Reference address : https://ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/ancient-greece/aristotle/prior-analytics.asp?pg=34

ELPENOR - Home of the Greek Word

Three Millennia of Greek Literature
ARISTOTLE HOME PAGE  /  ARISTOTLE WORKS  /  SEARCH ARISTOTLE WORKS  

Aristotle PRIOR ANALYTICS Complete

Translated by A. Jenkinson.

Aristotle Bilingual Anthology  Studies  Aristotle in Print

ELPENOR EDITIONS IN PRINT

The Original Greek New Testament
109 pages - You are on Page 34

Part 19

If one of the premisses is necessary, the other problematic, then if the negative is necessary a syllogistic conclusion can be drawn, not merely a negative problematic but also a negative assertoric conclusion; but if the affirmative premiss is necessary, no conclusion is possible. Suppose that A necessarily belongs to no B, but may belong to all C. If the negative premiss is converted B will belong to no A: but A ex hypothesi is capable of belonging to all C: so once more a conclusion is drawn by the first figure that B may belong to no C. But at the same time it is clear that B will not belong to any C. For assume that it does: then if A cannot belong to any B, and B belongs to some of the Cs, A cannot belong to some of the Cs: but ex hypothesi it may belong to all. A similar proof can be given if the minor premiss is negative. Again let the affirmative proposition be necessary, and the other problematic; i.e. suppose that A may belong to no B, but necessarily belongs to all C. When the terms are arranged in this way, no syllogism is possible. For (1) it sometimes turns out that B necessarily does not belong to C. Let A be white, B man, C swan. White then necessarily belongs to swan, but may belong to no man; and man necessarily belongs to no swan; Clearly then we cannot draw a problematic conclusion; for that which is necessary is admittedly distinct from that which is possible. (2) Nor again can we draw a necessary conclusion: for that presupposes that both premisses are necessary, or at any rate the negative premiss. (3) Further it is possible also, when the terms are so arranged, that B should belong to C: for nothing prevents C falling under B, A being possible for all B, and necessarily belonging to C; e.g. if C stands for 'awake', B for 'animal', A for 'motion'. For motion necessarily belongs to what is awake, and is possible for every animal: and everything that is awake is animal. Clearly then the conclusion cannot be the negative assertion, if the relation must be positive when the terms are related as above. Nor can the opposite affirmations be established: consequently no syllogism is possible. A similar proof is possible if the major premiss is affirmative.

Previous Page / First / Next Page of PRIOR ANALYTICS
Aristotle Home Page ||| Search Aristotle's works

Plato ||| Other Greek Philosophers ||| Elpenor's Free Greek Lessons

Development of Greek Philosophy ||| History of Greek Philosophy ||| History of Ancient Greece
Three Millennia of Greek Literature

 

Greek Literature - Ancient, Medieval, Modern

  Aristotle Complete Works   Aristotle Home Page & Bilingual Anthology
Aristotle in Print

Elpenor's Greek Forum : Post a question / Start a discussion

Learned Freeware

Reference address : https://ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/ancient-greece/aristotle/prior-analytics.asp?pg=34