mu e Tu
tp i Mp
tp o Tu
 THE RULES OF THE TERMS
The Quantity or Extension of the Terms
RULE 4
The middle term must be universal, or
distributed, at least once.

Some animals are pigs.

but all cats are animals.
therefore, some cats are pigs
 THE RULES OF THE
PROPOSITIONS
The
RULE 5
Quality of the Proposition
If both premise are affirmative, the conclusion
must be affirmative.

All risk-takers are gamblers.

but some Filipinos are gamblers.
therefore some Filipino are risk-takers.
 THE RULES OF THE
PROPOSITIONS
The
RULE 6
Quality of the Proposition
If one premise is affirmative and the other
negative, the conclusion must be negative.

No computer is useless.
but all ATM are computers.
therefore no ATM is useless.
THE RULES OF THE PROPOSITIONS
The Quality of the Proposition
RULE 7
If both premises are negative-and not
equivalently affirmative –there is no
conclusion at all.

No country is leaderless.
but, no ocean is a country.
therefore no ocean is leaderless. NO CONCLUSION
 THE RULES OF THE
PROPOSITIONS
The Quantity of the
RULE 8 Proposition
At least one premise must be universal.

* U+U=U
* U+P= P

All cats are domestic animals.

but no unicorns are domestic animals
therefore, some unicorns are not cats.
 THE RULES OF THE
PROPOSITIONS
The Quantity of the
RULE 9 Proposition
If a premise is particular, the conclusion must
be particular.

• P+P=No Conclusion

No dogs are cats.

but some poodle are dogs.
therefore some poodle are not cats.
 THE RULES OF THE
PROPOSITIONS
The Quantity of the
RULE 10 Proposition
The actual real existence of a subject may not
be asserted in the conclusion unless it has
been asserted in the premises.

This wood floats

but that wood floats.
therefore, all wood floats.
 Logical Forms of the
Categorical Syllogism
 The basic structure is also known as the
logical form, which includes;
◦ The arrangement of the terms
◦ The arrangement of the propositions based on the
quality and quantity.
 General Nature
of the Figures and Moods
 FIGURE OF A CATERORICAL SYLLOGISM
The figure is defined by the arrangement of the
terms in the premises.
In the categorical syllogism, there are four
figures based on the location of the middle
term that is found only in both premises but
not in the conclusion.
 4 FIGURES
OF THE CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
Figure 1 Figure Figure 3 Figure 4
(sub-pre) 2 (sub-sub) (pre-sub)
(pre-pre)

M T T M M T T M
t M t M M t M t
t T t T t T t T
 General Nature
of the Figures and Moods
 MOOD OF A CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
The mood is defined by the arrangement of the
kinds of propositions (according to the
quantity and quality combined)in the
categorical syllogism.
It is based of propositions according to the
quantity and quality (A, E, I and O)
 MOOD OF CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM
16 FAIRS
Pair
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
#

Major
A A A A E E E E I I I I O O O O

Minor
A E I O A E I O A E I O A E I O

Conclusio
n A E I O E/ E O O I O I O O O O O
/ O
I
 Invalid fairs
Violates rule # 7

6 8 14 16

E E O O

E O E O
 Invalid fairs
Violates rule # 3

10
I
E
O
 Invalid fairs
Violates rule # 8

11 12 15 16
I I O O
I O I O
 The remaining valid combinations
but still violates the general rules

Pair
TH
Numbe
1 2 3 4 5 7 9 13
r
Major
Premise
A A A A E E I O

A E I O A I A A
Minor
Premise
 THE SPECIAL RULES GOVERNING EACH
FIGURES
 1st figure (sub-pre)
 RULE 3 is violated by mood A-E and A-O
 RULE 4 also invalidates the moods I-A

and O-A
(for this reason we have only four (4) moods
remaining)
 4 MOODS remaining

A A E E
Major
Premise

A I A I
Minor
Premise

A I E O
Conclusion
 SUB-PRE
1. M a T 2. M a t
t a M t i M
t a T t i T

3. M e T 4. M e t
t a M t i M
t e T t o T
 Special rules of the first
figures
1. The major premise must be universal
(A or E)
2. The minor premise must be affirmative
(A or I)
 THE SPECIAL RULES GOVERNING
EACH FIGURES
 2nd figure (pre-pre)
 RULE 4 is violated by moods A-A, A-I and I-A
 RULE 3 also excludes the mood O-A

(for this reason, we have again the four

remaining moods)
 4 MOODS remaining

A A E E
Major
Premise

E O A I
Minor
Premise

E O E O
Conclusion
 PRE-PRE
1. T a M 2. T a M
t e M t o M
t e T t o T

3. T e M 4. T e M
t a M t i M
t e T t o T
Special rules of the second figures
1. The major premise must be universal
(A or E)
2 One premise must be negative (E or O)
 THE SPECIAL RULES GOVERNING
EACH FIGURES
3rd figure (sub-pre)
RULE 3 disqualifies the mood A-E and A-O
(for this reason, we have the six remaining
moods)
 6 MOODS remaining

A A E E I O
Major
Premise

A I A I A A
Minor
Premise

A I O O I O
Conclusio
n
 SUB-SUB
1. M a T 2. M a T 3. M e
T
M a t M i t M a t
t a T t i T t o T

4. M e T5. M i T 6. M o T
M i t M a t M a t
t o T t i T t o T
Special rules of the third figures
1. The minor premise must be affirmative
(A or I)
2. The conclusion must be particular (I or O)
 THE SPECIAL RULES GOVERNING
EACH FIGURES
4rt
figure (pre-sub)
RULE 4 discards the moods A-I and A-O
RULE 3 also excludes the mood O-A
(for this reason, we have now the five
remaining moods)
 5 MOODS remaining

A A E E I
Major
Premise

A E A I A
Minor
Premise

A E O O I
Conclusio
n
 PRE-SUB
1. T a M 2. T a M 3. T e M
M a t M e t Ma t
t a T t e T t o T

4. T e M 5. T i M
M i t M a t
t o T t i T
Special rules of the fourth figures
1. It he major premise is affirmative (A or I),
the minor premise must be universal (A or
E)
Note: that the I-E combination has been
proven to violate Rule 3 is invalid.
2. If the minor premise is affirmative (A or I),
the conclusion must be particular (I or O)
3. If a premise is negative (E) the major
premise must be universal (A).
 The Valid Moods of Each
Figure
 There are 19 valid moods;
 4 valid moods – 1st figure
 4 valid moods – 2nd figure
 6 valid moods – 3rd figure
 5 valid moods – 4rt figure
 The Valid Moods of Each
Figure
 MNEMONIC VERSES (Latin hexameters)

 Barbara, Celarent, Darii, Ferioque prioris;

 Cesare, Camestres, Festino, Baroco secundae;
 Tertia Darapti, Disamis, Datisi, Felapton, Bocardo, Feriso
habet.
 Quarta insuper addit, Bramantip, Camenes, Dimaris,
Fesapo, Fresison.

 The first vowel – major premise

 The second vowel – minor premise
 The third vowel - conclusion
 FIRST FIGURE (sub-pre)
Barbara Celarent Darii Ferio

M a T M e T M a T M e T
t a M t a M t i M t i M
t a T t e T t i T t o T
 SECOND FIGURE (pre-pre)
Cesare Camestres Festino Baroco

T e M T a M T e M T a M
t a M t e M t i M t oM
t e T t e T t o T t o T
 THIRD FIGURE (sub-sub)
Darapti Disamis Datisi
M a T M i T M a T
M a t M a t M i t
t i T t i T t i T

Felapton Bocardo Ferison

M e T M o T M e T
M a t M a t M i t
t o T t o T t o T
FOURTH FIGURE (pre-sub)
Bramantip Camenes Dimaris
T a M T a M T i M
M a t M e t M a t
t i T t e T t i T

Fesapo Fresison
T e M T e M
M a t M i t
t o T t o T
KNOWING THE TRUTH
 LEARNING COMPETENCIES
 THE NATURE OF TRUTH
◦ Explain the nature of truth in terms of
 A. being property of beliefs or statements
 B. the consideration that have given rise to different kinds of truth
 TRUTH AND KNOWLEDGE
◦ Distinguish between the different ways or methods for
knowing determining or establishing the truth of a statements
or beliefs
◦ Explain the conditions of knowledge and how disagreement s
about truth and knowledge can be resolve
 REASONING AND FALLACIES
◦ Distinguish the kinds of reasoning used to arrive at or justify
truth and identify some common errors in reasoning.
THE NATURE OF TRUTH
TOPICS TO BE COVERED
1. THE BEARERS OF TRUTH
2. KINDS OF TRUTH
 KEY CONCEPTS
 Beliefs and statements are the bearer of truths
 Empirical and rational truths
 Universal and relative truths
 Subjective and objective truths
 Private and public truths
 Necessary and contingent truths
 A priori and a posteriori truths
 Analytical and synthetic truths
 Certain and probable truths
 Religious, scientific, physical and psychological
truths
 EXPECTED LEARNING
COMPETENCIES
 Explain the nature of truth as a property of
beliefs and statements
 Identify the different ways of distinguishing

certain kinds of truth

 Explain the differences among certain kinds

of truths
 THE BEARER OF TRUTHS
 Traitsof a WISE PERSON
 Aware of his/her ignorance
 What is it that we know or do

not know?
◦TRUTH
 THE BEARER OF TRUTHS
 PHILOSOPHY

 Love of Wisdom
 Search for TRUTH
 WHAT IS TRUTH?
 How do we know it?
 When can we say that what we know is

the truth?
 What are the ways by which we can

know the truth?

 WHAT ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS

THAT WE CAN PROPERLY SAY TO BE

TRUE?
 TRUTH
 Understanding about truth;
◦ Kind of property whose opposite is falsity
◦ Something that is said to be true
 We express as THE TRUTH or A TRUTH
 To have the property of TRUTH or BEING TRUE
 Sample;
 THE TRUTH HURTS
 What is being declared is that things that are true
 The property of being true – hurt
 PROPERTY OF TRUTH
BEARER OF TRUTH
Which we can properly
attribute the property of
truth
Philosophers referred as the

BEARERS OF TRUTH
 3 CANDIDATES
FOR THE BEARERS OF TRUTH
BELIEFS
STATEMENTS
SENTENCE
 SENTENCE
◦ Not all sentences can be either true or false
◦ When we say that sentences can be true, what we
have in mind are the declarative sentence only.
◦ We do not say of a question, an exclamation or
essential that is either true or false.
◦ Declarative sentence
 to issue command
 Grammatical form of sentence – meaning is urgent
 Sample;
 Your mother tells you that the floor is dirty
 Most likely your mother wants you to clean the floor
 Not just to inform you that the floor is dirty
 STATEMENTS
not sentences are properly speaking the bearer of truth

 Philosophers called it PROPOSITION

 Refers to linguistic expression whose function
is to advance a claim about the world.
◦ Claims may be about the things or events in the
world about relations of ideas.
◦ Claims can be true or false – statements is either
true or false
 Express as declarative sentences
◦ To describe a things in the world
◦ Say to issue a command
◦ It express claim
 STATEMENTS
 Truth bearers – they make
claims
◦In terms of describing the
world
◦Asserting/declaring ideas
◦Linguistic expression of our
claims
 BELIEFS
 Mental expression of our claims – made in the
mind
 Statements are expression of beliefs – which

makes as more basic than statements

 Determine the truth of a statement without

associating it with belief.

◦ Sample;
 THE TABLE IS BROWN
 Observe whether the table the statement is referring to is
actually brown.
 Belief determine its truthfulness without associating its first
to the statement.
 BEARERS OF TRUTH
 Statement and beliefs are bearers
of truth.
 Sentences are bearers of truth

only when function as statements

and statements and beliefs can be
treated independently when
determining their truth.
 CONFUSION BETWEEN
TRUTH AND A FACT
 FACT

◦ something that occurs in the

world
◦ makes certain statement true
 Sample
◦ There is a table at back
 It is true that there is a table at the back (existence)
 There is a table at the back but in reality there’s not -
falsity
 KINDS OF TRUTH
 Statements and beliefs are either TRUE or
FALSE
 Certain questions or considerations about

certain aspects of the truth or falsity of

statements and beliefs, which have given rise
to different kinds of truth.
 KINDS OF TRUTH
 1. Truth of a belief or statement is
established or arrived at by means of;
◦ SENSE EXPERIENCE
 Experience through the use of five
sense organs
◦ REASON
 Through inference or analysis of
concept
 KINDS OF TRUTH
EMPIRICAL TRUTH
◦ Established by means of sense
experience
◦ Technically describe as A POSTERIORI
 It can only be known after some
relevant experience
 Sample
 It’s raining – use of sense of
sight
 KINDS OF TRUTH
RATIONAL TRUTH
◦ Established by means of reason
◦ Technically describe as A PRIORI
 It can be known before some
relevant experience
 Sample
 Triangle has tree sides
(mathematical truth)
 Five and five are ten
 KINDS OF TRUTH
 2.Truth of a statement or belief
extends our KNOWLEDGE OR ADDS TO
WE ALREADY KNOW
◦ Question is technically express by
some philosophers in terms of
whether the predicate of a true
belief or statement is already
contained in the information
provided by its subject.
 KIND OF TRUTH
SYNTHETIC (FAKE) TRUTH
 The information provided by the predicate is
not contained in the information provided by
the subject
◦ All empirical truth are synthetic truths
 Sample
 THE TABLE IS BROWN
 Subject
 Predicate
 Are all table is brown?
 KINDS OF TRUTH
ANALYTIC TRUTH
 The information provided by the predicate is
contained in the information provided by the
subject.
◦ Definitions and identity statements are good examples
of analytic truths
 Sample
 THE TRIANGE HAS THREE SIDES
 Information about having three sides is contained in the
information of being a triangle
 MAN IS A RATIONAL BEING
 Subject
 Predicate
 Conformity to the essence of man
 THERE IS NO EXTENSION OF KNOWLEDGE THAT HAPPENS
 KINDS OF TRUTH
 3.The question of whether or
not the statement or belief is
true in all possible situations
 KINDS OF TRUTH
CONTINGENT/CONDITIONAL TRUTH
 Is not true in all possible situations
 Empirical truth are contingent truth

◦ Sample
 THE TABLE IS BROWN
 Only true in a situation where there is a table that happens
to be brown in color - TRUE
 Another situation where there is table that is black in color
- FALSE
 KINDS OF TRUTH
NECESSARY TRUTH
 Rational truths are necessary truths
 Always true

◦ Sample
 A TRAINGLE HAS TREE SIDES
 True in all possible situations in which it is said or
expressed
 KINDS OF TRUTH
4.Truth of a belief or
statement can only be
known by the person who
has belief or makes the
statement.
 KINDS OF TRUTH
PRIVATE TRUTH
 Can only be known by the person who has the
belief or makes the statement considered to be
true.
 The truth of psychological statements or
statements about one’s own mental states.
 Empirical and rational truths are both private
truths
◦ Sample
 MY SKIN IS CUT AND BLEEDING – public truth
 I feel great pain , I can directly know that I am in great pain -
result of private truth
 Everyone in principle that my skin is cut and bleeding
 KINDS OF TRUTH
PUBLIC TRUTH
 The principle be known by everyone (by in
principle we mean that occurrence or
presence of the necessary conditions like the
knowing person is a normal adult)
 KIND OF TRUTH
 5.The truth of a belief or
statement is dependent on;
◦Attitudes
◦Preference
◦Interest of a person or a
group of person.
 KIND OF TRUTH
SUBJECTIVE TRUTH
 Dependent on the attitudes, preferences or
interests of a person or a group of persons
 Value judgment – aesthetic judgment

◦ Sample
 THE ROCK MUSIC IS THE BEST KIND OF MUSIC
 Subjective –depend on one’s musical preferences
 There are others;
 Pop
 Rap
 KINDS OF TRUTH
OBJECTIVE TRUTH
 Based on value judgment – factual/accurate
judgment
◦ Sample;
 ROCK MUSIC IS ONE OF THE MAJOR KINDS OF MUSIC
 Objective for whether one likes rock music or not the
statement.
 Rock music is one of the major kinds of music remains to
be true.
 Day 7
KIND OF TRUTH
6.Question of whether a
belief or statement is
acknowledged to be
true by everyone or
only by some people.
 KINDS OF TRUTH
UNIVERSAL TRUTH
Universally true if its true is
acknowledge by everyone.
Objective truths are

universal truth
 KINDS OF TRUTH
RELATIVE TRUTH
Relatively true if its truth
acknowledge only be
some people.
Subjective truth are

relative truth
 KINDS OF TRUTH

The truth of a belief is
7.

arrived at through the

process of deductive
reasoning or inductive
reasoning
 KINDS OF TRUTH
CERTAIN TRUTH
 The truth of statement arrived at through the
process of deductive reasoning is certain.
◦ Sample
 ALL HUMANS ARE MORTAL
PEDRO IS MORTAL

 PEDRO IS MORTAL
 Inferred from the truth of statement that
ALL HUMANS ARE MORTAL
 KINDS OF TRUTH
PROBABLE TRUTH
 The truth arrived at through the process of
inductive reasoning is merely probable.
◦ Sample
 MOST FILIPINOS ARE HOSPITABLE
JUAN IS HOSPITABLE

 JUAN IS A FILIPINO? is a probable truth

 KINDS OF TRUTH
 8.The question of under what
area of study does the topic
or content of a belief or
statement that is held to be
true falls.
◦This gives us the rise number
of truth, as many as there are
different areas of study.
 KINDS OF TRUTH
DISCIPLINAL KINDS OF TRUTH
 Religious truth
◦ Concerns the truth of religious statements or
beliefs
 Scientific truth
◦ The truth of scientific statements or beliefs
 Psychological truths
◦ The truths of psychological statements
 Biological truths
 Economic truths
 KINDS OF TRUTH
 Some of these kinds of truth interact with or
closely related to one another
◦ EMPIRICAL TRUTH
 Synthetic and contingent truth
◦ RATIONAL TRUTH
 Analytic and necessary truth
 Deductive or certain truths are necessary truth
◦ OBJECTIVE TRUTH
 Universal and subjective truth
THE TRUTH AND
KNOWLEDGE
TOPICS TO BE COVERED
1.WAYS OF KNOWLEDGE
2. CONDITIONS OF KNOWLEDGE
 KEY CONCEPTS
 Theories of truth  Mystical experience
 Methods of truth  Opinion

 Correspondence of  Knowledge of

truth acquaintance
 Practical knowledge
 Coherence of truth
 Propositional knowledge
 Pragmatic of truth
 Justified true belief
 Internal observation
 Disagreement
 External observation
 Disagreement in belief
 Reasoning
 Disagreement in attitude
 Intuition
 Merely verbal
 Authority disagreement
EXPECTED LEARNING OUTCOMES
 Explain the differences among the correspondence, coherence
and pragmatic theories or methods of truth
 Distinguish and explain the particular methods of observation,
reasoning, intuitions, mystical experience and the appeal to
authority
 Distinguish between knowledge by acquaintance, practical
knowledge and propositional knowledge
 Explain the nature of knowledge as justified true belief
 Explain the conditions of beliefs, truth and justification of
knowledge
 Distinguish between knowledge and forms of non knowledge
(opinion and guess)
 Distinguish between disagreements in belief, attitude and
merely verbal .
 CULTIVATING
KNOWLEDGE AND
SKILLS
 WAYS OF KNOWING
 Determining the truths of a
given statement or belief
 METHODS OF TRUTH

◦Distinguish into general and

particular kinds
 GENERAL METHODS OF
TRUTH
 Methods of truth described in what
philosophers usually call theories of truth
 Consisting of the

◦ . Correspondence
◦ Coherence
◦ Pragmatic theories
 Theories of truth are actually ways of
explaining the truth or what makes the
statement or belief true
PARTICULAR METHODS OF TRUTH
 Refers to a specific ways of applying of the
general methods of truth
 These are the

◦ Observation
◦ Reasoning
◦ Intuition
◦ Mystical experience
◦ The appeal to authority
 GENERAL METHOD OF
CORRESPONDENCE
 To know the truthfulness of a statement/belief
◦ Examines whether the statement/belief
 Corresponds to
 Represent a fact in the world
 If the statement/belief does correspond to a fact then the
statement is true
 If the statement/beliefs does not correspond to the
statement, then it is false
 Sample;
 THE SKY IS BLUE – TRUE represents or correspond to the
fact that the sky is blue
 WATER IS NOT WET – FALSE it does not correspond to a
fact that there is no form of water that it is not wet.
GENERAL METHOD OF COHERENCE
 To know the truthfulness of the
statement/belief
◦ Examining whether the statement/beliefs
 coheres with the rules of the relevant system.
 If the statement/belief coheres with these rules – TRUE
 If does not - FALSE
 Sample
 THREE AND THREE ARE SIX – TRUE it coheres with the
rules of the mathematical system
 BACHELORS ARE MARRIED MALES – FALSE it violates the
rules of language
 GENERAL METHOD OF
PRAGMATISM
 The truthfulness of a statement/belief
◦ Examining the consequences of holding or
accepting the statement/belief to be true
 Holding of the statement/belief to be true result of
beneficial consequences – TRUE
 If does not – FALSE
 The statement/belief which we hold to be true though
there are no objective (universal) means to verify their
truth.
 Sample
 Some people think that there are ghost or vampires base their
belief in the fact that they find it useful to hold such a belief –
like explaining unusual phenomena and dealing with fears
 TRUTHFULNESS OF
STATEMENT/BELIEF
 Generally examine whether or
not;
◦ They correspond to fact
◦ Coherence with the rules of a
system
◦ Result of beneficial
consequence
 THE TRUTH AMONG THE
3 GENERAL METHODS
 Depending on which is appropriate given the
kind of statement/belief that we are
considering.

◦ Sample
 Believe in VAMPIRES
 They believe because they think that there are vampires in the
world
 These people, what makes their belief about vampires is true
that correspond to or represents actual creatures in the world
 They justify by some kind of experience that they had or
accounts by some people.
 QUESTION ABOUT THE GENERAL
METHOD OF TRUTH
 How does one know whether a
statement/belief does;
◦ Correspond to the fact
◦ Coherence with the rules of a system
◦ Result in beneficial consequence
 We shall briefly examine the particular methods of
 Observation
 Reasoning
 Intuition
 Mystical experience
 Appeal to authority
 OBSERVATION
The method used if an
empirical statement
A statement an observable

fact in the world

Correctly represents a fact
 INTERNAL OBSERVATION
INTROSPECTION
 Observation of our own
thoughts and feelings
 To determine the truth by

psychological statements
 Statements about the mental

or conscious states
 OBSERVATION – EXTERNAL
 Observation of things outside our mind or
consciousness
 The physical objects using the five organs of

sense
 Done with or without the aid of sensory

extending devices such as telescope and

microscope
 To verify the truth of physical statements

 Statements about physical or material

objects
 REASONING
 The process of knowing or establishing truth
by means of our reason.
 Varity of ways;

◦ Testing for coherence

 Use of 2 statements are contradictory or cannot be
held to be true at the same time
◦ Using of inference (depending on whether the truth
being proven is regardless to be certain or merely
probable).
 Inductively
 Deductively
 INTUITION
DIRECT GRASPING OF TRUTH
 The way by which we directly grasp the truth of
something
 Immediately know that something is true
without going through the process of
observation and reasoning
 Direct access to the truth that bypasses the
processes of observation and reasoning
 Intuition in the areas of ethics, arguing
◦ Sample
 Immediately know what our moral duties are in a given
situation
 MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE
 Provides the person having the experience of
knowing something which cannot be known
using the usual methods of observation by
our sense organs and reasoning.
 The assumption is that there are some

aspects of reality
 Forms of truth that cannot be accessed or

known using our normal ways of knowing

MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE ARE;
◦ Spiritual – dealing with non physical
aspect of life
◦ Religious – dealing with divine or
sacred
 Experience of our union with God
 Receiving messages and instruction
from God
 Interrelatedness of things
 Religious truth are known
 APPEAL TO AUTHORITY
 Form of testimony of a reliable eyewitness
 Information provided by an appropriate
expert truth
 Reliable documents
 Required observation of reasoning to know a
truth may have already been done and
documented by someone else
 Knowing this person’s testimony, the
information that they provides as well as a
documents is also a way of knowing the truth.
 APPEAL TO AUTHORITY
SAMPLE
 Wants to know whether a particular movie is
already being shown in SM Cinema
◦ We can rely a testimony of someone who has
already seen the movie at SM Cinema
◦ Check in the newspapers or internet
◦ Call the authority in the management in SM Cinema
 FALLACY IN APPEAL TO
AUTHORITY
 When we appeal to a wrong authority
◦ Sample ;
 TV Ads
 Basketball player endorsing some product which is not
connected in the game of basketball.
 Toothpaste – dental product
CONDITION OF KNOWLEDGE
 Referring to the thing that should occur so
that we can rightly say that we know
something.
 Distinguish the kind of knowledge that deals

with truth from other kinds

 Specify the condition of knowledge
 Distinguish between

◦ knowledge and certain dorms of non-knowledge

(opinion or guess)
◦ Kinds of disagreement
 KNOWLEDGE
 How we use the word KNOW in different
situations
 KNOW

◦ KNOWLEDGE OF ACQUINTANCE
 To mean acquaintance or familiarity with a place or
person
 Expressing familiarity with the person or things
◦ PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE
 Asserting their knowledge of skills
 SAMPLE OF
KNOWLEDGE OF ACQUAINTANCE
 I know this place, this is the National
Museum.
 I know this person, he is Ms. Tina our

principal in St. Columban Montessori School

in San Felipe Zambales.
 SAMPLE OF
PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE
 I know how to cook Chicken Adobo
 I know how to operate the washing machine
 I know how to use the computer
 I know how to play Piko
KNOW – KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACT
PROPOSITIONAL KNOWLEDGE
 A situation or anything that can either be true
or false
 What I claim to know are things that can

either true or false

 Truthfulness and falsity started in the form of

a proposition of statement
◦ Sample
 I know that the clinic closes at 5:00 in the afternoon
 I know that you like to eat spicy food
PROPOSITIONAL KNOWLEDGE
 To determine whether indeed KNOWLEDGE
and not AN OPINION OR A GUESS
 Specify the conditions for knowledge
 PROPOSITIONAL KNOWLEDGE
JUSTIFIED TRUE BELIEF
◦ We can only correctly say that X, if only if
 1. we believe that X to be true
 2. X is indeed true
 3. we are justified in believing X to be true
 Problem;
 Supposed Jose claims that he knows that Manila is the
capital city of the Philippines.
 For Jose to really know that Manila is the Capital City of
the Philippines
 The following conditions should occur:
 PROPOSITIONAL KNOWLEDGE
JUSTIFIED TRUE BELIEF
 1. Jose believes that Manila is the capital of
the Philippines
 2. It is true That Manila is the Capital of the

Philippines
 3. Jose is justified in believing that Manila is

the capital of the Philippines

3 CONDITIONS FOR KNOWLEDGE

BELIEF
TRUTH
JUSTIFICATION
ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSITIONS
 1ST If Jose does not believe that Manila is the
capital of the Philippines
 Either Jose doubts it or he has other reasons
for saying that he knows it
 If Jose doubts that Manila is the capital of the
Philippines then he does not really know
whether Manila is the capital of the Philippines
 If he has other reasons for saying that he
knows it, like to express a joke or to deceive
his listeners
ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSITIONS
 2ND Suppose what Jose claims instead is that he
knows that Quezon City is the capital of the
Philippines
 That he is convinced of the truth of what he
claims to know
 But we know that what Jose claims to know is
false (for Manila is the capital of the Philippines)
 Jose is mistaken in believing the Quezon city is
the capital of the Philippines
 And because Jose is mistaken in his belief then he
does not really know what he claims to know
ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSITIONS
 3 rd Maintaining that Jose claims that Manila is the capital
of the Philippines, and that he believes it, which happens
to be true
 Is it enough to say that Jose knows that his evidence for

saying that he knows that Manila is the Capital of the

Philippines or what led him to think that he knows it
 Jose will tell us that he got this information from the

conversation in a cartoon comedy movie that he saw in

Youtube, can we say that Jose really knows it? I think not
 That is just by luck or coincident that Jose gets to know it
 The information must be justified by having a

sufficient evidence in believing that Manila is the

capital of the Philippines.
 CONDITION OF JUSTIFICATION
Distinguish knowledge form an opinion and from
guess
 OPINION  GUESS
◦ is simply unjustified ◦ a person claims to
belief that may turn know something
out to be true without any evidence
◦ A person claims to at all
know a certain event
based on little or
insufficient evidence.
 CONDITION OF JUSTIFICATION
Distinguish knowledge form an opinion and from
guess
What is a certain event happened in the history of AFRICA?

 Sample OPINION  Sample GUESS

◦ LESS KNOWLEDGE ◦ NO KNOWLEDGE
 I could offer an opinion ◦ I don’t know but I
based on what I know could make a guess
 CONDITION OF JUSTIFICATION
Distinguish knowledge form an opinion and from
guess

Opinion and guess could be

true
But still they are not

knowledge
What I know to be true is true

not by mere luck or

coincidence.
 DISAGREEMENT/DISPUTES
OF BELIEFS
 What we believe to be true or
false.
 How do we resolve these

agreements?
 How does this type of

disagreements differ from

other types?
 KINDS OF DISAGREEMENTS
1. Disagreements in Belief
2. Disagreement in Attitude
3. Merely Verbal

Disagreement
 DISAGREEMENTS IN BELIEF
 Disagreement about the facts which are
properly resolved by verifying the facts at
issue.
 The verification of fact can be done either by;
◦ directly observing the facts
◦ Examining relevant documents
◦ Appealing to appropriate authorities
 SAMPLE
 Disagreement of this kind is the one over whether a
certain politician stole money form the government.
DISAGREEMENT IN ATTITUDE
 Disagreement over preferences
 They usually resolve by persuasion if not by

compromise
 Persuasion done either
◦ logically one’s arguments are consistent with the
valid rules of deduction
◦ Illogically one’s arguments commit the informal
fallacies
 Sample
 Disagreement of this kind of issue of divorce and same
sex marriage should be legalized in our country
MERELY VERBAL DISAGREEMENT
 Disagreement that arise out of the
misunderstanding of the meanings of our
linguistic expressions
 Properly resolved by clarifying the meanings

of the misunderstood linguistic expression

◦ Sample
 Two friends are arguing over which movie to watch
together only to find out later that they have the same
movie in mind.
 DISAGREEMENT
 Truth involves disagreements in belief
◦ Conditions for knowing something to be true
 Disagreement in belief and attitude
considered genuine and real disagreement
 Merely Verbal disagreement are not real

disagreement, it is just a though that they

are.
◦ It is a waste of time and energy
◦ Needless
◦ It is pity that some relationships are ruined
FALLACIES
Chapter IX
 Plato

Arguments,
like men,
are often
pretenders
.
 FALLACIES
Fallacyis an erroneous
reasoning that comes
from false premises or
irrelevant conclusion
which seems to be
correct.
 FALLACY
 FALLERE (Latin)
 To deceive or to lead astray.
 This is a form of deception coming from an

argument that is lacking in the basis or

evidence which we sometimes cannot easily
detect without paying close attention to it.
 They are created either intentionally or

unintentionally in order to deceive other

people.
 FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
 It is committed when the meaning of words
or phrases created a different meaning in the
conclusion.
 This may happened, if the words that are

used or structurally presented in the premise

are not properly expressed grammatically or
syntactically.
 An argument is called ambiguous when the

meaning of a certain statement or argument

is not clearly stated.
 KINDS OF FALLACIES
 FORMAL FALLACIES
◦ Are errors in reasoning due to an incorrect form or
structure of an argument
◦ It correspond to invalid deductive arguments
 INFORMAL FALLACIES
◦ Known as material fallacies
◦ Errors in reasoning due exclusively to an anomaly
or defect in the content of an argument
◦ This is usually psychologically influential and
commonly committed
 3 GROUPS OF
INFORMAL FALLACIES
FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
FALLACIES OF RELEVANT
FALLACIES OF

PRESUMPTION
 FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
 It is committed when the meaning of words
or phrases created a different meaning in
the conclusion.
 This may happened, if the words that are

used or structurally presented in the

premise are not properly expressed
grammatically or syntactically.
 An argument is called ambiguous when the

meaning of a certain statement or argument

is not clearly stated.
 FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
 FALLACY OF AMPHIBOLY
This kind of fallacy of ambiguity is
committed when the expression
of statements are not properly
constructed grammatically.
These statements created problems
in the clarity of meaning for they
become open to different
interpretations.
 FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
 FALLACY OF EQUIVOCATION
This fallacy of ambiguity appears
when the meaning of a particular
word in a premise is different in
use as given in the other premise.
A word is ambiguous when used in
two different senses in an
argument.
 FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
 FALLACY OF ACCENT
This fallacy of ambiguity is
committed due to the different
ways a word is emphasized or
accented in a premise.
This misplaced emphasis
causes misinterpretation by
the listener.
 FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
 FALLACY OF COMPOSITION
This fallacy is committed due to the
assumption that the whole has the
characteristics of its parts.
This happens when one transfers the
characteristics of the parts unto the
whole, by arguing that since the part
has this, the whole must necessarily
have also this.
 FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY
 FALLACY OF DIVISION
The fallacy of division is committed when
one assumes that the parts have the
characteristic s of the whole.
The qualities of a whole to the qualities
of the parts of the whole.
This is the opposite of the fallacy of
composition which asserts the whole as
having the characteristics of its parts.
 FALLACY OF RELEVANCE

It is committed due to the premises

that are not significant to their
conclusion in an argument.
This happens when premises have
no relationship to the conclusion,
therefore, this argument cannot
establish its truth.
ARGUMENTUM AD IGNORANTIAM

This is called ARGUMENT OF

IGNORANCE because this one
argues that an argument is
wrong since it has not yet
been proven as true, or it is
true since it is not yet proven
to be false.
ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM

This is called the APPEAL TO

INAPPROPRIATE AUTHORITY
because this is committed when
one appeals to an authority
whose field of expertise does
not include the nature of the
conclusion being establish.
ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM
 This is called the ARGUMENT AGAINST THE MAN,
wherein one uses an argument that focuses on
attacking the person or the opponent in the
issue rather than on the issue.
 This happens when one argues that since this
man is like this (by attacking his character,
personality status or belief) and so his
argument should be dismissed.
 It is known to us, as black propaganda character
assasination, mud slinging, expose, bomba,
mura or kabastusan.
ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUM
 This is called the APPEAL TO PEOPLE
because this is committed when one
argues using expressive language or
other devices to excite passion
(enthusiasm, happiness, anger, hate,
lust or fear) of the people or the
crowd.
 An argument ad populum is the

conviction of the heart. As such, it is

not entirely groundless and whimsical
(fanciful).
ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAM
 Thisis called the APPEAL TO MERCY,
because this is committed when
someone instead of proving his
argument relies in soliciting the
sympathy or pity of the listener.
 Shedding tears and showing

sadness are examples of this fallacy.

ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM
 This is called the APPEAL TO
FORCE since this is committed
when one resorts to using force or
threat in trying to push others to
accept the issue.
 Its purpose is to scare people to

accept or to be convinced about

something.
Argumentum ad Crumemam
 This is called the ARGUMENT TO THE MONEY
this fallacy when we appeal to the sense of
greed or cupidity of an individual
 When instead of reasoning out of an

argument, we use money to bribe the

opponent to concede
 Argumentum ad
Auctoritatem
 This is called ARGUMENT TO THE
AUTHORITY, this fallacy related to the
argument to the customs and traditions
 We commit this fallacy when instead of

showing the intrinsic merit of the issue at

hand, we appeal to the authority of some
prominent person to support our contention
 Argumentum Pansarilum
 This is called ARGUMENT TO ONE’S OWN
ADVANTAGE, this fallacy ignore an issue and
appeal to a person or a group of persons to
adopt a belief or policy which the person or
group of persons concerned would heed
unless the advantage offered were given
especially if such belief or policy is contrary
to the person’s accepted sense of morality
FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION
 Referring to a fallacies in which
error in reasoning brought
about by the occurrence of
complex or loaded expressions
whose assumptions are
questionable or have not yet
been proven to be true
PLURIOM INTERROGATIONUM
Thisfallacy is called MANY
OR COMPLEX QUESTIONS
because this is committed
when an argument
demands a simple answer
to a complicated question.
 PETITIO PRINCIPII
 This is called BEGGING THE QUESTION
because this is committed when an
argument has not reached the
conclusion by presenting
questionable or weak premises.
 This happens when the argument is

not proving anything about the

conclusion.
POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC
 This fallacy is called FALSE CAUSE in that
this is committed when an argument
assumes that the effect is attributed to an
inadequate cause.
 This happens when one argues that since

this event happened before the other or in

the next event, this must be the cause of
that event.
 Oftentimes, this fallacy is accompanied by

superstitions and presumptions.

 IGNORATIO ELINCHI
 This fallacy is also known in Latin, the
NON SEQUITOR or it is called the
ARGUMENT OF IGNORANCE OF
REFUTATION or irrelevant conclusion.
 This fallacy is committed when the

conclusion is drawn from premises

which are not related of proving the
issue, it rather ignores, kisses the
point, or evades it.
FALLACY OF BEGGING QUESTION

Iscommitted when
reasoning is circular in
that the conclusion is
already assumed in
the premises
 FALLACY OF ACCIDENT
Committed when one applies
a general rule to individual
cases, which because of their
special or accidental nature
The general rules does not

properly apply
 FALLACY OF HASTY
GENERALIZATION
 Iscommitted when one makes a
generalization from a special or
accident case or simply from
insufficient number of cases.
 Converse accident is a case of

weak inductive reasoning.

Practical Applications of
Logic to Argument and
Debate
 Argumentation and
Debate Differentiated
 Argumentation
 The art of influencing others through the
medium of reasoned discourse to believe or
act as we wish them to believe or act
 It is the process of changing the belief or

behavior of the bearer or reader, through the

use of spoken or written speech by
persuading him with reasons and by strring
up his feelings
 Debate
 Is a formal and direct oral contest in
argumentation between two or more persons on
one single definite proposition at a definite time
 It is the art of persuasive communication
◦ It requires skill in performance
◦ Uses a systematized body of principles intended to
enhance skill in the application of that process
 An oral controversy on a definite question
between opposing speakers (the 2 sides are the
affirmative “accept“ and the negative “reject”)
 The Value of
Argumentation and Debate
 BASIC SKILL IN THE PROCESS INFLUENCING
OTHER TO ACCEPT OR REJECT BELIEFS
◦ It trains men in a democracy in quick and accurate
thinking
 Democracy becomes useless if the democratic processes
are not prepared to weight the logic and reasonable
propositions it becomes an exercise of futility
 DEVELOPS THE HUMAN QUALITIES OF SELF
RELIANCE AND ASSURANCE
◦ Man lives in the society and is endowed with the gift
of his communicating his thoughts and ideas
 Teacher – student (use of language)
 The 2 Approaches in the work of
Argumentation and Debate
 Conviction which appeals to reason
 Persuasion which appeals to human emotion or feeling

 MAN as
◦ Rational
◦ Emotional (emotion can dominate reason)

CONVICTION
* it is an aspect of argumentation whereby the debater direct
his words to the reasoning faculty of man
* it makes the truth clear and makes it more interesting
* Opinion leads one to embrace the truth
 The Four Process of
Argumentation
 Invention
◦ Determining ideas whose truth the arguer or debater
whishes his listener to believe
 Selection
◦ `gathering of data and information needed to serve as a
proof
 Arrangement
◦ The materials are supposed to be arranged according to
a pre established plan which can clearly, effectively and
forcefully presented as proof
 Presentation
◦ To communicate ideas, invented, selected and arranged
The Subject of Argumentation: The
Proposition
 The proposition in a debate enables the
debater to understand the issues and how to
discuss them
 It prevents using his time and effort uselessly

in arguing about the matter wholly outside

the real question and issue and proving
things that are considered as BESIDE THE
POINT AT ISSUE
 2 classification of
Propositions
 Proposition of the fact
◦ Is the one whose chief concern is the truth or falsity of
an act of judgment
◦ It aims to belief
◦ It addresses itself to the question: IS THIS AFFIRMATION
TRUE OR FALSE?
 That the Duterte Administration deserves to be supported
 Proposition of policy
◦ It aims at action and only at belief
◦ It addressed the question of SHOULD OR OUGHT THIS
TO BE DONE
 That the US maintain its military presence in the Philippines
The Forms of the Proposition
 Association/ Organization/Class (School) as form of
resolution
 Lawmaking body (Senate or House of
Representative) in making some bill, resolution or a
motion
 Sanguniang Panlunsod or Panlalawigan ( in making
some ordinance)
 In a court of law (form of pleading)
◦ Complaint
◦ Information
◦ Petition
◦ motion
Qualities of Good Propositions for
Debates
 The proposition should be debatable
 The proposition must be simple and concise
 The proposition must be free from any ambiguity
 The proposition must not be biased
 The proposition must not use abstraction and vague

generalizations
 The proposition must be in the form of

assertion/allegation
 The proposition must result in only one act of judgment
 The proposition must be so worded in a manner that the

burden of proof will fall on the affirmative side

 The proposition must be interesting
 Nature, Function, and Kinds of
issues in a Debate
 Issues in a debate are essential points,
segments, elements or smaller propositions
affirmed by the affirmative or denied by the
negative
 Issues are of 3 types

◦ Potential issues
◦ Admitted issues
◦ Stock issues
 Evidence, Proof and
Argument
 Evidence
◦ Anything that tends to prove or disprove something. It
must pass the parameter of acceptability in regard to
conviction and opinion
 Proof
◦ To convince the mind of truth or falsity of any
proposition (presentation of evidence/fact that sought
to be proved –principal fact “factum probandum”)
 Argument
◦ The arguer infers the existence of other facts from
knowing the existence of one or more facts in order to
establish the reality of a point
 Outline of Debate
 Title
 Preliminary introduction
 Main introduction
 Statement of the issues
 Brief of the argument
 conclusion
 Rules
 The brief must be presented in the form of heading
and sub headings
 The brief must be partitioned into 3 parts
(introduction, discussion and conclusion)
 Each heading and sub-heading must be shown in the
form of a complete sentence
 Each heading and sub-heading must embody only
one sentence except when it includes a lifted but
properly acknowledge quotation
 Every series of sentences must follow the principles
of rhetoric/public speaking
 All sources of materials and other information should
be properly acknowledged, stating the bibliographic
information
 The 1st part of the introduction must embody
all the information needed for a clear
comprehension of the discussion
 The last portion of the introduction must

embody the statement of the different issues

and of the portion of the main body
 The main body of the argumentative speech

must contain all the evidences and arguments

to be used on the given side of the
proposition
 In the main body of the main speech, each

broad heading must be treated as a reason

for the truth or falsity of the proposition
 Each sub-heading or series of coordinate sub-
headings must be treated as a reason for the
truth of the heading immediately above it
 Possible objections to be proved false must be

recorded and the possible denial must be noted

 In phrasing the denial, the heading must clearly

state the argument to be answered and the

character of the answer to be made
 The conclusion must embody a summary of the

essential points of the proof

 The debater must in the entire course of the

debate, think and act logically

 The Interpellation and the
Rebuttal Rules
 The interpellator and the one interrelated must stand near the
front part of the platform and should speak aloud while giving
the remarks to the other
 Question as well as the corresponding answer must be brief
and concise
 Question must be so designed as to force the opponent to
accept the strength of the interpellator ‘s reasoning or
evidences
 Questions must be asked in such manner as to show the
opponent's absence or reasoning and evidences, the weakness
of his evidences or simply illogical reasoning
 Question must be directed to the arguments of the opponents
 In his denial speech the interpellator must unveil the
insignificance of his opponent’s answer
 The Points of Difference Between
the main and the rebuttal speech
 The debate characterized as a friendly
encounter of minds in the arena of the
academe
 There are 2 kind of speech
◦ CONSTRUCTIVE SPEECH
 The debater show a direct proof for the truth of one
side of the proposition
◦ REBUTTAL /DENIAL SPEECH
 The intention of the debater is to destroy the proofs
previously presented by the opposing side
 Special Problems Encountered in
the Making of the Rebuttal Speech
 Rule of thumb
◦ THERE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY BE NO NEW PROOF TO
BE INTRODUCED IN THE REBUTTAL/DENIAL SPEECH,
EXCEPT WHAT IS REQUIRED TO GOVE AN
APPRORIATE REPLY TO THE PROOF OF THE
OPPONENT
 Debate
 Group 1 – Christian to non Christian view
 Group 2 – same sex marriage legalization

 Group 3 – God is dead – God is not dead (faith)

 Group 4 – Death penalty legalization

 Group 5 – Divorce legalization

 Other topics

◦ China vs Philippine sea

◦ Burial of Ferdinand Marcos in libingan ng mga bayani
◦ De Lima’s case on drugs
◦ Publication of the names of celebrity who involve in drugs
◦ Change of name Gordon College to Olongapo City College
God may be gloried!
That in all things