Error in Traditional Logic II?

[Racheleah]

In Chapter 1, "The Fourth Figure (Indirect First)," the book gives this syllogism as an example:

All Romans are men
All men are mortal
There, some mortals are Romans

The major term (Romans) is undistributed in the conclusion, but distributed in the premise. Isn't that a Fallacy of Illicit Major, or am I missing something...? I'm a little confused here.

[Martin Cothran]

Racheleah,

The text uses it as an example of a 4th figure syllogism, not necessarily a valid 4th figure syllogism. There are any number of possible syllogisms in the 4th figure that are invalid. However, you are not the first person whom it has caused confusion, so we will probably change it in the next edition.

In Chapter 1, "The Fourth Figure (Indirect First)," the book gives this syllogism as an example:

All Romans are men
All men are mortal
There, some mortals are Romans

The major term (Romans) is undistributed in the conclusion, but distributed in the premise. Isn't that a Fallacy of Illicit Major, or am I missing something...? I'm a little confused here.

[Racheleah]

Oh, ok. Thank you very much for clearing that up for me.