FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   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   >>   >|  
bus (S) is not a wise man (P). In this example, instead of P being predicated of M, M is predicated of P, and yet S is given as included not in P, but in M. The divergence of such a syllogism from the _Dictum_ may, however, be easily shown to be superficial by writing, instead of _No wise man fears death_, the simple, converse, _No man who fears death is wise_. Again: Some dogs (M) are friendly to man (P); All dogs (M) are carnivores (S): .'. Some carnivores (S) are friendly to man (P). Here P is predicated of M undistributed; and instead of S being included in M, M is included in S: so that the divergence from the type of syllogism to which the _Dictum_ directly applies is still greater than in the former case. But if we transpose the premises, taking first All dogs (M) are carnivores (P), then P is predicated of M distributed; and, simply converting the other premise, we get-- Some things friendly to man (S) are dogs (M): whence it follows that-- Some things friendly to man (S) are carnivores (P); and this is the simple converse of the original conclusion. Once more: No pigs (P) are philosophers (M); Some philosophers (M) are hedonists (S): .'. Some hedonists (S) are not pigs (P). In this case, instead of P being predicated of M distributed, M is predicated of P distributed; and instead of S (or part of it) being included in M, we are told that some M is included in S. Still there is no real difficulty. Simply convert both the premises, and we have: No philosophers (M) are pigs (P); Some hedonists (S) are philosophers (M). Whence the same conclusion follows; and the whole syllogism plainly conforms directly to the _Dictum_. Such departures as these from the normal syllogistic form are said to constitute differences of Figure (see Sec. 2); and the processes by which they are shown to be unessential differences are called Reduction (see Sec. 6). Sec. 2. Figure is determined by the position of the Middle Term in the premises; of which position there are four possible variations. The middle term may be subject of the major premise, and predicate of the minor, as in the first example above; and this position, being directly conformable to the requirements of the _Dictum_, is called the First Figure. Or the middle term may be predicate of both premises, as in the second of the above examples; and this is called the Second Figure. Or
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   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   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

predicated

 

included

 

friendly

 

Dictum

 
Figure
 

philosophers

 

premises

 

carnivores

 
distributed
 

called


hedonists
 
syllogism
 

position

 

directly

 

conclusion

 

differences

 

premise

 

things

 

middle

 

simple


divergence
 

converse

 

predicate

 

syllogistic

 

normal

 

subject

 
examples
 
departures
 

Second

 
plainly

conforms

 

constitute

 
variations
 

processes

 

unessential

 
determined
 
Whence
 

Middle

 

conformable

 

requirements


Reduction

 

undistributed

 

applies

 
greater
 

writing

 
superficial
 

easily

 

transpose

 

convert

 
Simply