Book, Paragraph

 1      I, 2 |        is not animal.~First then take a universal negative with
 2      I, 3 |      possible. At present we may take this much as clear in addition
 3      I, 4 |      between the extremes we may take the terms animal, man, horse;
 4      I, 4 |    relation between the extremes take the terms science, line,
 5      I, 4 |    relation between the extremes take the terms good, state, wisdom:
 6      I, 4 |     there cannot be a syllogism. Take the terms white, horse,
 7      I, 4 |         animal, man, white: next take some of the white things
 8      I, 4 |         but let some C not be B. Take the terms inanimate, man,
 9      I, 4 |      inanimate, man, white: then take some white things of which
10      I, 5 |      there will be no syllogism. Take the terms animal, substance,
11      I, 5 |          it is not admissible to take terms: our point must be
12      I, 5 |        But it is not possible to take terms to illustrate the
13      I, 6 |       universally to the middle, take the terms animal, science,
14      I, 6 |       universally to the middle, take as terms for a negative
15      I, 8 |       the demonstration will not take the same form, but it is
16      I, 11|         if that is not possible, take as the term "awake" or "
17      I, 11|        affirmative is necessary, take the terms "waking" - "animal" - "
18      I, 11|        particular and necessary, take the terms "waking"- "animal" - "
19      I, 11|         particular is necessary, take the terms "biped", "moving", "
20      I, 14|   Further, this is obvious if we take terms; for if the premisses
21      I, 14|        must belong to all of it. Take as terms common to all the
22      I, 15|        happened, is. But we must take the impossible and the possible
23      I, 15|        another term. But we must take our terms better.~If the
24      I, 15|         positive relation we may take the terms white-animal-snow:
25      I, 15|         positive relation we may take the terms white-animal-snow;
26      I, 15|         positive relation we may take the terms animal-white-man;
27      I, 16|     universal is negative we may take the terms animal-white-raven
28      I, 16|  universal is affirmative we may take the terms animal-white-swan
29      I, 20|         the affirmative relation take the terms animal-man-white;
30      I, 20|         illustrate the negative, take the terms horse-man-white—
31      I, 22|         To illustrate the former take the terms sleep-sleeping
32      I, 22|         to illustrate the latter take the terms sleep-waking horse-man.~
33      I, 23|       single thing. Thus we must take another premiss as well.
34      I, 23|          But it is impossible to take a premiss in reference to
35      I, 23|      anything of it; or again to take a premiss relating A to
36      I, 23|   premiss relating A to B, if we take nothing common, but affirm
37      I, 23|   attributes of each. So we must take something midway between
38      I, 23|         to that. If then we must take something common in relation
39      I, 27|    peculiar to each. Nor must we take as things which the superior
40      I, 27|      inferior term follows, e.g. take as subjects of the predicate "
41      I, 32|        we must posit the one and take away the other, until we
42      I, 32|        into their terms. We must take that term as middle which
43      I, 36|          may be said to be true. Take for example the statement
44      I, 36|       terms of the thesis. Again take the inference "opportunity
45      I, 36|          useful to God". We must take as terms opportunity-right
46      I, 38|         are thus limited we must take the terms in the way stated.~
47      I, 39|      word and phrase, and always take a word in preference to
48      I, 39|     statements), it is better to take as the terms the supposable
49      I, 41|         any C at all. If then we take three terms it is clear
50      I, 43|          the definition, we must take as a term the point to which
51      I, 43|        drinkable liquid, we must take as terms drinkable and water.~
52      I, 45|      terms are universal we must take them in a similar way. Let
53     II, 2 |      then the premiss BC which I take is true, and the premiss
54     II, 2 |        to every swan, then if we take as premisses that A belongs
55     II, 8 |         since it is necessary to take both premisses in reference
56     II, 9 | conversion of the conclusion may take. For the conclusion of the
57     II, 11|        to all B, or to no B, and take besides another premiss
58     II, 14|         positions. Both, indeed, take two premisses that are admitted,
59     II, 15| recognize that it is possible to take opposites in the way we
60     II, 19|         drawn against us we must take care, whenever an opponent
61     II, 19|     preliminary syllogisms, they take the necessary premisses
62     II, 19|       are closely connected they take as far as possible those
63     II, 20|    conclusion, a refutation must take place: for a refutation