FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149  
150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   >>   >|  
_Canon V._ If one premiss is negative, the conclusion must be negative. If one premiss is negative, one of the Extremes must be excluded in whole or in part from the Middle term. The other must therefore (under Canon IV.) declare some coincidence between the Middle term and the other extreme; and the conclusion can only affirm exclusion in whole or in part from the area of this coincidence. _Canon VI._ No conclusion can be drawn from two particular premisses. This is evident upon a comparison of terms in all possible positions, but it can be more easily demonstrated with the help of the preceding canons. The premisses cannot both be particular and yield a conclusion without breaking one or other of those canons. Suppose both are affirmative, II, the Middle is not distributed in either premiss. Suppose one affirmative and the other negative, IO, or OI. Then, whatever the Figure may be, that is, whatever the order of the terms, only one term can be distributed, namely, the predicate of O. This (Canon II.) must be the Middle. But in that case there must be Illicit Process of the Major (Canon III.), for one of the premisses being negative, the conclusion is negative (Canon V.), and P its predicate is distributed. Briefly, in a negative mood, both Major and Middle must be distributed, and if both premisses are particular this cannot be. _Canon VII._ If one Premiss is particular the conclusion is particular. This canon is sometimes combined with what we have given as Canon V., in a single rule: "The conclusion follows the weaker premiss". It can most compendiously be demonstrated with the help of the preceding canons. Suppose both premisses affirmative, then, if one is particular, only one term can be distributed in the premisses, namely, the subject of the Universal affirmative premiss. By Canon II., this must be the Middle, and the Minor, being undistributed in the Premisses, cannot be distributed in the conclusion. That is, the conclusion cannot be Universal--must be particular. Suppose one Premiss negative, the other affirmative. One premiss being negative, the conclusion must be negative, and P must be distributed in the conclusion. Before, then, the conclusion can be universal, all three terms, S, M, and P, must, by Canons II. and III., be distributed in the premisses. But whatever the Figure of the premisses, only two terms can be distributed. For if one of the Premisses be O, the other must
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149  
150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

conclusion

 

negative

 

distributed

 
premisses
 
Middle
 

premiss

 
affirmative
 

Suppose


canons

 

demonstrated

 
preceding
 

Premiss

 

Figure

 

Universal

 

coincidence

 
predicate

Premisses

 

combined

 

Briefly

 
subject
 

Before

 
universal
 

undistributed

 

Canons


single

 

compendiously

 

weaker

 
exclusion
 

evident

 

comparison

 

affirm

 

extreme


excluded

 

Extremes

 

declare

 

positions

 

Process

 

Illicit

 

easily

 

breaking