Book, Paragraph

  1      I, 2 |                    not convert, for if some animal is not man, it does not
  2      I, 2 |                 follow that some man is not animal.~First then take a universal
  3      I, 2 |                     B; e.g. let B stand for animal and A for man. Not every
  4      I, 2 |                    and A for man. Not every animal is a man; but every man
  5      I, 2 |                    man; but every man is an animal.~
  6      I, 4 |              extremes we may take the terms animal, man, horse; of a universal
  7      I, 4 |                negative relation, the terms animal, man, stone. Nor again can
  8      I, 4 |           attributed. Suppose the terms are animal, man, white: next take some
  9      I, 4 |                   predicated-swan and snow: animal is predicated of all of
 10      I, 4 |                 common to all the above are animal, white, horse: animal, white,
 11      I, 4 |                   are animal, white, horse: animal, white, stone.~It is clear
 12      I, 5 |                     extremes are substance, animal, man; a negative relation,
 13      I, 5 |               negative relation, substance, animal, number-substance being
 14      I, 5 |                 positive relation are line, animal, man: a negative relation,
 15      I, 5 |                    negative relation, line, animal, stone.~It is clear then
 16      I, 5 |                   syllogism. Take the terms animal, substance, raven; animal,
 17      I, 5 |                   animal, substance, raven; animal, white, raven. Nor will
 18      I, 5 |                    between the extremes are animal, substance, unit: a negative
 19      I, 5 |                  unit: a negative relation, animal, substance, science.~If
 20      I, 5 |                   relation are black, snow, animal. But it is not possible
 21      I, 5 |                positive relation are white, animal, raven: for the negative
 22      I, 5 |                negative relation are white, animal, snow; for the positive
 23      I, 5 |                   positive relation, white, animal, swan. Evidently then, whenever
 24      I, 5 |                    all the above are white, animal, man: white, animal, inanimate.
 25      I, 5 |                  white, animal, man: white, animal, inanimate. It is clear
 26      I, 6 |                   the positive relation are animal, horse, man: for the negative
 27      I, 6 |                   for the negative relation animal, inanimate, man.~Nor can
 28      I, 6 |                   the positive relation are animal, horse, inanimate; for the
 29      I, 6 |                  relation are animate, man, animal. For the universal negative
 30      I, 6 |                   the positive relation are animal, man, wild: for the negative
 31      I, 6 |                  for the negative relation, animal, science, wild-the middle
 32      I, 6 |                  the middle, take the terms animal, science, wild; animal,
 33      I, 6 |                terms animal, science, wild; animal, man, wild. When the major
 34      I, 6 |                    Common terms for all are animal, man, white: animal, inanimate,
 35      I, 6 |                     are animal, man, white: animal, inanimate, white.~It is
 36      I, 9 |                  e.g. if A were movement, B animal, C man: man is an animal
 37      I, 9 |                    animal, C man: man is an animal necessarily, but an animal
 38      I, 9 |                  animal necessarily, but an animal does not move necessarily,
 39      I, 9 |                     Try the terms movement, animal, white.~
 40      I, 10|             premisses. For example let A be animal, B man, C white, and let
 41      I, 10|                 before: it is possible that animal should belong to nothing
 42      I, 10|                      not however so long as animal belongs to nothing white.
 43      I, 11|                  that which B signifies be "animal", let the term C be "horse".
 44      I, 11|                     necessary that the term animal should belong to every horse:
 45      I, 11|                     not necessary that some animal should not be good, since
 46      I, 11|                    it is possible for every animal to be good. Or if that is
 47      I, 11|                      or "asleep": for every animal can accept these.~If, then,
 48      I, 11|                   be waking, B biped, and C animal. It is necessary that B
 49      I, 11|                  take the terms "waking" - "animal" - "man", "man" being middle,
 50      I, 11|                   take the terms "waking"- "animal" - "white": for it is necessary
 51      I, 11|                    for it is necessary that animal should belong to some white
 52      I, 11|                   should not belong to some animal. But when the negative proposition
 53      I, 11|                   terms "biped", "moving", "animal", "animal" being middle.~
 54      I, 11|                biped", "moving", "animal", "animal" being middle.~
 55      I, 13|                  thus and not thus, e.g. an animal’s walking or an earthquake’
 56      I, 14|                  cases under consideration "animal" - "white" - "man", where
 57      I, 14|                  necessarily to the minor; "animal"- "white" - "garment", where
 58      I, 15|              Further let the major term be "animal", the middle "moving", the
 59      I, 15|                      For man is necessarily animal. It is clear then that the
 60      I, 16| animal-white-inanimate. For the relation of animal to some white, and of white
 61      I, 18|                   is positive, e.g. health, animal, man, and when it is negative,
 62      I, 19|                  stands for "awake", B for "animal", A for "motion". For motion
 63      I, 19|                   and is possible for every animal: and everything that is
 64      I, 19|                 everything that is awake is animal. Clearly then the conclusion
 65      I, 27|                    of these is both man and animal); and some things are themselves
 66      I, 27|                     e.g. man of Callias and animal of man. It is clear then
 67      I, 27|                    a whole, e.g. that every animal follows man or every science
 68      I, 27|                     that every man is every animal or justice is all good.
 69      I, 27|             superior term; for what follows animal also follows man, and what
 70      I, 27|                     what does not belong to animal does not belong to man);
 71      I, 27|                  subjects of the predicate "animal" what are really subjects
 72      I, 27|                     is necessary indeed, if animal follows man, that it should
 73      I, 31|                    universal as middle. Let animal be the term signified by
 74      I, 31|                  divides assumes that every animal is either mortal or immortal:
 75      I, 31|                 lays it down that man is an animal, so he assumes A of D as
 76      I, 31|                   again, taking A as mortal animal, B as footed, C as footless,
 77      I, 31|                   or in C (for every mortal animal is either footed or footless),
 78      I, 31|                   as we saw, to be a mortal animal); consequently it is necessary
 79      I, 31|               either a footed or a footless animal; but it is not necessary
 80      I, 32|                     if it is necessary that animal should exist, if man does,
 81      I, 32|                  substance should exist, if animal does, it is necessary that
 82      I, 36|                 nominative, e.g. "man is an animal", or in whatever other way
 83      I, 46|                false. Similarly also "every animal is not-white" is not the
 84      I, 46|                  not the negation of "every animal is white" (for both are
 85      I, 46|                   proper negation is "every animal is not white". Since it
 86      I, 46|                    e.g. that whatever is an animal is not white or may not
 87      I, 46|                  assume that whatever is an animal either is musical or is
 88     II, 2 |                      This is possible, e.g. animal belongs to no stone, nor
 89     II, 2 |                   true: for every man is an animal. Similarly with the negative.
 90     II, 2 |                  put as middle: for neither animal nor man belongs to any stone,
 91     II, 2 |                   belongs to any stone, but animal belongs to every man. Consequently
 92     II, 2 |                    B belongs to all C, e.g. animal to every swan and to some
 93     II, 2 |                 truly: for every swan is an animal. Similarly if the statement
 94     II, 2 |                should belong to all C, e.g. animal to some white thing, but
 95     II, 2 |           subordinate one to the other: for animal belongs both to horse and
 96     II, 2 |               species of another genus: for animal belongs neither to music
 97     II, 2 |                 species and difference: for animal belongs to every man and
 98     II, 2 |                     and its difference: for animal neither belongs to any wisdom
 99     II, 2 |                    C, and B to some C, e.g. animal belongs to no snow, but
100     II, 2 |                     is taken as middle, and animal as first term, and it is
101     II, 2 |                     belongs to some C, e.g. animal belongs to every man, but
102     II, 2 |                   belonging to some C, e.g. animal to something beautiful and
103     II, 2 |                     B belongs to no C, e.g. animal to every swan and to some
104     II, 2 |                     of its own species: for animal belongs to no number and
105     II, 2 |            accidents of the same genus: for animal belongs to some white things
106     II, 2 |                     of its own species: for animal belongs to no number, but
107     II, 2 |                     B belongs to no C, e.g. animal belongs to every swan, and
108     II, 3 |                     no B and to all C, e.g. animal to no stone and to every
109     II, 3 |                    co-ordinate species. For animal belongs to every horse and
110     II, 3 |                     then it is assumed that animal belongs to all of the one,
111     II, 3 |                     B belongs to no C, e.g. animal to some white things and
112     II, 3 |                     B belongs to no C, e.g. animal belongs to some white things,
113     II, 3 |                 some C, and B to no C, e.g. animal to some white things and
114     II, 3 |                  not belong to some C, e.g. animal to every man and to some
115     II, 3 |                  not belong to some C, e.g. animal belongs to nothing lifeless,
116     II, 3 |                  not belong to some C, e.g. animal belongs to no number nor
117     II, 3 |                 species and difference: for animal follows every man and footed
118     II, 3 |                  not belong to some C, e.g. animal follows no science but every
119     II, 4 |                   black belongs to no swan, animal to every swan, and animal
120     II, 4 |                   animal to every swan, and animal not to everything black.
121     II, 4 |                  not belong to some B, e.g. animal and white follow every swan,
122     II, 4 |                   follow every swan, though animal does not belong to everything
123     II, 4 |                     belongs to some B, e.g. animal belongs to every swan, black
124     II, 15|                  that it is not good, if an animal, that it is not an animal
125     II, 15|                   animal, that it is not an animal because the syllogism springs
126     II, 15|                   once assumed, e.g. "every animal is white and not white",
127     II, 15|                   and we proceed "man is an animal". Either we must introduce
128     II, 21|                      and thinking that this animal is with foal: for he does
129     II, 27|                 sign proper to each kind of animal, we shall be able to infer
130     II, 27|                     and some other kinds of animal as well. They will then