Welcome
   Home | Texts by category | | Quick Search:   
Authors
Works by Aristotle
Pages of Prior Analytics - Book II



Previous | Next
                  

Prior Analytics - Book II   


opposites are never subjects of a single science, and contraries are

opposites, so that we get the first figure, or that the knowable and

the unknowable are not subjects of a single science: this proof is

in the third figure: for it is true of C (the knowable and the

unknowable) that they are contraries, and it is false that they are

the subjects of a single science.

Similarly if the premiss objected to is negative. For if a man

maintains that contraries are not subjects of a single science, we

reply either that all opposites or that certain contraries, e.g.

what is healthy and what is sickly, are subjects of the same

science: the former argument issues from the first, the latter from

the third figure.

In general if a man urges a universal objection he must frame his

contradiction with reference to the universal of the terms taken by

his opponent, e.g. if a man maintains that contraries are not subjects

of the same science, his opponent must reply that there is a single

science of all opposites. Thus we must have the first figure: for

the term which embraces the original subject becomes the middle term.

If the objection is particular, the objector must frame his

contradiction with reference to a term relatively to which the subject

of his opponent's premiss is universal, e.g. he will point out that

the knowable and the unknowable are not subjects of the same

science: 'contraries' is universal relatively to these. And we have

the third figure: for the particular term assumed is middle, e.g.

the knowable and the unknowable. Premisses from which it is possible

to draw the contrary conclusion are what we start from when we try

to make objections. Consequently we bring objections in these

figures only: for in them only are opposite syllogisms possible, since

the second figure cannot produce an affirmative conclusion.

Besides, an objection in the middle figure would require a fuller

argument, e.g. if it should not be granted that A belongs to B,

because C does not follow B. This can be made clear only by other

Previous | Next
Site Search