The first few Introduction to Logic readings – Categorical Propositions and Venn Diagrams – were very easy to understand and interpret into more examples. However, the Syllogistic Terminology reading wasn’t as clear to me. One thing that was difficult to grasp was how the argument of Councilman William Meyers would alter when it was put into the A, E, I, and O categorical proportions. Another thing I did not understand at first was the difference between the minor and major premisses and how you knew which one to use and when. Above all, the most confusing aspect of the Syllogistic Terminology reading was when the arguments were put into Venn Diagrams and the figure of the syllogism. The Venn Diagrams challenge me most because while I may completely understand the arguments, I read the Venn Diagrams wrong every time. I’m not sure if it’ show I was taught to read Venn Diagrams but for me I see a shaded area and that’s where something is present.
Except for initial confusion, categorical syllogism is a good way to test arguments for accuracy and validity. As seen in the syllogism for Councilmen Meyers, his argument was proven false by interpreting it through the syllogism and Venn Diagrams. I also found the Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise. The example of how the S and P were both negative but together in the syllogism the result was a positive. I thought it was a great example to see how the equation for syllogism works. I think this way of thinking is a good way to test a statement before exclaiming it and also is a good organizational system, once you can sift through the initial confusion.