FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   >>  
. This formidable objection is refuted, with beautiful clearness and simplicity, by these three Diagrams, which show us that, in each of the three Figures, the Conclusion is really involved in the _two_ Premisses taken together, each contributing its share. Thus, in Fig. I., the Premiss xm_{0} empties the _Inner_ Cell of the N.W. Quarter, while the Premiss ym_{0} empties its _Outer_ Cell. Hence it needs the _two_ Premisses to empty the _whole_ of the N.W. Quarter, and thus to prove the Conclusion xy_{0}. Again, in Fig. II., the Premiss xm_{0} empties the Inner Cell of the N.W. Quarter. The Premiss ym_{1} merely tells us that the Inner Portion of the W. Half is _occupied_, so that we may place a 'I' in it, _somewhere_; but, if this were the _whole_ of our information, we should not know in _which_ Cell to place it, so that it would have to 'sit on the fence': it is only when we learn, from the other Premiss, that the _upper_ of these two Cells is _empty_, that we feel authorised to place the 'I' in the _lower_ Cell, and thus to prove the Conclusion x'y_{1}. Lastly, in Fig. III., the information, that m _exists_, merely authorises us to place a 'I' _somewhere_ in the Inner Square----but it has large choice of fences to sit upon! It needs the Premiss xm_{0} to drive it out of the N. Half of that Square; and it needs the Premiss ym_{0} to drive it out of the W. Half. Hence it needs the _two_ Premisses to drive it into the Inner Portion of the S.E. Quarter, and thus to prove the Conclusion x'y'_{1}. pg165 APPENDIX, ADDRESSED TO TEACHERS. Sec. 1. _Introductory._ There are several matters, too hard to discuss with _Learners_, which nevertheless need to be explained to any _Teachers_, into whose hands this book may fall, in order that they may thoroughly understand what my Symbolic Method _is_, and in what respects it differs from the many other Methods already published. These matters are as follows:-- The "Existential Import" of Propositions. The use of "is-not" (or "are-not") as a Copula. The theory "two Negative Premisses prove nothing." Euler's Method of Diagrams. Venn's Method of Diagrams. My Method of Diagrams. The Solution of a Syllogism by various Methods. My Method of treating Syllogisms and Sorites. Some account of Parts II, III. Sec. 2. _The "Existential Import" of Propos
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   >>  



Top keywords:

Premiss

 

Method

 

Quarter

 
Premisses
 
Conclusion
 

Diagrams

 

empties

 
Methods
 

matters

 

Existential


Import

 

Portion

 

Square

 
information
 

understand

 

simplicity

 

Symbolic

 
differs
 

respects

 
clearness

Learners

 
discuss
 

explained

 

beautiful

 
Teachers
 

treating

 

Syllogism

 

Solution

 

Syllogisms

 

Sorites


Propos

 

account

 

formidable

 

refuted

 
objection
 

published

 
Propositions
 
Negative
 
theory
 

Copula


Introductory

 

authorised

 

contributing

 
occupied
 

Figures

 

APPENDIX

 

ADDRESSED

 
TEACHERS
 

exists

 
involved