Existential instantiation. Grump in his dianoetic of categorical syllogism has strayed from the accepted traditional logic standards and his conclusion is invalid because it has two universal premises and a particular conclusion, however, for the conclusion to be true, at least one member of the class must exist. Inductive reasoning is predicated by facts determined by repeated observations. From the argument, there exists no exculpatory evidence to suggest any attempt at observing and annotatiing of recurring phenomenal patterns. This leads one to the conclusion that the falsity of his antecedent prevents us from using the conditional to infer the consequent. This question is not a tautology. His commutation of conditionals and refusal to use logical biconditionals result in his disambiguation. Does the CaneyFork column truly exist?