Changes

149 bytes removed ,  04:04, 14 September 2013
fix greek transliterations
Line 22: Line 22:     
<pre>
 
<pre>
Appendix A:  Sources
+
Appendix A:  Sources
Aristotle:  On Interpretation
+
Aristotle:  On Interpretation
Chapter 1
+
Chapter 1
 
   
 
   
{1} Words spoken are symbols or signs of affections or impressions
+
{1} Words spoken are symbols or signs of affections or impressions
of the soul;  written words are the signs of words spoken.  As
+
of the soul;  written words are the signs of words spoken.  As
writing, so also is speech not the same for all races of men.
+
writing, so also is speech not the same for all races of men.
But the mental affections themselves, of which these words
+
But the mental affections themselves, of which these words
are primarily signs, are the same for the whole of mankind,
+
are primarily signs, are the same for the whole of mankind,
as are also the objects of which those affections are
+
as are also the objects of which those affections are
representations or likenesses, images, copies.
+
representations or likenesses, images, copies.
 
   
 
   
Aristotle:  Prior Analytics
+
Aristotle:  Prior Analytics
Book 1 Chapter 4
+
Book 1 Chapter 4
{1} When three terms are so related to one another that the last
+
{1} When three terms are so related to one another that the last
is wholly contained in the middle and the middle is wholly
+
is wholly contained in the middle and the middle is wholly
contained in or excluded from the first, the extremes must admit
+
contained in or excluded from the first, the extremes must admit
of perfect syllogism.  By 'middle term' I mean that which both is
+
of perfect syllogism.  By 'middle term' I mean that which both is
contained in another and contains another in itself, and which is
+
contained in another and contains another in itself, and which is
the middle by its position also; and by 'extremes' (a) that which
+
the middle by its position also; and by 'extremes' (a) that which
is contained in another, and (b) that in which another is
+
is contained in another, and (b) that in which another is
contained.  For if A is predicated of all B, and B of all C,
+
contained.  For if A is predicated of all B, and B of all C,
A must necessarily be predicated of all C.  ...  I call this kind
+
A must necessarily be predicated of all C.  ...  I call this kind
of figure the First.
+
of figure the First.
 
   
 
   
Chapter 5
+
Chapter 5
 
   
 
   
{2} When the same term applies to all of one subject and to none
+
{2} When the same term applies to all of one subject and to none
of the other, or to all or none of both, I call this kind of
+
of the other, or to all or none of both, I call this kind of
figure the Second; and in it by the middle term I mean that which
+
figure the Second; and in it by the middle term I mean that which
is predicated of both subjects; by the extreme terms, the subjects
+
is predicated of both subjects; by the extreme terms, the subjects
of which the middle is predicated; by the major term, that which
+
of which the middle is predicated; by the major term, that which
comes next to the middle; and by the minor that which is more
+
comes next to the middle; and by the minor that which is more
distant from it.  The middle is placed outside the extreme terms,
+
distant from it.  The middle is placed outside the extreme terms,
and is first by position.
+
and is first by position.
 
   
 
   
Chapter 6
+
Chapter 6
 
   
 
   
{3} If one of the terms applies to all and the other to none of
+
{3} If one of the terms applies to all and the other to none of
the same subject, or if both terms apply to all or none of it,
+
the same subject, or if both terms apply to all or none of it,
I call this kind of figure the Third; and in it by the middle I
+
I call this kind of figure the Third; and in it by the middle I
mean that of which both the predications are made; by extremes
+
mean that of which both the predications are made; by extremes
the predicates; by the major term that which is [further from?]
+
the predicates; by the major term that which is [further from?]
the middle; and by the minor that which is nearer to it.  The
+
the middle; and by the minor that which is nearer to it.  The
middle is placed outside the extremes, and is last by position.
+
middle is placed outside the extremes, and is last by position.
 
   
 
   
Book 2 Chapter 21
+
Book 2 Chapter 21
 
   
 
   
{1} Similarly too with the theory in the Meno that learning is
+
{1} Similarly too with the theory in the Meno that learning is
recollection.  For in no case do we find that we have previous
+
recollection.  For in no case do we find that we have previous
knowledge of the individual, but we do find that in the process
+
knowledge of the individual, but we do find that in the process
of induction we acquire knowledge of particular things just as
+
of induction we acquire knowledge of particular things just as
though we could remember them; for there are some things which we
+
though we could remember them; for there are some things which we
know immediately:  e.g., if we know that X is a triangle we know
+
know immediately:  e.g., if we know that X is a triangle we know
that the sum of its angles is equal to two right angles.
+
that the sum of its angles is equal to two right angles.
Similarly too in all other cases.
+
Similarly too in all other cases.
 
   
 
   
{2} Thus whereas we observe particular things by universal
+
{2} Thus whereas we observe particular things by universal
knowledge, we do not know them by the knowledge peculiar to them.
+
knowledge, we do not know them by the knowledge peculiar to them.
Hence it is possible to be mistaken about them, not because we
+
Hence it is possible to be mistaken about them, not because we
have contrary knowledge about them, but because, although we have
+
have contrary knowledge about them, but because, although we have
universal knowledge of them, we are mistaken in our particular
+
universal knowledge of them, we are mistaken in our particular
knowledge.
+
knowledge.
 
   
 
   
Book 2 Chapter 23
+
Book 2 Chapter 23
 
   
 
   
{1} Induction epagwgh, or inductive reasoning, consists in
+
{1} Induction (epagoge), or inductive reasoning, consists in
establishing a relation between one extreme term and the middle
+
establishing a relation between one extreme term and the middle
term by means of the other extreme; e.g., if B is the middle term
+
term by means of the other extreme; e.g., if B is the middle term
of A and C, in proving by means of C that A applies to B; for this
+
of A and C, in proving by means of C that A applies to B; for this
is how we effect inductions.  E.g., let A stand for 'long-lived',
+
is how we effect inductions.  E.g., let A stand for 'long-lived',
B for 'that which has no bile' and C for the long-lived
+
B for 'that which has no bile' and C for the long-lived
individuals such as man and horse and mule.  Then A applies to the
+
individuals such as man and horse and mule.  Then A applies to the
whole of C, for every bileless animal is long-lived.  But B, 'not
+
whole of C, for every bileless animal is long-lived.  But B, 'not
having bile', also applies to all C.  Then if C is convertible
+
having bile', also applies to all C.  Then if C is convertible
with B, i.e., if the middle term is not wider in extension,
+
with B, i.e., if the middle term is not wider in extension,
A must apply to B.
+
A must apply to B.
 
   
 
   
{2} This kind of syllogism is concerned with the first or
+
{2} This kind of syllogism is concerned with the first or
immediate premiss.  Where there is a middle term, the syllogism
+
immediate premiss.  Where there is a middle term, the syllogism
proceeds by means of the middle; where there is not, it proceeds
+
proceeds by means of the middle; where there is not, it proceeds
by induction.  There is a sense in which induction is opposed to
+
by induction.  There is a sense in which induction is opposed to
syllogism, for the latter shows by the middle term that the major
+
syllogism, for the latter shows by the middle term that the major
extreme applies to the third, while the former shows by means of
+
extreme applies to the third, while the former shows by means of
the third that the major extreme applies to the middle.  Thus by
+
the third that the major extreme applies to the middle.  Thus by
nature the syllogism by means of the middle is prior and more
+
nature the syllogism by means of the middle is prior and more
knowable; but syllogism by induction is more apparent to us.
+
knowable; but syllogism by induction is more apparent to us.
 
   
 
   
Book 2 Chapter 24
+
Book 2 Chapter 24
 
   
 
   
{1} We have an Example paradeigma when the major extreme is shown
+
{1} We have an Example (paradeigma) when the major extreme is shown
to be applicable to the middle term by means of a term similar to
+
to be applicable to the middle term by means of a term similar to
the third.  It must be known both that the middle applies to the
+
the third.  It must be known both that the middle applies to the
third term and that the first applies to the term similar to the
+
third term and that the first applies to the term similar to the
third.  E.g., let A be 'bad', B 'to make war on neighbors',
+
third.  E.g., let A be 'bad', B 'to make war on neighbors',
C 'Athens against Thebes' and D 'Thebes against Phocis'.  Then
+
C 'Athens against Thebes' and D 'Thebes against Phocis'.  Then
if we require to prove that war against Thebes is bad, we must be
+
if we require to prove that war against Thebes is bad, we must be
satisfied that war against neighbors is bad.  Evidence of this can
+
satisfied that war against neighbors is bad.  Evidence of this can
be drawn from similar examples, e.g., that war by Thebes against
+
be drawn from similar examples, e.g., that war by Thebes against
Phocis is bad.  Then since war against neighbors is bad, and war
+
Phocis is bad.  Then since war against neighbors is bad, and war
against Thebes is against neighbors, it is evident that war
+
against Thebes is against neighbors, it is evident that war
against Thebes is bad.  Now it is evident that B applies to C
+
against Thebes is bad.  Now it is evident that B applies to C
and D (for they are both examples of making war on neighbors),
+
and D (for they are both examples of making war on neighbors),
and A to D (since the war against Phocis did Thebes no good); but
+
and A to D (since the war against Phocis did Thebes no good); but
that A applies to B will be proved by means of D. ...
+
that A applies to B will be proved by means of D. ...
 
   
 
   
{2} Thus it is evident that an example represents the relation,
+
{2} Thus it is evident that an example represents the relation,
not of part to whole or of whole to part, but of one part to
+
not of part to whole or of whole to part, but of one part to
another, where both are subordinate to the same general term,
+
another, where both are subordinate to the same general term,
and one of them is known.  It differs from induction in that the
+
and one of them is known.  It differs from induction in that the
latter, as we saw, shows from an examination of all the individual
+
latter, as we saw, shows from an examination of all the individual
cases that the [major] extreme applies to the middle, and does not
+
cases that the [major] extreme applies to the middle, and does not
connect the conclusion with the [minor] extreme; whereas the
+
connect the conclusion with the [minor] extreme; whereas the
example does connect it and does not use all the individual cases
+
example does connect it and does not use all the individual cases
for its proof.
+
for its proof.
 
   
 
   
Book 2 Chapter 25
+
Book 2 Chapter 25
 
   
 
   
{1} We have Reduction apagwgh (a) when it is obvious that the
+
{1} We have Reduction (apagoge) (a) when it is obvious that the
first term applies to the middle, but that the middle applies to
+
first term applies to the middle, but that the middle applies to
the last term is not obvious, yet nevertheless is more probable or
+
the last term is not obvious, yet nevertheless is more probable or
not less probable than the conclusion; or (b) if there are not
+
not less probable than the conclusion; or (b) if there are not
many intermediate terms between the last and the middle; for in
+
many intermediate terms between the last and the middle; for in
all such cases the effect is to bring us nearer to knowledge.
+
all such cases the effect is to bring us nearer to knowledge.
 
   
 
   
{2} (a) E.g., let A stand for 'that which can be taught', B for
+
{2} (a) E.g., let A stand for 'that which can be taught', B for
'knowledge' and C for 'morality'.  Then that knowledge can be
+
'knowledge' and C for 'morality'.  Then that knowledge can be
taught is evident; but whether virtue is knowledge is not clear.
+
taught is evident; but whether virtue is knowledge is not clear.
Then if BC is not less probable or is more probable than AC, we
+
Then if BC is not less probable or is more probable than AC, we
have reduction; for we are nearer to knowledge for having
+
have reduction; for we are nearer to knowledge for having
introduced an additional term, whereas before we had no knowledge
+
introduced an additional term, whereas before we had no knowledge
that AC is true.
+
that AC is true.
 
   
 
   
{3} (b) Or again we have reduction if there are not many
+
{3} (b) Or again we have reduction if there are not many
intermediate terms between B and C; for in this case too we are
+
intermediate terms between B and C; for in this case too we are
brought nearer to knowledge.  E.g., suppose that D is 'to square',
+
brought nearer to knowledge.  E.g., suppose that D is 'to square',
E 'rectilinear figure' and F 'circle'.  Assuming that between
+
E 'rectilinear figure' and F 'circle'.  Assuming that between
E and F there is only one intermediate term - that the circle
+
E and F there is only one intermediate term - that the circle
becomes equal to a rectilinear figure by means of lunules -
+
becomes equal to a rectilinear figure by means of lunules -
we should approximate to knowledge.
+
we should approximate to knowledge.
 
   
 
   
{4} When, however, BC is not more probable than AC, or there are
+
{4} When, however, BC is not more probable than AC, or there are
several intermediate terms, I do not use the expression
+
several intermediate terms, I do not use the expression
'reduction'; nor when the proposition BC is immediate; for such
+
'reduction'; nor when the proposition BC is immediate; for such
a statement implies knowledge.
+
a statement implies knowledge.
 
   
 
   
Book 2 Chapter 27
+
Book 2 Chapter 27
 
   
 
   
{1} A probability eikoV is not the same as a sign shmeion.  The
+
{1} A probability (eikos) is not the same as a sign (semeion).  The
former is a generally accepted premiss; for that which people know
+
former is a generally accepted premiss; for that which people know
to happen or not to happen, or to be or not to be, usually in a
+
to happen or not to happen, or to be or not to be, usually in a
particular way, is a probability:  e.g., that the envious are
+
particular way, is a probability:  e.g., that the envious are
malevolent or that those who are loved are affectionate.  A sign,
+
malevolent or that those who are loved are affectionate.  A sign,
however, means a demonstrative premiss which is necessary or
+
however, means a demonstrative premiss which is necessary or
generally accepted.  That which coexists with something else,
+
generally accepted.  That which coexists with something else,
or before or after whose happening something else has happened,
+
or before or after whose happening something else has happened,
is a sign of that something's having happened or being.
+
is a sign of that something's having happened or being.
 
   
 
   
{2} An enthymeme is a syllogism from probabilities or signs; and
+
{2} An enthymeme is a syllogism from probabilities or signs; and
a sign can be taken in three ways - in just as many ways as there
+
a sign can be taken in three ways - in just as many ways as there
are of taking the middle term in the several figures ...
+
are of taking the middle term in the several figures ...
 
   
 
   
{3} We must either classify signs in this way, and regard their
+
{3} We must either classify signs in this way, and regard their
middle term as an index tekmhrion (for the name 'index' is given
+
middle term as an index (tekmerion) (for the name 'index' is given
to that which causes us to know, and the middle term is especially
+
to that which causes us to know, and the middle term is especially
of this nature), or describe the arguments drawn from the extremes
+
of this nature), or describe the arguments drawn from the extremes
as 'signs', and that which is drawn from the middle as an 'index'.
+
as 'signs', and that which is drawn from the middle as an 'index'.
For the conclusion which is reached through the first figure is
+
For the conclusion which is reached through the first figure is
most generally accepted and most true.
+
most generally accepted and most true.
 +
 
 +
Aristotle:  The Art of Rhetoric
 
   
 
   
Aristotle:  The Art of Rhetoric
+
Book 1 Chapter 2
 
   
 
   
  Book 1 Chapter 2
+
{1} But for purposes of demonstration, real or apparent, just as
 +
Dialectic possesses two modes of argument, induction and the
 +
syllogism, real or apparent, the same is the case in Rhetoric;
 +
for the example is induction, and the enthymeme a syllogism, and
 +
the apparent enthymeme an apparent syllogism. Accordingly I call
 +
an enthymeme a rhetorical syllogism, and an example rhetorical
 +
induction.
 
   
 
   
{1} But for purposes of demonstration, real or apparent, just as
+
{2} But since few of the propositions of the rhetorical syllogism
Dialectic possesses two modes of argument, induction and the
+
are necessary, ... it is evident that the materials from which
syllogism, real or apparent, the same is the case in Rhetoric;
+
enthymemes are derived will be sometimes necessary, but for the
for the example is induction, and the enthymeme a syllogism, and
+
most part only generally true; and these materials being
the apparent enthymeme an apparent syllogism.  Accordingly I call
+
probabilities and signs, it follows that these two elements must
an enthymeme a rhetorical syllogism, and an example rhetorical
+
correspond to these two kinds of propositions, each to each.  ...
induction.
  −
  −
{2} But since few of the propositions of the rhetorical syllogism
  −
are necessary, ... it is evident that the materials from which
  −
enthymemes are derived will be sometimes necessary, but for the
  −
most part only generally true; and these materials being
  −
probabilities and signs, it follows that these two elements must
  −
correspond to these two kinds of propositions, each to each.  ...
   
</pre>
 
</pre>
12,080

edits