(3) Partial inclusion in the first and total inclusion in
the second (Disamis).
[Illustration]
Some B is A.
All B is C.
.'. some C is A.
(4) Total exclusion of the first from a term which is
wholly included in the second (Felapton).
[Illustration]
No B is A.
All B is C.
.'. some C is not A.
(5) Total exclusion of the first from a term which is
partly included in the second (Ferison).
[Illustration]
No B is A.
Some B is C.
.'. some C is not A.
(6) Exclusion of the first from part of a term which
is wholly included in the second (Bokardo).
[Illustration]
Some B is not A.
All B is C.
.'. Some C is not A.
FIGURE IV.
§ 637. CANON. If one term is wholly or partly included in another
which is wholly included in or excluded from a third, the third term
wholly or partly includes the first, or, in the case of total
inclusion, is wholly excluded from it; and if a term is excluded from
another which is wholly or partly included in a third, the third is
partly excluded from the first.
Here we have five cases--
(1) Of the inclusion of a whole term (Bramsntip).
[Illustration]
All A is B.
All B is C.
.'. Some C is (all) A.
(2) Of the inclusion of part of a term (DIMARIS).
[Illustration]
Some A is B.
All B is C.
.'. Some C is (some) A,
(3) Of the exclusion of a whole term (Camenes).
[Illustration]
All A is B.
No B is C.
.'. No C is A.
(4) Partial exclusion on the ground of including
the whole of an excluded term (Fesapo).
[Illustration]
No A is B.
All B is C.
.'. Some C is not A.
(5) Partial exclusion on the ground of including
part of an excluded term (Fresison).
[Illustration]
No A is B.
Some B is C.
.'. Some C is not A.
§ 638. It is evident from the diagrams that in the subaltern moods the
conclusion is not drawn directly from the premisses, but is an
immediate inference from the natural conclusion. Take for instance AAI
in the first figure. The natural conclusion from these premisses is
that the minor term C is wholly contained in the major term A. But
instead of drawing this conclusion we go on to infer that something
which is contained in C, namely some C, is contained in A.
[Illustration]
All B is A.
All C is B.
.'. all C is A.
.'. some C is A.
Similarly in EAO in figure 1, instead of arguing that the whole of C
is excluded from A, we draw a conclusion which really involves a
further inference, namely that part of C is excluded from A.
[Illustration]
No B is A.
All C is B.
.'. no C is A.
.'. some C is not A.
§ 639. The reason why the canons have been expressed in so cumbrous a
form is to render the validity of all the moods in each figure at once
apparent from the statement. For purposes of general convenience they
admit of a much more compendious mode of expression.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account