sbccPhilosophy-111 Critical Thinking And Writing:

Essay #2 Writing Assignment








Formulate Two Opposing Standard Form Categorical Syllogisms

by Mark McIntire

More of a writing assignment than an essay this task will help you formulate the first part of your term paper. In fact, if you do it correctly, it constitutes the skeletal structure for PART ONE: Validity of your Term Paper as well as the basis for your Final Refutation exam in this course.

Using the standards and methods of Aristotelian Standard Form Categorical Logic, formulate TWO VALID Standard Form Categorical Syllogisms, one that affirms the conclusion of your TERM PAPER THESIS and one that negates the conclusion of your TERM PAPER THESIS.

Provide the MOOD, FIGURE and LATIN NAME for each of the TWO valid syllogisms as well as the appropriate Venn Diagram proving the validity for each syllogism. Identify the MAJOR TERM, MINOR TERM AND MIDDLE TERM of each syllogism.

Formulate your TWO standard form categorical syllogisms using any of the 15 valid syllogistic forms with Latin names found on the 15 Valid Forms link at our course home page.


Identify itsí LATIN NAME, MOOD, FIGURE, MAJOR TERM, MINOR TERM and MIDDLE TERM. Thatís all I want. Hereís an example of what I want, nothing less and nothing more. There should be nothing on your completed assignment except 2 syllogisms something like what appears in the affirmative example below.

Example of AFFIRMATIVE syllogism:

"All politicians warning us about the perils of global warming are politicians using indisputable facts."

"All Democrat presidential candidates are politicians warning us about the perils of global warming."

"Therefore, all Democrat presidential candidates are politicians using indisputable facts."

This is a valid standard form categorical syllogism of the form; LATIN NAME: BARBARA. Its MOOD & FIGURE are AAA-1.

Sample Venn Diagram of an AAA-1 BARBARA syllogism

Major term = P (politicians using indisputable facts)
Minor term = S (Democrat presidential candidates)
Middle term = M (politicians warning us about the perils of global warming)

Now, repeat this formulation process for another syllogism that NEGATES the conclusion of the AFFIRMATIVE syllogism. The NEGATION can be either in the form of a CONTRARY or a CONTRADICTORY conclusion to the affirmative conclusion.

Using the affirmative example above you would formulate a CONTRARY negation syllogism that concluded.

"No democrat presidential candidates are politicians using indisputable facts".

Or, you would formulate a CONTRADICTORY syllogism that concludes,

"Some democrat presidential candidates are not politicians using indisputable facts."

Either way, it's your choice, but you must formulate a refutation to your affirmative syllogism. Notice,

Make sure you have TWO VENN DIAGRAMS in your completed assignment and that each syllogism identifies its MOOD, FIGURE, major, minor, middle term and LATIN NAME


Submit your essay via email by the due date/time sent to you.


Mark McIntire

SBCC Philosophy