Book, Paragraph

  1      I, 3 |           A. This has been already proved. But in negative statements
  2      I, 3 |       white. This has been already proved. The particular negative
  3      I, 3 |              But this also will be proved in the sequel. In conversion
  4      I, 4 |           that all conclusions are proved by this figure, viz. universal
  5      I, 5 |           O. This has already been proved. Again if M belongs to all
  6      I, 5 |           terms: our point must be proved from the indefinite nature
  7      I, 5 |          stated: the point must be proved from the indefinite nature
  8      I, 6 |            premiss RS. It might be proved also per impossibile, as
  9      I, 6 |           Our point, then, must be proved from the indefinite nature
 10      I, 7 |          first figure: if they are proved per impossibile, because
 11      I, 8 |             the conclusion will be proved to be necessary by means
 12      I, 10|           results. But it has been proved in the case of the first
 13      I, 11|         necessity; for it has been proved, in the case of the first
 14      I, 11|        thus, the conclusion (as we proved was not necessary: consequently
 15      I, 13|            by what means it can be proved. I use the terms "to be
 16      I, 14|        impossible. For it has been proved that if the terms are related
 17      I, 15|     premisses is reversed, must be proved per impossibile. At the
 18      I, 15|            possible.~Since this is proved it is evident that if a
 19      I, 15|  impossible. For since it has been proved that if B’s being is the
 20      I, 15|          Only some of them will be proved per impossibile, others
 21      I, 15|         nothing at all can ever be proved.~
 22      I, 16|          the proof: for it will be proved in the same manner as above.
 23      I, 17|            convertible.~This being proved, suppose it possible that
 24      I, 17|            affirmative: it will be proved by an example that the predicate
 25      I, 17|            is negative: it will be proved that it is not problematic
 26      I, 18|     syllogism is possible (this is proved similarly and by the same
 27      I, 19|          can be drawn. This can be proved in the same way as for universal
 28      I, 19|      affirmative: this also may be proved as above. But when both
 29      I, 21|         once more, and it has been proved that if one premiss is problematic
 30      I, 21|           all C: for this has been proved before. But it was assumed
 31      I, 23|        presently, when it has been proved that every syllogism is
 32      I, 23|          regard to those which are proved per impossibile, and in
 33      I, 23|         the original conclusion is proved hypothetically, and we have
 34      I, 24|       proposed at the outset to be proved. This is more obvious in
 35      I, 24|           will beg the thing to be proved, unless he also states that
 36      I, 24|           a universal statement is proved only when all the premisses
 37      I, 24|            particular statement is proved both from two universal
 38      I, 25|            for it has already been proved that if a syllogism is formed
 39      I, 25|         assumed that the syllogism proved E. And if no conclusion
 40      I, 26|           universal affirmative is proved by means of the first figure
 41      I, 26|          the universal negative is proved both through the first figure
 42      I, 26|          particular affirmative is proved through the first and through
 43      I, 26|         The particular negative is proved in all the figures, but
 44      I, 26|         the particular negative is proved in all the figures, the
 45      I, 26|           character of the problem proved in each figure, and the
 46      I, 28|       aforesaid figures. For it is proved that A belongs to all E,
 47      I, 29|           is involved. For what is proved ostensively may also be
 48      I, 29|            same terms; and what is proved per impossibile may also
 49      I, 29|            impossibile may also be proved ostensively, e.g. that A
 50      I, 29|           e.g. suppose it has been proved that A belongs to no E,
 51      I, 29|            E. Again if it has been proved by an ostensive syllogism
 52      I, 29|           to some E and it will be proved per impossibile to belong
 53      I, 29|           the problems then can be proved in the manner described;
 54      I, 29|           or a pure proposition is proved. We must find in the case
 55      I, 29|       actually do not: for we have proved that the syllogism which
 56      I, 29|           every syllogism has been proved to be formed through one
 57      I, 31|            what ought to have been proved syllogistically. And again,
 58      I, 31|       diagonal is a length, he has proved that the diagonal is either
 59      I, 31|      assumed what he ought to have proved. He cannot then prove it:
 60      I, 38|          Similarly if it should be proved that the healthy is an object
 61      I, 38|   condition, e.g. when the good is proved to be an object of knowledge
 62      I, 38|           knowledge and when it is proved to be an object of knowledge
 63      I, 38|            is good. If it has been proved to be an object of knowledge
 64      I, 42|         Since not every problem is proved in every figure, but certain
 65      I, 44|             For they have not been proved by syllogism, but assented
 66      I, 44|         contraries, but he has not proved that there is not a science.
 67      I, 44|            be analysed since it is proved by syllogism, though the
 68      I, 44|         agreement that if there is proved to be one faculty of contraries,
 69      I, 45|           45~Whatever problems are proved in more than one figure,
 70      I, 46|          the same way for both are proved constructively by means
 71      I, 46|            a man is not musical is proved destructively in the three
 72      I, 46|           this is false: for as we proved the sequence is reversed
 73     II, 1 |     conclusion, e.g. if A has been proved to to all or to some B,
 74     II, 1 |          some A: and if A has been proved to belong to no B, then
 75     II, 1 |           to the conclusion may be proved by the same syllogism, if
 76     II, 1 |            if the conclusion AB is proved through C, whatever is subordinate
 77     II, 1 |           A. But while it has been proved through the syllogism that
 78     II, 1 |           the conclusion cannot be proved; the other subordinate can
 79     II, 1 |           other subordinate can be proved, only not through the syllogism,
 80     II, 1 |  subordinate to the middle term is proved (as we saw) from a premiss
 81     II, 4 |           is possible: this can be proved, if the same terms as before
 82     II, 4 |            Again since it has been proved that if A belongs to no
 83     II, 4 |          great, just as if it were proved through three terms.~
 84     II, 5 |          to all C, and it has been proved through B; suppose that
 85     II, 5 |       suppose that A should now be proved to belong to B by assuming
 86     II, 5 |    premisses had ex hypothesi been proved. Consequently if we succeed
 87     II, 5 |           premisses will have been proved reciprocally. If then it
 88     II, 5 |        premisses assumed have been proved, and C must belong to A.
 89     II, 5 |           very thing that is being proved: for C is proved of B, and
 90     II, 5 |          is being proved: for C is proved of B, and B of by assuming
 91     II, 5 |         that C is said of and C is proved of A through these premisses,
 92     II, 5 |           for what is universal is proved through propositions which
 93     II, 5 |          particular premiss may be proved. Suppose that A has been
 94     II, 5 |            Suppose that A has been proved of some C through B. If
 95     II, 6 |        negative proposition may be proved. An affirmative proposition
 96     II, 6 |     affirmative proposition is not proved because both premisses of
 97     II, 6 |         proposition is (as we saw) proved from premisses which are
 98     II, 6 |       affirmative. The negative is proved as follows. Let A belong
 99     II, 6 |        universal premiss cannot be proved, for the same reason as
100     II, 6 |          particular premiss can be proved whenever the universal statement
101     II, 7 |         that which is universal is proved through statements which
102     II, 7 |      belongs to all A, it has been proved that C belongs to some B,
103     II, 7 |     belongs to some C has not been proved. And yet it is necessary,
104     II, 7 |           the other premiss can be proved. Let B belong to all C,
105     II, 8 |         some". Suppose that A been proved of C, through B as middle
106     II, 8 |          saw) the universal is not proved through the last figure.
107     II, 8 |      negative. Suppose it has been proved that A belongs to no C through
108     II, 8 |            Suppose that A has been proved of some C. If then it is
109     II, 10|         moods. Suppose it has been proved that A belongs to some B,
110     II, 10|      negative. Suppose it has been proved that A does not belong to
111     II, 11|       syllogism per impossibile is proved when the contradictory of
112     II, 11|            All the problems can be proved per impossibile in all the
113     II, 11|    universal affirmative, which is proved in the middle and third
114     II, 11|    universal affirmative cannot be proved in the first figure per
115     II, 11|    particular negatives can all be proved. Suppose that A belongs
116     II, 11|         the problem in hand is not proved. Suppose that A belongs
117     II, 11| proposition concerns B, nothing is proved. If the hypothesis is that
118     II, 11|           but to some B, it is not proved that A belongs not to all
119     II, 11|            to no B. But if this is proved, the truth is refuted as
120     II, 11|          holds good, then if it is proved that the negation does not
121     II, 12|          universal affirmative are proved per impossibile. But in
122     II, 12|          last figures this also is proved. Suppose that A does not
123     II, 12|         the problem in hand is not proved. For if A belongs to no
124     II, 13|         the problem in hand is not proved: for if the contrary is
125     II, 13|          all B, the problem is not proved.~But this hypothesis must
126     II, 13|          universal conclusion, are proved in a way.~
127     II, 14|       concluded ostensively can be proved per impossibile, and that
128     II, 14|     impossibile, and that which is proved per impossibile can be proved
129     II, 14|      proved per impossibile can be proved ostensively, through the
130     II, 14|            Suppose that A has been proved to belong to no B, or not
131     II, 14|           B. Similarly if has been proved not to belong to all B.
132     II, 14|          Again suppose it has been proved that A belongs to some B.
133     II, 14|          Again suppose it has been proved in the middle figure that
134     II, 14|           Similarly if it has been proved that A belongs to some B:
135     II, 14|          Again suppose it has been proved in the third figure that
136     II, 14|           that every thesis can be proved in both ways, i.e. per impossibile
137     II, 15|          if a thing is good, it is proved that it is not good, if
138     II, 16|           which would naturally be proved through the thesis proposed,
139     II, 16|          them, e.g. if A should be proved through B, and B through
140     II, 16|           natural that C should be proved through A: for it turns
141     II, 16|            due to the thesis to be proved and the premiss through
142     II, 16|        premiss through which it is proved being equally uncertain,
143     II, 17|        proposition which was being proved by the reduction. For unless
144     II, 18|          must be false: for (as we proved) a false syllogism cannot
145     II, 19|     knowing what kind of thesis is proved in each figure. This will
146     II, 23|            For it has already been proved that if two things belong
147     II, 24|             when the major term is proved to belong to the middle
148     II, 24|        that A belongs to B will be proved through D. Similarly if
149     II, 26|      premiss, and opposites can be proved only in the first and third
150     II, 26|            negative; the former is proved from the first figure, the
151     II, 27|         people suppose it has been proved that she is with child.
152     II, 27|           index: for that which is proved through the first figure