Book, Paragraph

 1      I,  1 |            implicit in the clearly known particular. Again, the persuasion
 2      I,  1 |          therein already virtually known. For example, the student
 3      I,  2 |         primary, immediate, better known than and prior to the conclusion,
 4      I,  2 |       demonstration in order to be known, since to have knowledge,
 5      I,  2 |          of the conclusion, better known than it, and prior to it;
 6      I,  2 |            be causes; antecedently known, this antecedent knowledge
 7      I,  2 |            Now "prior" and "better known" are ambiguous terms, for
 8      I,  2 |           what is prior and better known in the order of being and
 9      I,  2 |           what is prior and better known to man. I mean that objects
10      I,  2 |         sense are prior and better known to man; objects without
11      I,  2 |     qualification prior and better known are those further from sense.
12      I,  2 |          be more certain or better known to him than these basic
13      I,  3 |      premisses prior to and better known than the conclusion; and
14      I,  3 |        proceeds from truths better known to us, is not demonstration
15      I,  4 |          connexions scientifically known in the unqualified sense
16      I,  8 |            can be demonstrated nor known by strictly scientific knowledge
17      I,  10|            equals remain", is well known and so not expressly assumed.
18      I,  12|            and such facts actually known to me to exist, which we
19      I,  13|            of the cause the better known of the two reciprocals is
20      I,  13|         quite easily be the better known and so become the middle
21      I,  13|           the effect is the better known, the fact is demonstrated
22      I,  22|            if a consequent is only known through an antecedent (viz.
23      I,  25|         all these are equally well known, where they are fewer knowledge
24      I,  25|         alike the middle terms are known, and that middles which
25      I,  25|         which are prior are better known than such as are posterior,
26      I,  25|       through F and G. Then A-D is known to the same degree as A-E (
27      I,  25|          proof), but A-D is better known than and prior to A-E (in
28      I,  25|        truth is proved is a better known and more certain truth,
29      I,  25|             being prior and better known and more certain, will be
30      I,  25| proposition is prior to and better known than the negative (since
31      I,  26|          This we have to suppose a known and admitted impossibility;
32      I,  26|         propositions is the better known, the one denying A of B
33      I,  26|           conclusion is the better known, we use reductio ad impossible;
34      I,  26|         which proceeds from better known and prior premisses, and
35     II,  8 |          is discovered and becomes known, and we see that, while
36     II,  8 |            distinct from itself be known without demonstration, nor
37     II,  16|          shows that the eclipse is known through the interposition
38     II,  19|         premisses, how they become known and what is the developed