Syllogism – Reasoning Ability
Delhi Patwari / Lekhpal – Examination Guide
1. What is a Syllogism?
A syllogism is a form of logical reasoning that uses two (or more) premises to arrive at a conclusion.
- Premise 1 (Major Premise) – a general statement.
- Premise 2 (Minor Premise) – a specific statement that falls under the general category.
- Conclusion – a logical inference that follows necessarily from the two premises.
Example
All mammals are warm‑blooded.
All dogs are mammals.
Therefore, all dogs are warm‑blooded.
2. Key Characteristics
| Feature | Description |
|---|---|
| Logical Validity | Conclusion must necessarily follow from premises. |
| Logical Soundness | Premises must be true and the reasoning valid. |
| Categories | C – universal affirmative; D – universal negative; E – particular affirmative; I – particular negative. |
| Quantifiers | All, Some, No, None |
| Quality | Affirmative vs Negative |
| Quantity | Universal vs Particular |
3. Types of Syllogisms (by form)
| Symbol | Form | Example |
|---|---|---|
| AA‑1 | All A are B. All B are C. → All A are C. | All birds are animals. All animals are living beings. → All birds are living beings. |
| AE‑1 | All A are B. Some B are not C. | All cars are vehicles. Some vehicles are not electric. |
| EA‑1 | Some A are B. All B are C. | Some fruits are apples. All apples are sweet. |
| EE‑1 | Some A are B. Some A are not C. | Some birds can fly. Some birds cannot fly. |
| OI‑1 | No A are B. Some C are A. | No reptiles are mammals. Some animals are reptiles. |
| OI‑2 | No A are B. Some C are B. | No birds are mammals. Some pets are birds. |
| II‑1 | Some A are B. Some A are not C. | Some students are athletes. Some students are not athletes. |
| II‑2 | Some A are B. Some C are not B. | Some flowers are roses. Some plants are not roses. |
Note: The above table shows the most common forms. In exams you might encounter variations, but the core logic remains the same.
4. How to Solve a Syllogism
- Identify the Premises
- Label them as Major and Minor (or First and Second).
- Determine the Type
- Check the quantifier (All / Some / No) and the quality (Affirmative / Negative).
- Apply the Rules
- Use the standard syllogistic rules (e.g., Major Premise determines the Conclusion’s subject, Minor Premise determines the Conclusion’s predicate).
- Check for Validity
- Make sure the conclusion logically follows.
- Verify No contradictions (e.g., “All A are B” and “No B are C” cannot both be true if an A exists that is also a C).
Quick Reference Rules
| Rule | What It Means |
|---|---|
| Rule of Quantity | If the conclusion is universal, at least one premise must be universal. |
| Rule of Quality | If the conclusion is negative, at least one premise must be negative. |
| Rule of Distribution | The conclusion cannot refer to a term that was undetermined (undistributed) in both premises. |
| Rule of Subalternation | From a universal premise you can infer a particular one, but not vice versa. |
5. Worked Example
Premise 1: All A are B.
Premise 2: No B are C.
Conclusion: All A are not C.
Step‑by‑Step
| Step | Action | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Label the premises | 1 = Major, 2 = Minor |
| 2 | Identify quantifiers & quality | Premise 1 = Universal affirmative (All A are B). Premise 2 = Universal negative (No B are C). |
| 3 | Apply the Rule of Quantity | Conclusion must be universal (cannot be particular). |
| 4 | Apply the Rule of Quality | Since at least one premise is negative, conclusion may be negative. |
| 5 | Check distribution | In Premise 1, “B” is distributed (All B). In Premise 2, “B” is also distributed. The term “B” is fully distributed in both premises, so the conclusion “All A are not C” is valid. |
| 6 | Final conclusion | All A are not C. |
Interpretation: If every A is a B, and no B is a C, then indeed no A can be a C.
6. Common Pitfalls
| Mistake | Why It Happens | How to Avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Confusing the order | Mixing up which premise is major/minor | Write them in order and keep track of subject/predicate |
| Ignoring distribution | Forgetting that all and no distribute the predicate | Check distribution after each premise |
| Assuming truth of premises | Validity ≠ Soundness | Treat premises as given; only check logical flow |
| Choosing wrong conclusion type | Picking a particular conclusion when the premises are universal | Apply the Rule of Quantity first |
| Over‑generalising | Assuming a particular conclusion from a universal premise | Remember subalternation goes one way only |
7. Quick Revision Summary
- Syllogism = 2 premises + 1