A logical syllogism is a type of logical argumentation that draws its conclusion from two or more premises.
What is so powerful about this form of argumentation is that the conclusion will follow from the premises logically and inescapably so long as the premises are affirmed as being true.
In order for someone to refute the conclusion they will be forced to deny one or more of the premises and present a case for their negation.
Basic example of a logical syllogism:
Premise (1) All men are mortal.
Premise (2) All Greeks are men.
Conclusion: Therefore, all Greeks are mortal.
The conclusion is logically valid. In other words the logic is irrefutable! If some one wants to deny the conclusion -as has been stated before- they will only be able to do so by denying one or more of the premises.
Examples from Natural Theology:
Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA)
Premise (1) Anything that begins to exist has a cause.
Premise (2) The universe began to exist.
Conclusion: Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Premise (1) If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.
Premise (2) Objective moral values do exist.
Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.
Note: It is inevitable that there will be those that deny certain premises but, what they will have to demonstrate is that the negation of those premises is more plausible than their affirmation. What constitutes a “good argument” is that the affirmation of any given premises is more plausible than their negation. This point cannot be stressed enough, the detractor is going to have to demonstrate that their denial of any given premise is more plausible that the its affirmation and if they do not succeed in doing so you will have an argument in good standing!
“How to Answer” Archive: Click Here
Find this post helpful? Please help me by sharing it through the social media options below