Book, Paragraph

 1      I, 1 |         when a man is proceeding by question, but when he is syllogizing
 2      I, 23|           proposition originally in question will have been assumed.
 3      I, 28|             attribute originally in question must belong to the subject
 4      I, 28|           the subject originally in question. But if the purpose is to
 5      I, 28|         terms of which the terms in question are predicable: for if any
 6      I, 28|         identical, the attribute in question must belong to some of the
 7      I, 28|           to some of the subject in question. Whenever the one term has
 8      I, 28|         present in the predicate in question: or conversely to the attributes
 9      I, 28|      identical, one of the terms in question cannot possibly belong to
10      I, 28|       antecedents of the subject in question and attributes which cannot
11      I, 28|          belong to the predicate in question. If any members of these
12      I, 28|            that one of the terms in question does not belong to some
13      I, 28|            subject and predicate in question: for all syllogisms proceed
14      I, 28|     consequent of both the terms in question: for the middle term must
15      I, 28|         consequents of the terms in question are identical, or if the
16      I, 29|         antecedents of the terms in question. In both cases the same
17      I, 29|         antecedents of the terms in question. Whatever the problem the
18      I, 29|         antecedents of the terms in question: for from these we obtain
19      I, 31|       general than the attribute in question. First, this very point
20     II, 16|             and assume the original question is a species of failure
21     II, 16|           is prior. Now begging the question is none of these: but since
22     II, 16|           then he begs the original question. This may be done by assuming
23     II, 16|         done by assuming what is in question at once; it is also possible
24     II, 16|        whether he begs the original question, but it is evident that
25     II, 16|         what is as uncertain as the question to be answered cannot be
26     II, 16|             the other, the original question is begged. For one might
27     II, 16|           being as uncertain as the question whether A belongs to C,
28     II, 16|         whether A belongs to C, the question is not yet begged, but no
29     II, 16|       because A follows B, then the question is begged for the same reason
30     II, 16|          the meaning of begging the question, viz. proving that which
31     II, 16|         itself.~If then begging the question is proving what is not self-evident
32     II, 16|            which are identical, the question may be begged in the middle
33     II, 16|          syllogism is negative, the question is begged when identical
34     II, 16|            premisses do not beg the question indifferently (in a similar
35     II, 16| indifferently (in a similar way the question may be begged in the middle
36     II, 16|       scientific demonstrations the question is begged when the terms
37     II, 21|           considered the particular question. For when he thinks that
38     II, 27|        correlative to the matter in question: for though Pittacus is