In Fig. III. the middle term is subject of both premises; so that, to reduce its Moods to the First Figure, it may be enough to convert the minor premise. This is the case with Darapti, Datisi, Felapton, and Ferison. But, with Disamis, since the major premise must in the First Figure be universal, we must transpose the premises, and then simply convert the new minor premise; and, lastly, since the major and minor terms have now changed places, we must simply convert the new conclusion in order to verify the old one. Thus: Disamis. Darii. Some M is P; ----\ /---> All M is S; \s./ \/ /\c. / \ All M is S: ----/ \---> Some P is M: s.c. ∴ Some S is P. <------------- ∴ Some P is S. Bocardo, like Baroco, indicates by its name the indirect process. To reduce it ostensively let its name be Doksamrosk, and proceed thus: Bocardo or Doksamrosk. Darii. Some M is not P; ----------\ /---------> All M is S; \ / \/ /\ _contrap_ / \ All M is S: ----------/ \---------> Some p (not-P) is M: _convert & obvert_ ∴ Some S is not P. <------------------------- ∴ Some p (not-P) is S. In Fig. IV. the position of the middle term is, in both premises, the reverse of what it is in the First Figure; we may therefore reduce its Moods either by transposing the premises, as with Bramantip, Camenes, and Dimaris; or by converting both premises, the course pursued with Fesapo and Fresison. It may suffice to illustrate by the case of Bramantip: Bramantip. Barbara. All P is M; ----------\ /------> All M is S; \/ /\ All M is S: ----------/ \------> All P is M: convert per acc. ∴ Some S is P. <----------------------- ∴ All P is S. This case shows that a final significant consonant (s, p, or sk) in the name of any Mood refers to the conclusion of the new syllogism in the First Figure; since p in Bramantip cannot refer to that Mood's own conclusion in I.; which, being already particular, cannot be converted _per accidens_. Finally, in Fig. I., Darii and Ferio differ respectively from Barbara and Celarent only in this, that their minor premises, and consequently their conclusions, are subaltern to the corresponding propositions of the universal Moods; a difference which seems insufficient to give them rank as distinct forms of demonstration. And as for Barbara and Celarent, they are easily reducible to one another by obverting their major premises and the new conclusions, thus: