What are the different formal fallacies in the categorical syllogism? and it's meaning? thx.?

Question

What are the different formal fallacies in the categorical syllogism? and it's meaning? thx.

Answer 1

fallacy is a part of an arguement that is flawed in logic or form, and thus invalidates the whole arguement
formal fallacies (also called logical fallacies)have a invalid form (structure)
it is a pattern of reasoning that is always wrong. the premise may be true, the conclusion may be true, but the premise does not lead to the conclusion in the way its described
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

this site has a list of formal fallacies

Answer 2

If that was a real case in a court of law, it would be thrown out. The defendant is always presumed innocent until proven guilty. The testimony of the accuser would not be enough to convict them, especially if there was evidence which suggested reasonable doubt. Pictures of the person at an ATM and an ATM receipt would suggest reasonable doubt. No jury would convict under those circumstances. If you accused me of stealing $100 from you, you would have to prove that you had the $100 in the first place. You would also have to prove that the $100 in my pocket actually had belonged to you (forensics should be able to match the smudges on the bills to your fingerprints if the money had belonged to you). You would have to point out exactly where you were and where I was when the money was taken. I would have to be placed at the scene. Et cetera, et cetera. Now, the way the burden of proof has ALWAYS worked is like this: The burden of proof falls on the person making the absolute claim, no matter what the claim is. Period. You say that there absolutely is no God, prove it. If I said there absolutely is a God, it would be up to me to prove it. That is the way it is. Don't like it? Don't make absolute claims, otherwise you can be called upon to prove it.

Answer 3

Formal fallacies of categorical syllogisms:

Undistributed middle; The middle term must be distributed at least once.

Illicit major/Illicit minor; If a term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must be distributed in a premise.

Exclusive premises; Two negative premises are not allowed.

Drawing an affirmative conclusion from a negative premise/Drawing a negative conclusion from an affirmative premise; A negative premise requires a a negative conclusion and a negative conclusion requires a negative premise.

Existential fallacy; If both premises are universal, the conclusion cannot be particular. (Boolean Standpoint)