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. The conclusion necessarily follows from the premises; so that, if these are true, the conclusion must be true, and the argument amounts to demonstration

1. a deductive scheme of a formal argument consisting of a major and a minor premise and a conclusion (as 'every virtue is laudable; kindness is a virtue; therefore, kindness is laudable') 2. a subtle, specious, or crafty argument 3. deductive reasoning.

An ancient form of a logical argument, first put forward by Aristotle. A syllogism typically consists of three sentences; two premises, one conclusion. If the premises were true, the conclusion must be true. For example: all left-handed people are smokers. Ann is left-handed. Ann must be a smoker.

A logical formula consisting of a major and a minor assumption and an inconsequent. (See

A deductive argument with two premises.

A three-part form of deductive reasoning.

A form of reasoning in which two statements are made and a conclusion is drawn from them. A syllogism begins with a major premise ("All tragedies end unhappily.") followed by a minor premise ("Hamlet is a tragedy.") and a conclusion (Therefore, "Hamlet ends unhappily.").

C&P page: 29,89 Definition: In the classic sense, a syllogism is an argument composed of three statements each of which connects any two of the same set of three categories and is of the form All X are Y, No X are Y, Some X are Y, or Some X are not Y. Comment: In the example below, the three categories are "students" (A), "smart people" (B), and "rich people" (C). The three statements involved thus reflect the patterns Some A are B, No B are C, and Some A are not C, respectively. "Some students are smart people. No smart people are rich people. Therefore, some students are not rich people."

A series of three statements used to form a new relationship between two ideas. Used in deductive reasoning.

deductive reasoning in which a conclusion is derived from two premises

a deductive argument consisting of two premises and a conclusion

a deductive argument in which a conclusion

a deductive argument that consists of two premises and a conclusion

a demonstration because of non-formal properties of its premises

a formal deductive argument made up of a major premise, a minor premise and a conclusion

a form of argument consisting of three propositions (two premises and a conclusion)

a form of argument that contains a major premise, a minor premise and a conclusion

a form of argument that is guaranteed to be accepted, because it is known (by all educated persons) to be valid

a form of deductive reasoning consisting of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion

a form of logical reasoning

a form of logic, first described by Aristotle, where "

a kind of argument, an argument form

a logical construct that has three parts

an argument composed of two (or more) premises or assertions

an argument comprised of three statements which are assumed to be true (for reasons of testing validity

an argument consisting of three parts, a major premiss, a minor premiss, and a

an argument that has a major premise, a minor premise and a conclusion, and often appears in the form 'A is B, C is D, therefore E is F'

an argument the conclusion of which is supported by two premises

an argument with two premises and a conclusion

an argument with two premisses leading to a conclusion

an inference (a conclusion) which is constructed by two premises and three terms

a statement of arguments in which, if the major premise and the minor premise are true, the conclusion will be true as well

a test for deductive reasoning

a three-step argument containing three different terms

a three-term argument

a type of formal logical argument

see deductive.

Made of 3 statements, includes 2 or 3 associated terms across the statements, and draws a conclusion from a major & minor premise.

A form of deductive reasoning using the key terms "all" and "some". For example, "all citizens of the EU are humans but only some humans are citizens of the EU." "All .

refers to a three-step deductive argument that moves logically from a major and a minor premise to a conclusion. A traditional example is "All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal." Symbol

is an argument of three propositions, two premises and a conclusion, with the conclusion's subject term in one of the premises, the predicate of the conclusion in the other premise, and a third term only in both premises. ( Study 3)

A logic problem containing two premises and a conclusion that may or may not follow from them.

Kind of deduction in which the premises and conclusions have forms such as ÒAll A are BÓ and ÒNo A are BÓ.

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.

A minimal unit of logical discourse, generally consisting of a major and a minor premise and a conclusion.  Thus, “All men are mortal (major premise) — Socrates is a man (minor premise) — so Socrates is mortal (conclusion).

"Style of inductive logic, that starts with a generalization (all men are mortal), includes a categorization (Socrates is a man) and concludes with a semantic entailment or the instance taking on an attribute of the category (Socrates is mortal)."

A syllogism ( — "conclusion", "inference"), usually the categorical syllogism, is a kind of logical argument in which one proposition (the conclusion) is inferred from two others (the premises) of a certain form. In his Prior Analytics, Aristotle defines syllogism as: "a discourse in which, certain things having been supposed, something different from the things supposed results of necessity because these things are so." (24b18–20) Despite this very general definition, however, he limits himself first to categorical syllogisms (and later to modal syllogisms). The syllogism is at the core of Deductive reasoning, where facts are determined by combining existing statements, in contrast to Inductive reasoning where facts are determined by experimenting on the world.