_Consequent._ _Antecedent._ 5. I will go, unless you wire me to the contrary. 6. I will pay you, when you present your bill. 7. I shall make the trip in granted that I have no accidents. ten hours, 8. My overcoat would not have if the door had been locked. been stolen, =4. TWO KINDS OF HYPOTHETICAL ARGUMENTS.= The two kinds of hypothetical syllogisms are the _constructive_ and _destructive_. _A constructive hypothetical syllogism is one in which the minor premise affirms the antecedent._ _A destructive hypothetical syllogism is one in which the minor premise denies the consequent._ The constructive hypothetical is sometimes referred to as the “_modus ponens_”; whereas the destructive hypothetical is called the “_modus tollens_.” ILLUSTRATIONS: _Constructive_ Hypothetical Syllogisms. _Symbols._ _Words._ If A is B, C is D If you are diligent, you will succeed; A is B And you _are_ diligent, ∴ C is D Therefore you will succeed. _Destructive_ Hypothetical Syllogisms. If A is B, C is D If you had been diligent, you would have succeeded; C is not D But you did not succeed, ∴ A is not B Therefore you were not diligent. =5. THE RULE AND TWO FALLACIES OF THE HYPOTHETICAL ARGUMENT.= From a given hypothetical proposition it is possible to construct _four_ different hypothetical syllogisms, as the attending illustrations make evident: Consider the hypothetical proposition “If it has rained, the ground is damp.” (1) Minor premise affirms antecedent. If it has rained, the ground is damp; It has rained, Therefore the ground is damp. (2) Minor premise denies antecedent. If it has rained, the ground is damp; It has not rained, Therefore the ground is not damp. (3) Minor premise affirms consequent. If it has rained, the ground is damp; The ground is damp, Therefore it has rained. (4) Minor premise denies the consequent. If it has rained, the ground is damp; The ground is not damp, Therefore it has not rained.