Book, Paragraph

  1      I, 2 |         these three kinds some are affirmative, others negative, in respect
  2      I, 2 |            attribution; again some affirmative and negative premisses are
  3      I, 2 |         pleasure; the terms of the affirmative must be convertible, not
  4      I, 2 |           pleasure; the particular affirmative must convert in part (for
  5      I, 3 |            potential is possible), affirmative statements will all convert
  6      I, 3 |            A or some B is not A is affirmative in form: for the expression "
  7      I, 3 |         will behave like the other affirmative propositions.~
  8      I, 4 |          an example of a universal affirmative relation between the extremes
  9      I, 4 |    indefinite, provided that it is affirmative: for we shall have the same
 10      I, 4 |      premiss is universal, whether affirmative or negative, and the minor
 11      I, 4 |         one negative and the other affirmative, or one indefinite and the
 12      I, 4 |          universal and particular, affirmative and negative. Such a figure
 13      I, 5 |        negative, the particular is affirmative: if the universal is affirmative,
 14      I, 5 |   affirmative: if the universal is affirmative, the particular is negative.
 15      I, 5 |         mean both negative or both affirmative, a syllogism will not be
 16      I, 5 |         Again let the premisses be affirmative, and let the major premiss
 17      I, 5 |           illustrate the universal affirmative relation, for the reason
 18      I, 5 |        raven. If the premisses are affirmative, terms for the negative
 19      I, 5 |          And it is evident that an affirmative conclusion is not attained
 20      I, 6 |          to some R. For, since the affirmative statement is convertible,
 21      I, 6 |        whenever both the terms are affirmative, there will be a syllogism
 22      I, 6 |         one is negative, the other affirmative, if the major is negative,
 23      I, 6 |       major is negative, the minor affirmative, there will be a syllogism
 24      I, 6 |           part only, when both are affirmative there must be a syllogism,
 25      I, 6 |           to some R. For since the affirmative statement is convertible
 26      I, 6 |          cases. But if one term is affirmative, the other negative, and
 27      I, 6 |         other negative, and if the affirmative is universal, a syllogism
 28      I, 6 |         whenever the minor term is affirmative. For if R belongs to all
 29      I, 6 |          But whenever the major is affirmative, no syllogism will be possible,
 30      I, 6 |            Terms for the universal affirmative relation are animate, man,
 31      I, 6 |          is negative and the minor affirmative there will be a syllogism.
 32      I, 6 |        figure, whether negative or affirmative.~
 33      I, 7 |      result, if both the terms are affirmative or negative nothing necessary
 34      I, 7 |      follows at all, but if one is affirmative, the other negative, and
 35      I, 7 |        indefinite for a particular affirmative will effect the same syllogism
 36      I, 8 |         the universal statement is affirmative, and the particular negative,
 37      I, 8 |       figure when the universal is affirmative and the particular negative,
 38      I, 9 |   universal premiss is negative or affirmative. First let the universal
 39      I, 10|           be necessary, but if the affirmative, not necessary. First let
 40      I, 10|           the relation.~But if the affirmative premiss is necessary, the
 41      I, 10|        necessary: but whenever the affirmative premiss is universal, the
 42      I, 10|           of the Cs. Again let the affirmative premiss be both universal
 43      I, 10|           let the major premiss be affirmative. If then A necessarily belongs
 44      I, 11|             and both premisses are affirmative, if one of the two is necessary,
 45      I, 11|         one is negative, the other affirmative, whenever the negative is
 46      I, 11|        necessary, but whenever the affirmative is necessary the conclusion
 47      I, 11|          let both the premisses be affirmative, and let A and B belong
 48      I, 11|       Again let AC be negative, BC affirmative, and let the negative premiss
 49      I, 11|           B is under C. But if the affirmative is necessary, the conclusion
 50      I, 11|       necessary. For suppose BC is affirmative and necessary, while AC
 51      I, 11|          necessary. Since then the affirmative is convertible, C also will
 52      I, 11|        particular, and if both are affirmative, whenever the universal
 53      I, 11|         before; for the particular affirmative also is convertible. If
 54      I, 11|   necessary.~But if one premiss is affirmative, the other negative, whenever
 55      I, 11|           some B. But whenever the affirmative proposition is necessary,
 56      I, 11|         wanted, when the universal affirmative is necessary, take the terms "
 57      I, 11|         being middle, and when the affirmative is particular and necessary,
 58      I, 12|         whether the syllogisms are affirmative or negative, it is necessary
 59      I, 13|       another. I mean not that the affirmative are convertible into the
 60      I, 13|           but that those which are affirmative in form admit of conversion
 61      I, 13|             And such premisses are affirmative and not negative; for "to
 62      I, 14|     negative, and the universal is affirmative, the major still being universal
 63      I, 14|        universal, whether both are affirmative, or negative, or different
 64      I, 14|          or of the second. For the affirmative is destroyed by the negative,
 65      I, 14|            and the negative by the affirmative. There remains the proof
 66      I, 14|           figure, whether they are affirmative or negative, only a perfect
 67      I, 15|    negative, and the premiss BC is affirmative, the former stating possible,
 68      I, 15|          premiss AB is negative or affirmative. As common instances of
 69      I, 15|           and problematic, whether affirmative or negative, and the particular
 70      I, 15|    negative, and the particular is affirmative and assertoric, there will
 71      I, 15|          premisses are negative or affirmative, or one is negative, the
 72      I, 15|         one is negative, the other affirmative, in all cases there will
 73      I, 15|      either premiss is negative or affirmative, problematic or assertoric,
 74      I, 16|    necessary. If the premisses are affirmative the conclusion will be problematic,
 75      I, 16|    universal or not: but if one is affirmative, the other negative, when
 76      I, 16|           other negative, when the affirmative is necessary the conclusion
 77      I, 16|      belong".~If the premisses are affirmative, clearly the conclusion
 78      I, 16|           inferred. Again, let the affirmative premiss be necessary, and
 79      I, 16|            But when the particular affirmative in the negative syllogism,
 80      I, 16|       universal proposition in the affirmative syllogism, e.g. AB the major
 81      I, 16|           and problematic, whether affirmative or negative, and the major
 82      I, 16|            and if the universal is affirmative we may take the terms animal-white-swan
 83      I, 17|          whether the premisses are affirmative or negative, universal or
 84      I, 17|          other problematic, if the affirmative is assertoric no syllogism
 85      I, 17|            and this must be either affirmative or negative. But neither
 86      I, 17|          Suppose the conclusion is affirmative: it will be proved by an
 87      I, 17|     premiss is negative, the minor affirmative, or if both are affirmative
 88      I, 17|        affirmative, or if both are affirmative or negative. The demonstration
 89      I, 18|          other problematic, if the affirmative is assertoric and the negative
 90      I, 18|           same terms. But when the affirmative premiss is problematic,
 91      I, 18|   converted into its complementary affirmative a syllogism is formed to
 92      I, 18|          But if both premisses are affirmative, no syllogism will be possible.
 93      I, 18|           particular. Whenever the affirmative proposition is assertoric,
 94      I, 18|     premiss into its complementary affirmative as before. But if the negative
 95      I, 18|       whether the other premiss is affirmative or negative. Nor can a conclusion
 96      I, 18|            are indefinite, whether affirmative or negative, or particular.
 97      I, 19|  assertoric conclusion; but if the affirmative premiss is necessary, no
 98      I, 19|            negative. Again let the affirmative proposition be necessary,
 99      I, 19|            if the major premiss is affirmative.~But if the premisses are
100      I, 19|     premiss into its complementary affirmative as before. Suppose A necessarily
101      I, 19|           But if the premisses are affirmative there cannot be a syllogism.
102      I, 19|          conversion); but when the affirmative proposition is universal
103      I, 19|            when both premisses are affirmative: this also may be proved
104      I, 19|   converted into its complementary affirmative. But if both are indefinite
105      I, 19|            proposition; but if the affirmative premiss is necessary no
106      I, 20|     premiss is necessary, if it is affirmative the conclusion will be neither
107      I, 20|            every C. Since then the affirmative proposition is convertible
108      I, 20|             and the proposition BC affirmative: for we shall again have
109      I, 20|            no B. To illustrate the affirmative relation take the terms
110      I, 21|         First let the premisses be affirmative: suppose that A belongs
111      I, 21|           or if AC is negative, BC affirmative, no matter which of the
112      I, 21|     particular, then when both are affirmative, or when the universal is
113      I, 21|           negative, the particular affirmative, we shall have the same
114      I, 21| syllogistic conclusion. But if the affirmative premiss is universal, the
115      I, 22|             when the premisses are affirmative a problematic affirmative
116      I, 22|          affirmative a problematic affirmative conclusion can always be
117      I, 22|            when one proposition is affirmative, the other negative, if
118      I, 22|         the other negative, if the affirmative is necessary a problematic
119      I, 22|       first that the premisses are affirmative, i.e. that A necessarily
120      I, 22|         suppose one proposition is affirmative, the other negative, the
121      I, 22|            the other negative, the affirmative being necessary: i.e. suppose
122      I, 22|            belong to all C. If the affirmative proposition BC is converted,
123      I, 22|     premiss into its complementary affirmative, as before; but if it is
124      I, 22|        part. If both premisses are affirmative, the conclusion will be
125      I, 22|     premiss is negative, the other affirmative, the latter being necessary.
126      I, 24|           of the premisses must be affirmative, and universality must be
127      I, 24|           I mean not only in being affirmative or negative, but also in
128      I, 26|          to attempt. The universal affirmative is proved by means of the
129      I, 26|      second in two. The particular affirmative is proved through the first
130      I, 26|            then that the universal affirmative is most difficult to establish,
131      I, 28|         figure with both premisses affirmative: if the antecedents of A
132      I, 45|         and A to all C. But if the affirmative statement concerns B, and
133      I, 45|            to some C. But when the affirmative statement concerns the major
134      I, 45|            C. Since the particular affirmative is convertible, C will belong
135      I, 45|       negative: for the particular affirmative is convertible: therefore
136      I, 45|        statement is universal, the affirmative particular: for A will belong
137     II, 1 |          particular syllogisms the affirmative yield more than one, the
138     II, 2 |           is wholly false, whether affirmative or negative, and the other
139     II, 3 |            same terms. Also if the affirmative premiss is partially false,
140     II, 3 |     Similarly if the premiss AB is affirmative: for it is possible that
141     II, 3 |           is stated universally is affirmative. For it is possible that
142     II, 3 |           the universal premiss is affirmative and the particular negative.
143     II, 4 |     premiss is negative, the other affirmative. For it is possible that
144     II, 4 |          the premisses assumed are affirmative, the conclusion may be true.
145     II, 4 |     premiss is negative, the other affirmative. For since it is possible
146     II, 6 |           not possible to prove an affirmative proposition in this way,
147     II, 6 |      proposition may be proved. An affirmative proposition is not proved
148     II, 6 |          the new syllogism are not affirmative (for the conclusion is negative)
149     II, 6 |     conclusion is negative) but an affirmative proposition is (as we saw)
150     II, 6 |           premisses which are both affirmative. The negative is proved
151     II, 6 |            negative, and the other affirmative, we shall have the first
152     II, 6 |         the universal statement is affirmative. Let A belong to all B,
153     II, 7 |          the premisses assumed are affirmative, and the universal concerns
154     II, 7 |            whenever one premiss is affirmative the other negative, and
155     II, 7 |            other negative, and the affirmative is universal, the other
156     II, 7 |        figure-if the conclusion is affirmative through the first; if the
157     II, 8 |   particular. Let the syllogism be affirmative, and let it be converted
158     II, 9 |         the universal statement is affirmative.~
159     II, 10|         belong to some B, BC being affirmative, AC being negative: for
160     II, 10|       other premiss particular and affirmative. If then A belongs to all
161     II, 11|            excepting the universal affirmative, which is proved in the
162     II, 11|            no B. But the universal affirmative is not necessarily true
163     II, 11|           clear that the universal affirmative cannot be proved in the
164     II, 11|    impossibile.~But the particular affirmative and the universal and particular
165     II, 11|            is false, the universal affirmative should be true, nor is it
166     II, 12|      problems except the universal affirmative are proved per impossibile.
167     II, 13|            in the middle figure an affirmative conclusion, and in the last
168     II, 14|          whether the conclusion is affirmative or negative; the method
169     II, 14|         negative in the middle, if affirmative in the last. Whenever the
170     II, 14|       first and middle figures, if affirmative in first, if negative in
171     II, 15|           possible, viz. universal affirmative to universal negative, universal
172     II, 15|      universal negative, universal affirmative to particular negative,
173     II, 15|    particular negative, particular affirmative to universal negative, and
174     II, 15|           negative, and particular affirmative to particular negative:
175     II, 15|          three: for the particular affirmative is only verbally opposed
176     II, 15|          contraries, the universal affirmative and the universal negative,
177     II, 15|        figure no syllogism whether affirmative or negative can be made
178     II, 15|           of opposed premisses: no affirmative syllogism is possible because
179     II, 15|     because both premisses must be affirmative, but opposites are, the
180     II, 15|         but opposites are, the one affirmative, the other negative: no
181     II, 15|          are reversed: before, the affirmative statement concerned B, now
182     II, 15|             In the third figure an affirmative syllogism can never be made
183     II, 15|           are three oppositions to affirmative statements, it follows that
184     II, 15|          may have either universal affirmative and negative, or universal
185     II, 15|         and negative, or universal affirmative and particular negative,
186     II, 15|            negative, or particular affirmative and universal negative,
187     II, 16|        though, if the syllogism is affirmative, only in the third and first
188     II, 20|      alternate (one, I mean, being affirmative, the other negative). For
189     II, 20|           the terms are related in affirmative propositions or one proposition
190     II, 20| propositions or one proposition is affirmative, the other negative: consequently,
191     II, 22|       moods do not do so as in the affirmative syllogism. Again if A and
192     II, 26|          man maintains a universal affirmative, we reply with a universal
193     II, 26|           figure cannot produce an affirmative conclusion.~Besides, an