CHAPTER SIX

CATEGORICAL PROPOSITION
This unit is divided into three parts. These include components of categorical proposition, Venn
diagrams and the modern square of opposition.
The first part deals with how a proposition relates two classes, sets, or categories and how a
standard for of categorical proposition is established. The second part analyzes and interprets
standard form categorical propositions. The third part tries to explain the methods of representing
propositions by diagrams and square of oppositions so as to check validity of inferences.
4.1 The Components of Categorical Proposition
What is categorical proposition?
In the first chapter we saw that proposition is a statement that is either true or false. A category is
a set of collection or class of similar objects. Thus, a categorical proposition is a proposition
that relates two classes or categories. The classes in categorical proposition are denoted by the
subject term and predicate term. Accordingly, using a categorical proposition we can talk about
the inclusion and exclusion of the subject term from predicate term. Here are some examples of
categorical propositions
1. Lions are animals.
2. Cats are not plants
3. Sea lions inhabit the coast of California
4. Not all lords are kings
Statement (1) says that every member of the class of lions is member of class of animals.
Statement (2) says that the entire class of cats is excluded from the class of milliners. Statement
(3) says that part of the class of sea lions is included in the class of things that inhabit the coast of
California. And statement (4) asserts that part of the class of lords is excluded from the class
kings.
Based on this inclusion and exclusion there are four types of categorical propositions. Those that
a) Assert the whole class is included in the predicate class
b) Assert the part of class is included in the predicate class
c) Assert the whole class is excluded from the predicate class
d) Assert the part of the subject class is excluded from the predicate class

1|Page
A categorical proposition that expresses these relations with complete clarity is in standard form.
A Standard Form of a categorical proposition is a statement that results from putting
respectively the subject and predicate terms in substitution instance of one the following four
forms.
 All S are P
 No S are P
 Some S are P
 Some S are not P.
The words all, no and some are called quantifiers because they specify how much of the subject
class is include in or excluded from the predicate class.
The letter S and P stand for the subject and predicate terms. The words are/are not are called
copula because they link the subject term with the predicate term.
Consider the following example
All members of the American Medical association are persons holding degrees from recognized
academic institutions.
NB: a) Subject term and predicate term don’t mean the same thing in logic as they mean in
grammar.
b) All S are not P is not a standard form.
c) There are exactly three forms of quantifiers and two forms of copulas’.
4.2 Quantity, Quality and Distribution
Quality and quantity are attributes of categorical proposition. The quality of categorical
proposition is either affirmative or negative depending on whether it affirms or denies class
membership. The quality of categorical proposition is either universal or particular depending on
whether the statement makes an assertion about every member or just some member of the class
denoted by the subject term. Since the middle ages four kinds of categorical proposition have
been designated by letter names corresponding to four vowels of roman alphabet; A,E,I,O.

2|Page
The universal affirmative is called an A proposition, the universal negative is called an E
proposition, The particular affirmative is called an I proposition and the particular negative is
called an O proposition.
Unlike quality and quantity which are attributes of propositions, distribution is an attribute of
terms i.e subject and predicate of proposition. A term is distributed if the propositions make an
assertion about every member of the class denoted by the term, otherwise, it is undistributed.
In this regard we can see that A proposition distributes the subject, E proposition distributes both
the subject and predicate, I distributes neither and O distributes Predicate.
The materials of this section may now be summarized as follows:
Preposition Letter Quantity Quantity Terms distributed
All S are P A Universal Affirmative S
No S are P E Universal Negative S and P
Some S are P I Particular Affirmative None
Some S are not P O Particular Negative P
4.3 Venn diagram and the Modern Square of Opposition
According to the Aristotelian proposition, the statement form ‘All S are P’ assert that all
members of S class are included I the P class, and it is assumed that members of S actually exist.
The other interpretation of categorical proposition which is neural about existence arose in the
19th century from the work of logician George Boole. According to Boolean interpretation, the
statement form ‘All S are P’ assert all members of the S class are include in the P class and it is
not assumed that members of S actually exist. The two interpretations are in agreement with
respect to particular I an O proposition by making positive claim about existence. Since the
Boolean interpretation of universal proposition is neutral about existence, it is simpler than the
Aristotelian, which involves an assumption about existence. Thus we begin with Boolean
interpretation and extend to Aristotle. According to Boolean interpretation the four kinds of
categorical propositions we have:
 All S are P; No member of S are outside P.
 No S are P; No member of s are inside P.
 Some S are P; At least one S exist and that S is a P.
 Some S are not P; At least one S exists and that S is not a P.

3|Page
Venn Diagrams
Nineteenth century logician John Venn developed a system of diagram to represent the
information categorical propositions express which are known as Venn diagram. A Venn
diagram is an arrangement of overlapping circles in which circles represent the class denoted by
a term in a categorical proposition. Because every categorical proposition has exactly two terms,
the Venn diagram for a single categorical proposition consists of two overlapping circles. Each
circle is labeled so that it represents one of the terms in the proposition. We adopt the convention
that the left hand circle represents the subject term and the right hand circle represents the
predicate term.

The shading of an area means the shaded area is empty, placing an x in an area means that at
least one thing exists in the area, if no mark appears it means that nothing is known about the
area, shading fits for representation the content of universal (A, E), X is always used to represent
the content of particular (I, O)
A: All S are P

S P

E: No S are P

S P

I: Some S are P

S P
4|Page
O: Some S are not P

S P

Modern Square of Opposition

According to Boolean of categorical proposition which resulted in Modern Square can be
explained in the following manner
To begin just compare the diagram of A proposition with the diagram of O proposition. The
diagram for A proposition asserts that the left-hand part of the S circle is empty, whereas the
diagram for O proposition asserts that the same area is not empty. These two diagrams make
assertion that is the exact opposition of each other. As a result, their corresponding statements
are said to contradict each other. Analogously, the diagram for E proposition asserts that where
the two circles overlap is empty, whereas the diagram for the I proposition asserts that the area
where the two circles overlap is not empty. Accordingly, their corresponding propositions are
also said to contradict is presented in a diagram called the Modern square of opposition,

A E

I O Contradictories
Modern Square of Opposition
Immediate Inferences
If two categorical propositions are related by the contradictory relation, they necessarily have
opposite truth values.
If A proposition is true, O proposition is false. And vise- versa

5|Page
If I proposition is true, E proposition is false. And vise-versa
However, given the truth value of an A and O proposition, nothing can be determined about the
truth value of the corresponding E and I proposition. These propositions could be either true or
false depending on whether their subject terms denote actually existing things. Thus from
Boolean standpoint, which is neutral about existence, they are said to have logically
undetermined truth value.
Similarly given the truth value of E or I proposition, nothing can be determined about the truth
value of the corresponding A or O proposition. They are said to have logically undetermined
truth value.
Modern square opposition helps us to test certain arguments for validity. Argument of this sort is
called immediate inferences because they have only one premise. Instead of reasoning from one
premise to the next, and then to the conclusion, we proceed immediately to the conclusion.
We can also use Venn diagrams to test immediate inferences for validity.
It is false that some Walyas are Nyalas.
Therefore, some Walyas are not Nyalas.
We can begin by using letters to represent its term
It is false that some W are N
Therefore, some W are not N
In representing the premise we do just the opposite of what we should do the diagram “some W
are N”. Instead of placing an “X” in the are where the two circles overlap, we shade that area for
the conclusion we place an “X” in the left hand part of W.
It is false that some W are N
Some W are N
Here, the conclusion diagram asserts that something exists in the left-hand part of W circle.
Since this information is not contained in the premise diagram, the argument is invalid.
The modern square of opposition and the Venn diagram technique for evaluating arguments are
applicable regardless of whether the terms in a particular argument denote actually existing
things.

6|Page
4.4 Conversion, Obversion and Contraposition
Categorical propositions would have their attribute with the change of some of its components.
The three ways of doing this is using conversion, obversion, and contraposition. These three
operations would help us to interpret and analyze arguments, to make valid arguments, and
develop logically equivalent or different meaning of Categorical propositions.
A. Conversion
It consists in interchanging the subject term with the predicate term
Statement Converse
All A are B All B are A

S P P S P

No A are B No B are A

S P S P

Some A are B Some B are A

S P
S P
Some A are not B Some B are not A

S P
In conversion S P
two statements are logically equivalent which are E and I statements. Since
conversion yields necessarily determined results for E and I statements, it can be used as the
basis for immediate inferences having these types of statements as premises.
B. Obversion
It requires two steps

7|Page
 A) Changing the quality
B) Replacing the predicate with its term complement
The second step requires understanding class complement .The complement of a class is the
group consisting of everything outside the class. For terms consisting of a single word, the term
complement is usually formed by simply attaching the prefix ‘non’ to the term.
Statement Obverse
All A are B No A are Non-B

S P P S P P
No A are B All A are non-B

S P
S P

Some A are B Some A are not not-B

S P S P

Some A are not B Some A are non-B

S P S P

NB: Each of the four types of categorical proposition is logically equivalent to its obverse. Hence
it can be used for validity of immediate inferences.

8|Page
 C. Contraposition
Requires two steps
1. Interchanging the subject and predicate terms
2. Replacing the subject and predicate terms with their predicate terms with their term
complement

Statement Contra positive

All A are B All non-B are non-A

S P P S P P
No A are B No non-B are non-A

S P S P

Some A are B Some non-B are non-A

S P
S P

Some A are not B Some non-B are not non-B

S P S P

A and O are logically equivalent and E and I are neither identical nor exact opposite. Thus
contraposting E and I gives a new statement whose truth value is logically undetermined.
The diagrams for the contra positives are interpreted as follows:

9|Page
All non-B are non-A asserts that no members of non-B are outside non-A It means no members
non-B are inside A or all class members that are not in B are not in A
No non-B are non-A asserts that the area where non-B overlap non-A is empty
Some non-B are non-A asserts that something exists in the area where non-B overlap non-A
Some non-B are not non-A asserts that at least one members of non-B is outside non-A. This
means at least one mebers of non-B is inside A.
4.5 The traditional Square of opposition
TSO is an arrangement of lines that illustrates logically necessarily relations among the four
kinds of categorical proposition. While the modern square depending upon the Boolean
interpretation of categorical proposition, the traditional square depending on the Aristotlean
interpretation. Hence the subject terms of these propositions denotes things that actually exist (A
and E proposition).

A contrary E

T F

sub alteration sub alteration

I subcontrary O
May be characterized as follows:
Contradictory=opposite truth value
Contrary=at least one is false
Subcontrary= at least one is true
Sublateration=truth flaws downward, falsity flows upward
Contrary relation expresses only partial opposition. If a certain A proposition is given as true, the
corresponding E proposition is false. But if an A proposition is given as false, the corresponding
E proposition would be either true or false without violating the ‘at least one is false’ rule. In this
case, the E proposition has logically undetermined truth value. Similarly, if an E proposition is
given as false, the corresponding A proposition has logically undetermined truth value. These
results are borne out in ordinary language. Thus if we are given the actually true A proposition
‘All cats are animals’ the corresponding E proposition ‘no cats are animals’ is false, and if we are

10 | P a g e
given the actually true E proposition ‘No cats are dogs’ the corresponding A proposition ‘all cats
are dogs’ is false. Thus, the A and E proposition cannot both be true However, they can both be
false. ‘All animals are cats’ and ‘No animals are cats’ are both false.
The Sub contrary relations also express a kind of partial opposition. If a certain I proposition is
given as false, the corresponding O proposition is true (because at least one must be true), and if
an O proposition is given as false, the corresponding I proposition is true. But if either an I or an
O proposition is given as true, then the corresponding proposition could be either true or false
without violating the ‘at least one is true’ rule. Thus, the corresponding proposition would have
logically undetermined truth value. Example: if we are given the actually false I proposition
‘some cats are dogs’ the corresponding O proposition ‘some cats are nor dogs’ is true and if we
are given the actually false O proposition ‘some cats are not animals’ the corresponding ‘some
cats are animals’ is true. Thus the I and O proposition cannot both be false, but they can both be
true. ‘some animals are cats’ and ‘some animals are not cats’ are both true.
Subalteration is represented by two arrows; a downward arrow marked with the letter T and the
upward arrow marked with an F as a metaphor for the pipelines through which truth values flow.
The downward arrow transmits only truth. The upward arrow transmits only falsity.
Thus if A proposition is given as true, the corresponding I proposition is true, and only if an I
proposition is given as false, the corresponding A proposition is false. But if an A proposition is
given as false, the truth value cannot be transmitted downward, so the corresponding I
proposition will have logically undetermined truth value.
The formal fallacies that follow from improper usage the above relations result in
 Illicit contrary
 Illicit Sub contrary
 Illicit Subcontary
 Existential fallacy

11 | P a g e