UP

Aristotle - The Organon - index for ANALYTICA POSTERIORA Book 2 Part 6

The definable form must not fall within the syllogism

  
Paragraph 1 Can we nevertheless actually demonstrate what a thing essentially and substantially is, but hypothetically, i.e. by premising (1) that its definable form is constituted by the 'peculiar' attributes of its essential nature;
Paragraph 2 Further, just as in syllogizing we do not premise what syllogistic inference is (since the premisses from which we conclude must be related as whole and part), so the definable form must not fall within the syllogism but remain outside the premisses posited.
Paragraph 3 The following type of hypothetical proof also begs the question.
Paragraph 4 Again, both proof by division and the syllogism just described are open to the question why man should be animal-biped-terrestrial and not merely animal and terrestrial, since what they premise does not ensure that the predicates shall constitute a genuine unity and not merely belong to a single subject as do musical and grammatical when predicated of the same man.


UPHOME HTML by RBJ created 1996/11/25 modified 2009/04/26