(2) Explain by circles the foregoing.
(3) From three different business transactions, select the middle term of comparison.
(4) Why should not those who are given to much which is argumentative, speak in syllogistic terms?
(5) “He is a man of high ideals, and you know him to bestrictly honest, therefore you have no excuse for not voting for him.” Recast this quotation with a view of making a logical syllogism.
(6) Show by circles that there may be a vital difference between a syllogism of three terms and an equation of three terms.
(7) Indicate by illustration that in conversational argumentation the minor premise naturally comes first.
(8) Show by circles the meaning of “indeterminate conclusion.”
(9) Rule five states that no conclusion can be drawn from two negatives. Defend this rule in connection with the following syllogism, which seems to contain a valid conclusion:
Any statement which is not true cannot be accepted,
This statement is not true,