FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236  
237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   >>  
s nom. and not abl. Petrus Valentia (p. 301, ed Orelli) justly remarks that an art is not to be condemned as useless merely because it is unable to solve every problem presented to it. He quotes Plato's remarks (in _Rep._ II.) that the Expert is the man who knows exactly what his art can do and what it cannot. Very similar arguments to this of Cic. occur in Sext., cf. esp. _P.H._ II. 175 and the words [Greek: eautou estai ekkalyptikon]. For the mode in which Carneades dealt with Dialectic cf. Zeller 510, 511. The true ground of attack is that Logic always _assumes_ the truth of phenomena, and cannot _prove_ it. This was clearly seen by Aristotle alone of the ancients; see Grote's essay on the Origin of Knowledge, now reprinted in Vol II. of his _Aristotle_. Sec.92. _Nata sit_: cf. 28, 59. _Loquendi_: the Stoic [Greek: logike], it must be remembered, included [Greek: rhetorike]. _Concludendi_: [Greek: tou symperainein] or [Greek: syllogizesthai]. _Locum_: [Greek: topon] in the philosophical sense. _Vitiosum_: 49, n. _Num nostra culpa est_: cf. 32. _Finium_: absolute limits; the fallacy of the _sorites_ and other such sophisms lies entirely in the treatment of purely _relative_ terms as though they were _absolute_. _Quatenus_: the same ellipse occurs in _Orator_ 73. _In acervo tritici_: this is the false _sorites_, which may be briefly described thus: A asks B whether one grain makes a heap, B answers "No." A goes on asking whether two, three, four, etc. grains make a heap. B cannot always reply "No." When he begins to answer "Yes," there will be a difference of one grain between heap and no heap. One grain therefore _does_ make a heap. The true _sorites_ or chain inference is still treated in books on logic, cf. Thomson's _Laws of Thought_, pp 201--203, ed 8. _Minutatim_: cf. Heindorf's note on [Greek: kata smikron] in _Sophistes_ 217 D. _Interrogati_: cf. 104. In 94 we have _interroganti_, which some edd. read here. _Dives pauper_, etc.: it will be easily seen that the process of questioning above described can be applied to any relative term such as these are. For the omission of any connecting particle between the members of each pair, cf. 29, 125, _T.D._ I. 64, V. 73, 114, Zumpt _Gram._ 782. _Quanto addito aut dempto_: after this there is a strange ellipse of some such words as _id efficiatur, quod interrogatur_. [_Non_] _habemus_: I bracket _non_ in deference to Halm, Madv. however (_Opusc._ I. 508) treats it as a s
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236  
237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   >>  



Top keywords:

sorites

 

Aristotle

 

remarks

 

absolute

 

ellipse

 
relative
 

inference

 

Thought

 
Minutatim
 

Heindorf


Thomson
 
treated
 

begins

 

answers

 
Petrus
 

briefly

 

Valentia

 

difference

 

answer

 
grains

addito

 

Quanto

 
dempto
 

strange

 

efficiatur

 

treats

 
deference
 

interrogatur

 
habemus
 
bracket

interroganti

 

pauper

 
Sophistes
 

Interrogati

 

easily

 

process

 

particle

 

connecting

 

members

 
omission

questioning

 

applied

 

smikron

 

Quatenus

 

Dialectic

 
Zeller
 

Carneades

 

Orelli

 

eautou

 
ekkalyptikon