FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165  
166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   >>   >|  
the ships can come in: they may be excluded by other causes. And so, though they cannot come in, it does not follow that the harbour is frozen. QUESTIONS CONNECTED WITH HYPOTHETICAL SYLLOGISMS. (1) _Are they properly called Syllogisms?_ This is purely a question of Method and Definition. If we want a separate technical name for forms of argument in which two terms are reasoned together by means of a third, the Hypothetical Syllogism, not being in such a form, is not properly so called. The fact is that for the purposes of the Hypothetical Argument, we do not require an analysis into terms at all: it is superfluous: we are concerned only with the affirmation or denial of the constituent propositions as wholes. But if we extend the word Syllogism to cover all arguments in which two propositions necessarily involve a third, the Hypothetical Argument is on this understanding properly enough called a Syllogism. (2) _Is the inference in the Hypothetical Syllogism Mediate or Immediate?_ To answer this question we have to consider whether the Conclusion can be drawn from either of the two premisses without the help of the other. If it is possible immediately, it must be educible directly either from the Major Premiss or from the Minor. (_a_) Some logicians argue as if the Conclusion were immediately possible from the Major Premiss. The Minor Premiss and the Conclusion, they urge, are simply equivalent to the Major Premiss. But this is a misunderstanding. "If A is B, C is D," is not equivalent to "A is B, _therefore_ C is D". "If the harbour is frozen, the ships cannot come in" is not to say that "the harbour is frozen, and therefore," etc. The Major Premiss merely affirms the existence of the relation of Reason and Consequent between the two propositions. But we cannot thereupon assert the Conclusion unless the Minor Premiss is also conceded; that is, the inference of the Conclusion is Mediate, as being from two premisses and not from one alone. (_b_) Similarly with Hamilton's contention that the Conclusion is inferrible immediately from the Minor Premiss, inasmuch as the Consequent is involved in the Reason. True, the Consequent is involved in the Reason: but we cannot infer from "A is B" to "C is D," unless it is conceded that the relation of Reason and Consequent holds between them; that is, unless the Major Premiss is conceded as well as the Minor. (3) _Can Hypothetical Syllogism be reduced to the Categ
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165  
166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Premiss

 

Conclusion

 

Hypothetical

 
Syllogism
 
Reason
 

Consequent

 

conceded

 
propositions
 

immediately

 

frozen


harbour

 

called

 

properly

 
Argument
 

premisses

 

equivalent

 

inference

 
Mediate
 

relation

 
involved

question

 
educible
 

directly

 

contention

 
inferrible
 

reduced

 

assert

 

affirms

 

misunderstanding

 

existence


logicians

 

Similarly

 

simply

 

Hamilton

 
separate
 

technical

 
Method
 
Definition
 
argument
 

reasoned


excluded

 

purely

 

QUESTIONS

 
follow
 

CONNECTED

 

Syllogisms

 

HYPOTHETICAL

 
SYLLOGISMS
 

purposes

 
understanding