登陆注册
26264800000007

第7章 6

But if one term belongs to all, and another to none, of a third, or if both belong to all, or to none, of it, I call such a figure the third; by middle term in it I mean that of which both the predicates are predicated, by extremes I mean the predicates, by the major extreme that which is further from the middle, by the minor that which is nearer to it. The middle term stands outside the extremes, and is last in position. A syllogism cannot be perfect in this figure either, but it may be valid whether the terms are related universally or not to the middle term.

If they are universal, whenever both P and R belong to S, it follows that P will necessarily belong to some R. For, since the affirmative statement is convertible, S will belong to some R: consequently since P belongs to all S, and S to some R, P must belong to some R: for a syllogism in the first figure is produced. It is possible to demonstrate this also per impossibile and by exposition. For if both P and R belong to all S, should one of the Ss, e.g. N, be taken, both P and R will belong to this, and thus P will belong to some R.

If R belongs to all S, and P to no S, there will be a syllogism to prove that P will necessarily not belong to some R. This may be demonstrated in the same way as before by converting the premiss RS.

It might be proved also per impossibile, as in the former cases. But if R belongs to no S, P to all S, there will be no syllogism. Terms for the positive relation are animal, horse, man: for the negative relation animal, inanimate, man.

Nor can there be a syllogism when both terms are asserted of no S.

Terms for the positive relation are animal, horse, inanimate; for the negative relation man, horse, inanimate-inanimate being the middle term.

It is clear then in this figure also when a syllogism will be possible and when not, if the terms are related universally. For whenever both the terms are affirmative, there will be a syllogism to prove that one extreme belongs to some of the other; but when they are negative, no syllogism will be possible. But when one is negative, the other affirmative, if the major is negative, the minor affirmative, there will be a syllogism to prove that the one extreme does not belong to some of the other: but if the relation is reversed, no syllogism will be possible. If one term is related universally to the middle, the other in part only, when both are affirmative there must be a syllogism, no matter which of the premisses is universal.

For if R belongs to all S, P to some S, P must belong to some R. For since the affirmative statement is convertible S will belong to some P: consequently since R belongs to all S, and S to some P, R must also belong to some P: therefore P must belong to some R.

Again if R belongs to some S, and P to all S, P must belong to some R. This may be demonstrated in the same way as the preceding. And it is possible to demonstrate it also per impossibile and by exposition, as in the former cases. But if one term is affirmative, the other negative, and if the affirmative is universal, a syllogism will be possible whenever the minor term is affirmative. For if R belongs to all S, but P does not belong to some S, it is necessary that P does not belong to some R. For if P belongs to all R, and R belongs to all S, then P will belong to all S: but we assumed that it did not. Proof is possible also without reduction ad impossibile, if one of the Ss be taken to which P does not belong.

But whenever the major is affirmative, no syllogism will be possible, e.g. if P belongs to all S and R does not belong to some S. Terms for the universal affirmative relation are animate, man, animal. For the universal negative relation it is not possible to get terms, if R belongs to some S, and does not belong to some S.

For if P belongs to all S, and R to some S, then P will belong to some R: but we assumed that it belongs to no R. We must put the matter as before.' Since the expression 'it does not belong to some' is indefinite, it may be used truly of that also which belongs to none.

But if R belongs to no S, no syllogism is possible, as has been shown.

Clearly then no syllogism will be possible here.

But if the negative term is universal, whenever the major is negative and the minor affirmative there will be a syllogism. For if P belongs to no S, and R belongs to some S, P will not belong to some R: for we shall have the first figure again, if the premiss RS is converted.

But when the minor is negative, there will be no syllogism. Terms for the positive relation are animal, man, wild: for the negative relation, animal, science, wild-the middle in both being the term wild.

Nor is a syllogism possible when both are stated in the negative, but one is universal, the other particular. When the minor is related universally to the middle, take the terms animal, science, wild; animal, man, wild. When the major is related universally to the middle, take as terms for a negative relation raven, snow, white. For a positive relation terms cannot be found, if R belongs to some S, and does not belong to some S. For if P belongs to all R, and R to some S, then P belongs to some S: but we assumed that it belongs to no S. Our point, then, must be proved from the indefinite nature of the particular statement.

Nor is a syllogism possible anyhow, if each of the extremes belongs to some of the middle or does not belong, or one belongs and the other does not to some of the middle, or one belongs to some of the middle, the other not to all, or if the premisses are indefinite. Common terms for all are animal, man, white: animal, inanimate, white.

It is clear then in this figure also when a syllogism will be possible, and when not; and that if the terms are as stated, a syllogism results of necessity, and if there is a syllogism, the terms must be so related. It is clear also that all the syllogisms in this figure are imperfect (for all are made perfect by certain supplementary assumptions), and that it will not be possible to reach a universal conclusion by means of this figure, whether negative or affirmative.

同类推荐
热门推荐
  • 天衍异世风云

    天衍异世风云

    千万年前,一人一剑,缔造了修炼界最惊悚的灭世传说!时空轮转,风云交替,不变的,是世人亘古永恒的末日阴霾……当来自异世的他重获那恶魔般的天才体质,从此被推向了修炼界不死不休的对立面,茫茫天衍,举世皆敌,风声鹤唳,草木成兵!恐惧?绝望?当一个个伙伴毅然决然的站到身旁,横眉笑谈生死,这一刻,所有的软弱化成了无穷的力量。为什么而活着?为了爱我的人!为什么而杀戮?为了我爱的人!为了所有爱我及我爱的人,纵然举世皆敌,我亦一往无前,让杀戮,纵情肆虐吧!!一个个性格鲜明的人物,一段段可歌可泣的热血故事,命运的羁绊,让性格各异的伙伴踏上了同一征程!不败热血,永恒经典,一切精彩,尽在《天衍异世风云》
  • 机甲之死神星空

    机甲之死神星空

    以高达为蓝本的机战类科幻军事小说。人类的战线上,巨大的机甲将主宰战场的主旋律,成为交战双方攻城略地的利器。这些人造的巨型武器将把战争拖入到一个新的局势。在庞大而激烈的战场上总是会有英雄引导着士兵,雷。迈克斯威尔,作为联邦第一机甲王牌,和自己的死神小队同联邦普通的士兵一起,战斗在战场的第一线。
  • 绝品童养婿

    绝品童养婿

    命途多舛,孤儿赵轲被收为童养婿,与李小月定下娃娃亲。因为年少时的一场意外,赵轲身获异能,不料这异能却要噬其性命。前途未卜,命格已缺,少年赘婿该如何堪破死局,自掌天命。恶势力的黑暗,杀手世界的阴郁,异能圈的神秘诡异,赵轲到底命在何方?娇艳美妇,爆乳萝莉,都市丽人,绝色校花,纯情教师……赵轲将会情归何处?李小月,你是我的!赵轲眼神邪魅,守卫自己的娃娃亲,一夫当关,万狼莫开!咱跟媳妇谈恋爱!一样的世界,不一样的命运!热血乾坤,谁言赘婿无傲骨!且看赘婿赵轲如何肆意人生。脚踏九州,遍赏群芳,赘婿也风流!
  • 异界超级药贩

    异界超级药贩

    现代社会中的高级11贩子,无意中被外星人选作实验标本送到异世星耀大陆。茫然中的刘清忽然发现自己有了一个新的身份——星耀大陆天龙帝国隆庆太子。11贩子竟然是处男之身,本来就够怪异的,宁愿舍弃帝位,甘心做一名小小的药贩,更是把怪异演绎到了极点。崇尚自由个性的刘清,在抵抗兽人王国的进攻中,竟然异想天开的提出领军出征,并且硬是凭借自己的努力达成了自己的心愿。这里是魔法的世界,这里是强者的天堂。又是一个我命由我不由天的自强者,又是一曲可歌可泣的英雄赞歌。支持刘清,支持紫云。有兴趣的朋友,请加QQ群:91634530,共同关注刘清的命运。
  • 魔帝绝宠小萌妻

    魔帝绝宠小萌妻

    她是王母瑶池里遗落凡间的遗珠,她是21世纪顶级美容师,一朝穿越附在她身上的灵魂!他是魔族的最高执掌者,因为一次机缘巧合,他莫名其妙的把她吃干抹尽了...从此将她禁锢在身边!他宠她宠到骨子里,她亦爱他爱到忘乎所以!当她认为自己是世界上幸福的女人的时候,他却要剖她的腹,取她体内的那颗与十二灵珠相为紧密的辰珠!那一刻她终于知道,她的出现只是为了他要救另一个女人...他宠爱自己是另有阴谋...然,他与她,却有着宿世的命运纠缠,当记忆苏醒,方知他就是前世杀死自己的凶手,芳心遗落,她该如何抉择,是忘记前尘与他睇睨天下,还是前世仇,今生恨,一起报...
  • 绝色冥妻

    绝色冥妻

    在农村,自古都有闹洞房的习俗!哥哥的婚礼上,伴娘惨被蹂躏,上吊自杀。却在半夜回来找我,说她要嫁给我!
  • 快穿之公主绝色

    快穿之公主绝色

    苏沁本贵为公主,因从十五岁起便随父皇四处征战而被誉为“铁面公主”却因为一个穿越女子的出现,惨死在心爱的男人手中。当她再次睁开眼时,却发现自己身处在一座竹林间的小屋之中,神秘的男子要求她收集魂源,便能重生一世。于是......一场场穿越之旅开始了。每周五,周六,周日更新,如无意外情况一天两更,有事一更。卡卡文笔不好,希望大家提出宝贵的意见!
  • 春雪

    春雪

    本书为公版书,为不受著作权法限制的作家、艺术家及其它人士发布的作品,供广大读者阅读交流。
  • 豪门强娶,首席步步逼婚

    豪门强娶,首席步步逼婚

    顾铭希,顾氏集团的传奇人物。12岁出道,以铁血手腕迅速成为世界首席总裁。为人冷酷霸道,他说一,从来没有人敢说二。离梦如,一名公司普通的小职员,并且也是被人收养的弃婴,由于父亲欠下巨额赌债,母亲重病缠身,不得已去酒吧打工赚钱。如果爱一个人,到最后的结局一定是支离破碎,残缺不全。那么,我宁愿,自己从来没有真正爱过你。
  • 凝眸只为你

    凝眸只为你

    我们从误会开始,又从误会结束,缘起缘落,酒醒终究是一场梦,但却无悔,用一切换取你的回眸,今生甘愿沉沦在爱的泥泞里,从此以后,你于天涯,我于海角。――凝柠如果爱可以从来,那么凝眸只为你。――南易