A method for argument validation involving three steps: a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion The conclusion is considered valid if the form is correct and the premises are true (Solso)
1 Argument involving three propositions: a formal deductive argument made up of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion An example is 'all birds have feathers, penguins are birds, therefore penguins have feathers' 2 Deductive reasoning: reasoning from the general to the specific, or an example of this
A deductive system of formal logic that presents two premises - the first one "major" the second one "minor" that inevitably lead to a sound conclusion Example: Major Premise: All men are mortal Minor Premise: Socrates is a man Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates is mortal A syllogism's conclusion is valid only if each of the two premises is valid
The conclusion necessarily follows from the premises; so that, if these are true, the conclusion must be true, and the argument amounts to demonstration deductive reasoning in which a conclusion is derived from two premises
A form of argumentation in which a conclusion is drawn from a major premise by the use of a minor premise: all men are mortal/Socrates is a man/ therefore Socrates is mortal
A doctrine of inference, historically the first logical system of deduction, formulated by Aristotle Every syllogism consists of a triad of propositions: two premises and a conclusion
Reasoning in which a logical conclusion is drawn from two premises and a logical conclusion is drawn from them
an argument according to Aristotle's logical theory involving a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion
deductive reasoning in which a conclusion is derived from two premises "All human beings are mortal I am a human being Therefore, I am mortal "
a statement with three parts, the first two of which prove that the third part is true, for example 'all men will die, Socrates is a man, therefore Socrates will die' (silogisme, from , from syllogismos, from syllogizesthai , from syn- ( SYN-) + logizesthai ). Form of argument that, in its most commonly discussed instances, has two categorical propositions as premises and one categorical proposition as conclusion. An example of a syllogism is the following argument: Every human is mortal (every M is P); every philosopher is human (every S is M); therefore, every philosopher is mortal (every S is P). Such arguments have exactly three terms (human, philosopher, mortal). Here, the argument is composed of three categorical (as opposed to hypothetical) propositions, it is therefore a categorical syllogism. In a categorical syllogism, the term that occurs in both premises but not in the conclusion (human) is the middle term; the predicate term in the conclusion is called the major term, the subject the minor term. The pattern in which the terms S, M, and P (minor, middle, major) are arranged is called the figure of the syllogism. In this example, the syllogism is in the first figure, since the major term appears as predicate in the first premise and the minor term as subject of the second
a deductive scheme of formal argument consisting a of a three-part statement? major premise, minor premise, and the conclusion
An important variety of deductive argument in which a conclusion follows from two or more premises; especially the categorical syllogism Recommended Reading: Aristotle, Categories, On Interpretation, Prior Analytics, tr by Hugh Tredennick (Harvard, 1938) {at Amazon com}; Jan Lukasiewicz, Aristotle's Syllogistic from the Standpoint of Modern Formal Logic (Clarendon, 1957) {at Amazon com}; The New Syllogistic, ed by George Englebretsen (Peter Lang, 1987) {at Amazon com}; and Bruce E R Thompson, An Introduction to the Syllogism and the Logic of Proportional Quantifiers (Peter Lang, 1993) {at Amazon com} Also see OCP, ColE, noesis, and MacE
{i} type of deductive reasoning containing two premises and a conclusion, logical argument in the form "if A=C and A=B then B=C" (Logic); deductive reasoning
The regular logical form of every argument, consisting of three propositions, of which the first two are called the premises, and the last, the conclusion
adj. Formal analysis of the syllogism. Developed in its original form by Aristotle in his Prior Analytics 350 BC, syllogistic represents the earliest branch of formal logic. Syllogistic comprises two domains of investigation. Categorical syllogistic confines itself to categorical propositions and their variation with respect to modalities. Noncategorical syllogistic is a form of logical inference using whole propositions as its units, an approach traceable to the Stoics but only fully developed by John Neville Keynes (1852-1949)
[ 'si-l&-"ji-z&m ] (noun.) 14th century. From Old French silogisme (“syllogism”), from Latin syllogismus, from Ancient Greek συλλογισμός (syllogismos, “inference, conclusion”).