In traditional logic the process of contraposition is a schema composed of several steps of inference involving categorical propositions and classes. A categorical proposition contains a subject and predicate where the existential impact of the copula implies the proposition as referring to a class with at least one member, in contrast to the conditional form of hypothetical or materially implicative propositions, which are compounds of other propositions, e.g. If P, then Q, where P and Q are both propositions, and their existential impact is dependent upon further propositions where in quantification existence is instantiated (exististential instantiation).
Conversion by contraposition is the simultaneous interchange and negation of the subject and predicate, and is valid only for the type "A" and type "O" propositions of Aristotelian logic, with considerations for the validity an "E" type proposition with limitations and changes in quantity. This is considered full contraposition. Since in the process of contraposition the obverse can be obtained in all four types of traditional propositions, yielding propositions with the contradictory of the original predicate, contraposition is first obtained by converting the obvert of the original proposition. Thus, partial contraposition can be obtained conditionally in an "E" type proposition with a change in quantity. Because nothing is said in the definition of contraposition with regard to the predicate of the inferred proposition, it can be either the original subject, or its contradictory, resulting in two contrapositives which are the obverts of one another in the "A", "O", and "E" type propositions.
By example: from an original, 'A' type categorical proposition,
which presupposes that all classes have members and the existential import presumed in the form of categorical propositions, one can derive first by obversion the 'E' type proposition,
The contrapositive of the original proposition is then derived by conversion to another 'E' type proposition,
The schema of contraposition:
|Original Proposition||Obversion||Contraposition||Obverted Contraposition|
|(A) All S is P||(E) No S is non-P||↔||(E) No non-P is S||(A) All non-P is non-S|
|(E) No S is P||(A) All S is non-P||→||(I) Some non-P is S||(O) Some non-P is not non-S|
|(I) Some S is P||(O) Some S is not non-P||None||None|
|(O) Some S is not P||(I) Some S is non-P||↔||(I) Some non-P is S||(O) Some non-P is not non-S|
Notice that contraposition is a valid form of immediate inference only when applied to "A" and "O" propositions. It is not valid for "I" propositions, where the obverse is an "O" proposition which has no converse. The contraposition of the "E" proposition is valid only with limitations (per accidens). This is because the obverse of the "E" proposition is an "A" proposition which cannot be validly converted except by limitation, that is, contraposition plus a change in the quantity of the proposition from universal to particular.
Also, notice that contraposition is a method of inference which may require the use of other rules of inference. The contrapositive is the product of the method of contraposition, with different outcomes depending upon whether the contraposition is full, or partial. The successive applications of conversion and obversion within the process of contraposition may be given by a variety of names.
The process of the logical equivalence of a statement and its contrapositive as defined in traditional class logic is not one of the axioms of propositional logic. In traditional logic there is more than one contrapositive inferred from each original statement. In regard to the "A" proposition this is circumvented in the symbolism of modern logic by the rule of transposition, or the law of contraposition. In its technical usage within the field of philosophic logic, the term "contraposition" may be limited by logicians (e.g. Irving Copi, Susan Stebbing) to traditional logic and categorical propositions. In this sense the use the term "contraposition" is usually referred to by "transposition" when applied to hypothetical propositions or material implications.
Football: Loyal Fans Make It a Sour Day for the Sugar Daddies ; Sir Alex Ferguson Has Never Known Support like It. Guy Hodgson Hears the Heckles and the Roof Raised
Feb 01, 2004; Never have so many prawn sandwiches been discarded so quickly. The Stretford End implored Old Trafford to rise in support of Sir...