mufassa l ba ya n. - Forgotten Books
314
-
Upload
khangminh22 -
Category
Documents
-
view
0 -
download
0
Transcript of mufassa l ba ya n. - Forgotten Books
S CIENCE OF LOG IC.
ZA'
W'
A IF-UL-MANTIQ ,
Y 4NE 1L }! 1 1“q KA’MUFASSA L BA YAN.
Jr'
s ke wdsz’
e Sam’sfir na imjm dig/d.
REV. T. J. S‘
COTT,M . A . ,
D.D.
H
m
f; POVERNNENT FP QZE fio o x .
Second Edition
REVISED AND ENLARGED.
A ll rights r eser ved.
LUCKNOWPRINTED AT THE AMERICAN METHODIST MISSION P3383
REV. T. CnAvnN, Supcfi ntcndent.
CON TE NTS .
PAGE
PREFACE,INTRODUCTION,
PARTI—APPREHENSION.
IN'raonuc
'ronr ,
Sphere of Logic
Certa in mental states,
1 .—Attention,
2 .—Comparing,3.
-Abstraction,
4.—Generaliz ation,
5.—Imnguage,
SECTION 1 .
SIMPLE APPREBEKSION,
SECTION 2.
THETERM,
Simple or complex,
Proper , singular, common, collective,
Abstract and concrete,
Absolute and relativ e,
Univ ocal, equiv ocal, synonymous,Contradictory,
Contrary,
Compatible and opposite,
I I
F I H R I S T I M A Z A M IN .
HISSA I—TASAUWUR.
A’
CA’E Kl’GRAND Batu-Es,
Cam p zn'
mr QU’WATElj .
l .-Dhyan,
2 .-Muq§bala karnai,
3.- Q fiwa t i ta friqi,
4.—Q fiwat i JIDSl,
5.—Quwat i natiqa,
PAHLI’ FASL.
TASAUWUR KE Bu m nag,
Do'sar FABL.
Isu KB BAYA'
N n ag ,
l .- Mufrad yaMurakkab,
2 .—Juzi ySKulli
3.-Bin-niebat ya bild
4.-Mushtarak, gait -mushtarak, mutaradif,
5.—Mutan£qiza,6.
Vi 0ONTENTS.
SECTION 3.
PAGE
CLASSIFICATION,G enus and species,
Extension and intention,Difl
'
erentia,
Property and accident,
SECTION 4.
PART II—PROPOSITIoNs.
SECTION 1 .
FORMATION AND DIVISION OF PROPOsITIONs,
l .- Simple and compound propositions,
2 .—Afi rmative and negative,
3.—Universal and
4.—Categorical and hypothetica l,
MATTER or PROPOSITIONS,
SECTION 2 .
DISTRIBUTION OF TERMS.
SECTION 3.
CoNVERsION,
SECTION 4.
OPl’OSITION,
FIHRIST I HAZA’MI’N.
TPBRI' FASL.
BAu'
N AJNA‘
S AUR ANWA'
,WG .,
Umfim OKhusus,Fasl
Bayi n im )
CHAUTHI' EASE.
MUARRIE KE BAYA'
NM313,
Q awaid i Muarrif,
HISSA II—Q AZIYA .
FABLI' EASL.
BAYA’N Q Az rog KA
’
,
A Q SA'
M l Q AZIYA,
l .—Mufrad yamurakkab,
2 .—Mfipba yasaliba,
3.—Kulliya yd juz iya,
4.—Hamliya yd shartiya,
BAYA‘N MA’DDE EA
'
,
DU’SRI’ FASL.
BAu N Q AZl'Olj KI’KULLIYAT O JUZIYA'I’
TPSRI' EASL .
Axe III: BAYA'
N MEN,
NAQ I'z EB BAn '
Nm y,
SAERA
FIHRIST I NAZA’
NI’
N. ix
EISSA III—DALIE.
PAHLI’ EASE.
SAFBA
DALI’L Ex HUJJAT EE BAYA'NMEN
,
Q iyas,
DU’SRI’EASE.
SHAKL RE BAYA'
N ME§ ,
TI’SRI’ EASE.
ZARB EE BAYA‘
N MEN,
KBULE,
CHAUTHI’FASL.
BAYA’N Q IYA
’S SHARTIYA KA
'
,
l .—Q iy6.s i ittisali,
2 .—Q iyés i infisali,
3.—Q iyasmurakkabshartiya,
PANCHWI’N EASE.
Q IYA'
S I BE-TARTI'B o MURAEEAR,
l .—Q iy£e i mulshafi
'
af,
2 .—Q iy§s i musalsal,
HISSA IV—MANTIG I ISTIAMAEI‘
.
FABLI’ EASE.
BAYA’N MUGA
'
LTON KA'
,
Q ISM AUWAL, MUGA’ETA I SU’RI’,
1 .- Hadd i ausat juzi,
2 .-N5jaiz kulliyat akbar ya asgar ki,
3.-Muqaddamat i salibe,
D lBACH A .
ILM I MANTIQ kaparhna z ihn ki arastagi aur sanwarneke waste bahut mufid hai . Lekin is ilm ki kitaben Hindustani z ubanon men bahut kam hain. Ek mukhtasarrisala musamma ba ILM I MANTIQ
”hal men ba zuban
i Urdu chhapa hai . Agarchi wub risala. achchh a hai,magar phir bhi ai se mukhtasar risala se ilm 1 Mantiqhéhal sa f nahin khulta ha
i
. Farsi men bhi do ek chh ote
chhote risale,maslan Su “Kubra ,”hain . Chandbaton
Mantiqke bayan men arya i Latafat aur Makhzanul-Ul lim
”men likhi hain, magar in kitabon se sirf unhin
lo on ko faida hai, jo Farsi jante hain , aur jabki Farsizu men is ilm ka sikhna mushkil hfia, to
men ( s se Farsi men tarjuma hua hai,) jaise risala 1
Shamsiya’
jis ki sharh Q utb hai, sikhna , awam-uh -nas
ke waste bahut mushkil hai . Siwa 18 ke un kitabon se is
ilm ka hal aksar Arabi talibul ilmon ke bhi samajh men
achchhi tarah nahin ata. Zubau i Sanskrit men Chand.kitaben 1s ilm ki pai jati hain, magar wuh sirf unhin logonkc kam ki hain, jo us mushkil z ubau men dakhl rakhte
Pas yih kaifiyat i s ilm ki mulk 1 Hind men dekhkar mere dil men aya, ki nu mushkil at ko 30 is ilm ke hasilkam e men akar parti hain , asan kami n . Chunanchi isi fil m
so yih kitabba zuban 1 Urdujismen ilm 1 Mantiqhé.bayankhfib tawalat ke saith likba hai, aur ] a be ja shaklon se
suhut diya hai, aur misalen aisi sahl sahl hain, ki agar koi
mubtadi talibul ilm bhi dil lagako parhe, to is ilm ko hasil
kar le , aur roz -marra ke waste Rafa uthawe , talif ki .
Roman -Urdfi nuskhe ke Sath Angrezi bhi hai . Baze
Hindustani doston ne , jo Angrezi se waqif hain, yih kaha,ki A gar yih kitab donon zubanon men ho, to kya kahna
Main ne bhi yih socha ki Angrezi talib ilmon ko Mantiq
4 PREFACE.
standing the subject in this languag e also, so that the
book would thus answer a double purpose .
Of the Urdu translation it may he remarked that it
is not always strictly literal . Where the meaning could
be better preserv ed the translation is fr e e, and some
little chang e in arrangement has been made to sui t the
terminology o f logic in Urdu .
Still, as a rule , the Urdu will be found to correspond
closely with the English, so that a g ood and may be
subserv ed by re taining both in one v olume . With the
hope that this book may assist the student of logic to a
better understanding of this useful science, it is sent forth .
BAREIL LY T. J. SCOTT.
December, 1870.
DI’
BA’OHA . 5
he sikhne men is zuban se bari madad pahunchegi, aur domatlabhasil honge .
Wéz ih ho, ki yih tarjumabilkull laiz i nahin hai, jahfinjahan achchhi tarah mane nikalte hain, wahan waise hirahn e diya hai, aur kahin kahin tartibibarat ki is garaz se,ki istilahat Mantiqki Urdumenbe-mahawara aur na-z ebana malfim hon , badal di hain. Magar phir bhi yihqaidarakha hai, ki Urdu tarjuma bilkull Angrezi se mutabaqatrakhta hai , yahan tak ki donon fi lmek jild men rakhn e se
faida n ikalta hai . Caraz is ummed par , ki tulaba i ilm iMantiqko khfibmadad pahunche, aur achchhi tarah ismufid ilm ko samjhen, yih kitabjari ki jati hai .
SHAHR I BARELf T. J. SCOTT.
1 161: i December, 1870.
PREFACE TOTHESECOND EDITION.
THE fi rst edition o f this book was soon exhausted,
a nd a second edition was called for, which hasbeen longdelayed for wan t o f time to make some needed cor re c
tions and additions. The book could easily be made
larg er, by a mor e leng thy discussion o f subje cts, and
fulle r, by the introduction o f many pe tty distin ctions
and div isions tha t pe rplex the memory without adding
much to a knowledg e o f the r ea l subject .
”
But I hav e
thought the book would be more g enerally use ful no t
en cumbered with unimpor tan t matter . Ordinarily themind works with more pleasure and powe r , the mor e
Simple and dire ct its machin e ry or the lin es Of thought
ov er which it mov es.
As fa r a s possible , I hav e conformed the termin ologyand mode o f tr ea tmen t to that in use among A rabic and
Pe rsian autho rs,but hav e n o t depa r ted from wha t se em
ed a be tte r me thod than theirs. Na tiv e scho lars must
n ot in fe r tha t this implies e rror , for the mode o f tr eatingthe subject o f log ic e v en
,is open to improv ement like
many othe r things.
BAEEILLY,N.
-W. P .,
T. J. SCOTT.
May, 1879 .
nisicun TABA ISA'
NI'
.
TARA I AUWAL ki sabjilden bahut jald kharch ho gain
aur do -bara chhapne ki zururat pari . Magar baz zun’
n‘i
islahat aur izafat ke liyeqillat i waqt ke mamhone se
chh apne menbahut waqfa haa. Mazamin ki bahs i tawil
aur bahut Si chhoti chhoti baton ke dakhil karne se hajm
is kitabkabarh sakta tha. Lekm 18 SCbilabusal kisi nafa
muatadd-bih ke z ihu ko zabt i mazamin men diqqat Wéqahoti hai . Is waste gair zurfir i bayan ke dakhil kam e se
muhtariz hoke nafa em ke laiqbanana, munasibjana.
Kyfi nki Saf wazih bayan par tabiat khlibjamti hai . Hatt
al- imkan main ne istilahat aur tarz i bayan Arabi o Farsi
musa'
nnifin ke muwafiqikhtiyar kiya hai . Lekin nu ke
tarz i bayan se jo tarz mujhe bihtar malfim haa, use nahin
chhora. Hindustani Mantiqin is so yih na samjhen ki is
men kuchh galati hai, kyI’
Inki is fan ke tarz i bayan men
bhi bahuteri aur baton ki tarah, taraqqi o tabdil ki gunjaishhai .
SHAHR I BARELf T. J. SCOTT.
Mci/I I'
May, 1879 .
THESCIENCE OF LOGIC.
INTRODUCTION.
1 ,—LOGIC is the Science and also
'
the Ar t of reason
ing . As a Science it has re ference to the n ecessa ry laws
o f thought, in accordance with which the mind a cts
in the production o f thought, and in conducting a
correct argumenta tion in the Search for truth . A s an
Art it has Special re ference to the practical rules laid
down for conducting an argumentation ; for guardingagainst erroneousprocesses of reasoning and the drawingo f false conclusions, and, in shor t
,for making the best
practical use o f a system of logic .
2 .-By some, log ic is thought to be one method o f
reasoning . It is thought that there are other modes o f
r easoning besides logical reasoning . Logic is supposed
to contain rules by which we can so reason as to con
found an opponen t by forcing him in to traps'and snares,
and secure v ictory ev en for e rror . Hence it is supposed
to be chiefly useful in gaining v ictory in a dispute
whether on the Side o f truth or e rror, and for making a
display o f smar tness and learning through pride or for
sport . This is a common mistake in India . A ll this is a
misapprehension of the r eal nature and object o f logic,
which is not merely a method of reasoning , but is the
only method of reasoning ; that is, in the correct search
for truth the mind acts in but one way or only bycertain laws. A departure from these laws inv olves
MUQABBAMA . 1 1
Khuda ke banae hain , larta hai ; pas agar in qam’
monke bamfijibz ihn na daure , to galati men par jata ha i .
Asl garaz mantiqki yih hai, ki wubqawan in i muqarrara bakh iibi zahir ho jawan , aur wubqaids hasil hon ,ki in par agar lihaz rakha jae , to 1mqawan in mazkfi ra ke
bamfi jih aql daure , aur agar koi 1mqawanin se alahidagi
ikhtiyar her e , to un ki mi se us ki galati malfim ho jae .
Maslan ,hisabek ilm hai, j ls ka istiamal Chand muqarrarqaidon ke bamfi jibkiya jata hai . Aur zurfi r hai
, ki yihqaide hamesha har mulk aur har zubau men ek hi hon.
Masal to maslan zur iir hai, ki a de jama, tafriq, z arb,
taqsim ke hamesha ek hi rahen . Ala hazalqasmantiqaqlda urane ka ilm hai
, aur agar ham thik thik aql dauranayasochua chahen , to mantiqhi ke bamajibkarma hoga. A isa
bhi hai, ki aksar log dur a sti se sochte,mubahisa karte , aur
hain, ba wujfid is amr ke,ki z ara bhi ilm i
m antiqkeqawaid se waqif nahin hote , jaisa ki aksar bii akarta hai, ki baz e admi durust likhnewalon ki suhbatpanese thik likhte aur bolte hain, agarchi sari O nahW se mutlaqbhi waqif nahin hote . Magar bahar hal yih bihtar hai, kiqawaid durust likhne aur bolne ke na-waqifon ki talim kewaste , aur un logon ke sudharne ke Waste , jo ki sahih
nahin likhte aur bolte hain, muaiyan hon . Isi tarah parqawaid i mantiq, khata aur galati se mahf iiz rakhn e ke
liye , aur auron ki kharabo naqis dalilou ka nuqs malfimkarn e ke liye kar
-amad hain .
3.— Baz e admi mantiqke matlabo haqiqat se waqif
nahi n hain , pas isi jibat se jante hain , ki mantiqke sikhn e
se iatiqad din par , aur Khuda ke wujlid parqaim nahin
rahta. We khiyal karte hain , ki mantiqek tarah ka
hun ar ya hikmat hai, jis ke z ar ia se mantiqi apui marz i
ke muwafiqhar ek bat ko jhii th ya sach kar sakta hai,
y ahan tak ki akhir anjam yih hota hai, ki mantiqi kaiatiqad sachchi bat par a m nahin rahta yih galat fahmi
hai, kyfi nki mantiqseqawat i z ihn i barhti, aur aql sachaiparqaim ho jati hai, aur khata o galati se mahffi z rahti
hai .
4.—Mantiqbahut purana ilm hai, aurqadim z amanon
men sir f doqaum on yane Yfinanion aur Hindfi on ke dar
miyan paya jata tha, aur sabqaumon ne inbin se yih ilm
12 INTRODUCTION.
science from them. It is n ot certainly known whether
the Greeks received it from the Hindus,or the Hindus
from the Greeks. Some learned men hav e thought tha t
the Greeks receiv ed the ir kn owledg e of logic from the
Hindus, while others have thought not. Most probablyeach nation formed the science for itself and cultiv ated
i t to the degree in which it has been found. The Rom
ans r eceiv ed their knowledge Oi logic from the Greeks.
European nations lea rn ed directly from the Greek o f
A ristotle and from A rabic translations of,and comment
a ries on , Greek works. The A rabs a lso r eceived their
knowledge of logic from the Greeks, while the Jews
learned from the A rabs.
The fi rst writer or teacher o f logic among the
Greeks, of whom we hav e any knowledge, was Zeno ,who liv ed about 488,B. C. There we re some good things
in his logic with some things obscure and worthless .
A fter Zeno, came Socrates,Euclid of Mage ra, An tis
then es, A rchytas, Plato, and A ristotle . Zen o and some
o f these writers cultiv ated a system of sophistical wrangling . Among them and their pupils logic seemed to be
simply a kind of recreation and div e rsion in which theyoccupied themselv es for hours in trials o f each other
’s
acuteness. Socra tes who liv ed 469 ,B. C.,made a more
worthy use of logic . He desired to see logic employed
more for the inv estigation o f truth and the cultivation o f
the intellect . He used in reasoning a system ofquestionsand answers leading to a conclusion . Plato
,the pupil
o f Socra tes, improved the science of logic still furthe r ;
but it r emained for Aristotle, born 384, B. C. ,to bring
the science to something like per fection, so that from
his day to the present, logic, as taught in Europe, is
substantially tha t of A risto tle . The works of A ristotle
we re translated into Arabic in the second century after
Mahomed ; and thus logic as studied among the Musal
PART l .—AP PREHENSION.
INTRODUCTORY.
The Sphere of Logic—Some Defi nitions of
Psycologz’
ca l Terms.
l .- Logic deals with the laws of mind in thinking
and r easoning . The mind is that spiritual n on-materia l
existence within us which feels, perceiv es, and r easons.
The body is merely its tenemen t. The mind ga ins
knowledg e of the materia l world in a mysterious way bymeans of the fi v e senses, v ia
,o f sight, hearing, fe eling ,
taste , and smell.
The mind,like a mirr or, r eceiv es imag es or impr es
sions through these senses. This fi gure illustrates the
r eceptiv e phase of mind. Besides these ideas or notion s
obtained through the fi v e senses, other ideas, as of God
and o f the soul itself, of moralquality, &C. ,may be
awakened in the soul . In tuition, consciousn e ss, origina l
suggestion may be mentioned as sources o f ideas. The
discussion o f this subject belongs to the science o f
psycology ra the r than to the science of logic . The
mind is possessed of v arious powers, some of which
will be briefly discussed in thisbook .
INTRODUCTORY.
All iron is heavy—is a judgment.
“This staff is iron - is a secondjudgment.
From these two we may draw a third judgment
o r conclusion, viz . therefore this stafi‘
is heavy . The
a ct of the mind by which these two judgments are
compared, and the third deduced fr om them,is called
reasoning .
Another example o f this operation is
All men are mortalZaid Amar and Bakr are men ;Therefore Zaid Amar and Bakr are mortal .
Here also we hav e in thisprocess the third state of
the mind with which logic is conce rned, v iz . , reasoning.
6 .-Thisbook is divided into three parts, in which
these three mental states or processes are trea ted in order .
It is the lawqf thought concern ed in them which consti
tutss the subject of logic .
Meanwhile there are a few mental states that maybe explained here . By them the materials of thought
are collected.
1 .- Attention is the directing of the mind to an
object. It may be a v oluntary state of the mind.
Thus, we may fix our attention on some object of sight,
or sound, or on the matter of a page we may be reading .
2 .—Oompar ing is the act of the mind in which it
contemplates two or more things with reference to
on e anothe r . Thus,when we observe that iron is
heav ier than wood, or that John is taller than James,
o r that one man is more learned than another, we per
form eu act of comparing . The conclusion we reach
from an act of comparing is a“judgment .
” The cor
rectness of every judgment and process of reasoningdepends on the accuracy of comparison .
A'
GA’Z KI
‘
CHAND BA’TEN. 21
Pahli .—Kull loha bhar i hota ha i .Basra—Yih danda lohe ka hai .
Abin do malIim tasdiqon se tisramajhIil nikalta hai,
ki yih danda bhar i ha i . Pasba z aria do tasdiqon malIima
ks, tisri tasdiqyane na tifa nikala. Dalil is hi ko kahte
Dasrt misdl. -Kull insan marnewale hain;Zaid, Amr , Bakr insan hain
Pas Zaid, Amr , Bakr , marnswale hain.
Chunanchi is tartibse aql ya z ihn daurane ko hujjat
6 .—Yih kitabtin bisson par munqasim hai, j in men
tasauwur aur tasdig aur da lil ka mufassal bayan hoga.
Janna ohahiye , ki maqSIid ilm i mantiqka us aqliqaminkabayan hai, jo in tin batonmen paya jata hai .
Munasibhai ki yahan par (3t zihni halat aurqwaton kabayan kiya jas.
1 .—Dhyan gci ganr us ko kahte hain , jab z ihu khauz
o fikr ke sath'
kisi chiz ya bat par lags ; masal to maslan ,
kisi chiz par, jo dekhne men awe , ya awaz par jo sunne
men awe , ya kisi kitabi muamile par parhte waqt hamapna dhyan lagawen ya gaur karen.
2 .—Mugabala Icarmi us zihn i halat ko kahte hain,
118 so ham do ya ziyada chiz on ko ek dIi sri se muqabalakaren. Pas jab ham dekhte hain, ki loha lakI
'i se bhari
hai, Zaid Amr se lamba hai , ya Zaid Amr se z iyada alim
hai, isi ko muqabals. karna kahte hain . Yahan par gaurkama chabiye, ki muqabals. karne se tasdiqat nikalti hain .
Har eh tasdiqaur hujjat ki sihhat O galati muqabals parmankasar hai ; aur agar muqabals karne men kisi tarahgalati par jaws, to tasdiqaur hujjatmen bhi galati ho jaegi
A’
GAZ KI’CHAND BA
’TEN. 23
3.
—Ek aurqwat z ihn men hai, j i se grima i i tafr igi
kahna achchha hoga. Yih wubiqwat hai, ki jab hamchahen to kisi chiz ki aur sabkhassiyaton ko chhoIkar ,us ki ek khassiyat par lihaz karen . Maslan
, jab ham
chahen, to isiqwat se lohe ‘ ki aur sabSifaten, yan e , rangaur sakhti, aur wazn ,
aur i wag . ko chhoI‘kar sirf us ki ek
sifat, yan e , shakl par lihaz rakh sakte hain . Ya alawa aur
sab khassiyaton ks, sir f us ki salehti ya wasn par lihaz
rakhen. Isqwat i z ihn i ka bara faida age malIim hoga.
4.
—Ek aurqwat z ihn men hai, jise grima i i j ins kahnaachchha hoga. Y ih wuhqwat hai, j i s ks z aria se ham balihaz amm khassiyaton ke , jo mukhtalif chiz on men pai'
ati hon , eh nam un ks Waste muqarrar kar sakte hain.
Idaslan ,bawujIide ki tarah tarah ks phIi l hain ,magar chIinki
bazon men ek khassiyat pai jati hai, is sababes un mutafar
riqphIi lon ko ga l-I6 kahte hain . Aur isi tarah bawui deki admionmen mukhtalif boli , aur rang, aurqadd oqamatwag . hai, magar ba lihaz amm khassiyat ke , sabks wasteek hi l iam, y ane , insan rakhte hain. Pas yih wuhi gi
‘
iwat
i j insi hai . Gaur karna chabiye, kiqwat i jinsi as bemadadqziwat i taf r iqa ks, f ins aur nan aur f asl bana sakte
hain. Isbat ko achchhi tarah samajhna, ilm i mantiqmen
n ihayat pur-z arIir hai, jaisa age mallim hoga. Hasil yih
hai, ki in sabbaton maz i ra i bala ks samajhne se is ilmks Sikhns aur samajh men kuchh na kuchh madad Euni r
pahunchti hai .
5 .—Boli yaneqama t i ndtiga ks kuchh bayan ks waste
yahan par achchha manqa malIim hota hai . Khaliqneinsan koqwat i nutqaisi ata ki hai, jis as be zaria awaz ,
jis es kalam banta hai, tarah tarah ks tasauwurat, aur
khiyalat, aur apni z ih n i halaten , jo guz ar ti rahti hain ,zahir kar sakta hai . Sir f insan hi men yihqwat hai .Haiwan bhi apni taklifat, aur khauf , aur ssa
wg . eh tar ah ki awaz se zahir kar sakte ain ; magar Iin
men wubqwat nahin , ] 18 SC alfaz banawen au r kalam ka
ren, lekin hazaron alfaz , ya awazen, insan tarah tarah par
istiamal men la sakta hai, taki be-shumar khiyalat ko, jodil men guz arte rahte hain , zahir karen .
A lfa’
s, mufrad, yamurakkabawazen hain, jo insan kejosh aur khiyalat ks izhar ks liye bole jate hain.
SECTION I.
SIMPLE APPREIIENSION.
1 .-We take up for more enlarged treatment the act
o r state of mind called simple apprehension. Simple appre
hension is the act of the mind by which some notion or
conception of an object of thought is obtained . As o f a
man when seen,of a sound when heard, of hardness
,
coldness, &c .,when felt. Thus, through the fi v e senses
we gain ideas of the external world. In a similar e le
mentary manner by what is called internal perception
or apprehension, or the“internal sense
,
’we grasp ide as
relating to the soul itself, to moral truth, the . By simple
apprehension we gather the elements of knowledge and
Of thought, which are woven into trains o f reflecti on
and reasoning .
2 .—Apprehension may be of an object as incomplex
or complex . The result of an act of apprehension isincomplex when the notion formed is simply of one o h
ject, or of sev eralwithout any connection being perceiv edbetween them ; as man, tree, stone, bravery ; and com
plex when, the notion we form of two or more objectsis a combination, as a man on horseback
, a book on the
table,a brave man .
The idea, notion Or conception gain ed by apprehension expressed in language is called, a term which willnowbe briefly discussed.
FASL I.
TASAUWUR KE RAYAN MEN.
l .
—A R tasauwur kamufassal bayan hota hai. Kisi
shai ya bat ks khiyal ko tasauwur kahte hain, jaisa
ki kisi admi ka khiyal jab dekhne men awe, ya kisi
chiz ki sakhti ya thandapan hé, jab ct ine men awe .
Juise hawass i khamsa se mahSIi sat ka tasauwur hota
hai, isi tarah idrak i batin , ya taaqqul, ya hiss i batinse r Iih aur neki wg . ka tasauwur z ihn men pahunchta
hai . Tasauwur karne se wub malIimat, aur khiyalat hasil
hots ha in , jo nazar o bahs ks silsile se Wahneta hots hain.
2 .—Tasauwur ya to muf rad hoga., ya murakkab,
Tasauwur i mufrad use kahte hain, jab ki eh chiz ya
kai chizon ka khiyal nlahida nlahida bila Ilaqa ke awe .
maslan , admi,patthar ,bahaduri . Tasauwur i murakkabuse
kahte hain, jab do ya ziyada chison kakhiyal dil men
guzre : masal to maslan, tasauwur ghore par sawa’
r ka. Gaurkarna chabiye , ki is tasauwur men ghor
darmiyan Ilaqa hai . DIi sri misal, mespar hi kitabanr dawat,
ya bahadur admi . Yahan tin chi zon ka tasauwur Ilaqa kesath hai, aur isi ko tasauwur i murakkabkahte hain . Yad
rakhna ohahiye , ki jabtasauwur zuban se sadir ho, to us
he lafz kahenge .
SECTION. II.
OE THE TERM .
A term is the r esult Of an act of apprehension ex
pressed in language . For instance, if we hav e by the
sense of sight, the apprehension o f a tre e , the word tree
by which we express the conception; formed is a term .
”
Again, if we hav e in mind the idea of sweetness, the
word sweetness wh en used to express this notion is a“te rm.
”In log ic a term has the broad signifi cation
o f any combination of words expressing an idea and
which stand as the subject or predicate of a proposition .
There are sev eral div isions of termswhich we must notice .
1 . —Terms are simple or complex. A simple term
as opposed to complex is the name of a sing le thing and
is g enera lly one word, as James,tree , swee tn ess. A.
complex term is a compound word or phrase expressinga complex notion gained by act o f apprehension , as“James the fi sherman
,
”a“ tall tree,
”the swe etness
o f an orange . James the fi sherman conta ins the
complex idea of a particular man and a cer tain cra ft .
Her e we also hav e two ideas connected in a complex
term, ta ll tree. Again, the two ideas, Sweetness a nd
orang e giv e the complex term sweetness of an orange.
Words are said to be categor ematic when they can beused alone asterms, astree , orange ,man , &c. Wordsthat can
not be thus used alone but are used In connection with other
words are called syncstegorematic. Such are prepositions,
gunctionS, adverbs, the inflected cases of nouns, e . g . , to ,
, ,and trulyy , man’s, &c . It must be marked that this
is a division of wordsmerely as suCh, not of terms.
FASL II .
V
-ISIII- EE MUEASSAL RAYAN MEN.
JAB ki tasauwur zubau se sadir ho, us ko laf z kahte
hain . Masai to maslan , dekhns se kisi darakht ki hayat
ka tasauwur zihn men awe , lafz darakht, jis as us tasauwurko zahir kiya, malfIi z kahte hain. DIisri misal, farz karo ,ki agar z ihn men tasauwur mithas ka awe , to us ki nishat
lafz mithas bolenge . Wasib ho, ki lair kai taqsim parmunqasim hai 118 habayan age awega.
1 —Lafz mnf rad hota hai ya murakkab. Jab kisitasauwur ks zahir karne ko ek hi lafz kafi 'ho,yane eh hi lafz
us tasauwur par dalalat kare,'
to us lafz ko mnf rad kahte
hain, maslan, Zaid, da rakht, mithas. Lafz murakkab, us
murakkab lafz ya fiqre ko kahte hain, jis as ch tasauwur imurakkabzahir hotahai,jaisaZaid machhnd, anchadarahht,narangi hi mithas, wg . Yahanpar do tasauWUr lafz murak
kabse zahir hIi e , yans ek khass shakhs aur us ka pesha.
Phir, tincha aur da rakht, ia'
donon tasauwuron ks zahir
karne ko lafz i murakkabancha darakhtbola gaya. DIi sri
misal mithas, aur narangi, in donon tasauwuron ke zahir
karne ko lafz i murakkab, yane mithi narangi bolagaya.
Janna chabiye, ki lafz tamcim aur na-tamam hotahai .
La fz tamam wuh hai, jo bilamadad dIisre ks, apne mane
batlawe , jeiss insan , Zaid, darakht, wg . Lafz na-tamam
wuh hai, jo bila madad kisi aur lafz ks, apne mane na
batlawe . Maslan harf, ha, se, men, az , wg .
ALFA’
ZKE
auwal har ek lafz ke mane khfib samajhna aur thahraina
chabiye, kyfinki aisa karne se bahut si taqrir aur galationmenparne se bachenge .
Lu z Ki MUJMAL BAYA’N.
( Mufrad yaMurakkab.Juzi yaKalli.Bin-nisbat yzi Elli -nisbat.Mushtarak yéGair-mushtarak yi Mutar‘dif.
lMutanéqiza .
lMutazadda.
SECTION III.
Cu ssxmcn ron AS RELATED ro ensue, srxcxss, AND
nmrmsnurm.
An other important subject connected with termsand n ecessa ry to a prope r understanding of logic is thato f species, genus, and difi
'
er en tia .
l .—C'ommon terms obtained by g eneralization a fford
the means of classifi cation of objects with re ference tosome common and distinguishing characte ristic . A collection containing objects ar ranged in this manner iscalled a species or genus. Genus is the more extensiv eterm
,often including many species, while species ia
cludes indiv iduals. Genus is a group o f g roups, o r aclass of classes. For instance the term anima l is a
genus including ev ery thing hav ing life and the power o fv oluntary motion . In this g enuswe have many speciesincluded as, man, beast, bird, 8120. Any species may bediv ided into sev eral classes, then it becomes a g enuswith r e ference to this new classifi cation .
Thus, abov e,“beast,
”according to a common use
of this word, is a species including a ll warm bloodedquadrupeds,but these may be divided into horses, sheep,
dogs, &0.
These then become species, and the term “beast,
which in the fi rst classifi cation was a species, becomes ag enus. Again, if we divide horses into different kinds,as Arabian horses
,mountain horses
, &c . , horse itselfbecomes thus a genus, and so on . The more extensiv eclass is the g enus, the more limited one is the species.
The genus when included in a higher classification be
FASL III.
KULLiY/I'r n un BAYXN 1 JINS, NAU, FASL AUR xnz .
l .—Wé.zih ho, ki j in-9, aur nag, aur ar z kabayan 91s
kc mutaalliqhai , aur man tiqke samajhne he waste pur
zarfir hai . Alfan i Kulli se jins aur nan wg . banae jate
hai1_1 . Maslan jabkai chizon ke Waste , balihaz eh ya z iyada
sifaton ke eh nam muqarrar kiya jawe , us ko f ins, aur nanNan ki banishat 31ns ke afrad ziyada hote hain, kyfi g
ki eh jinsmen kai nan hote hai1_1 . Masal to maslan ,ha iwdn
ek jins ha i, 318 men j ltni ohiz en jandar o mutaharrik bil
irada hain shamil hain . Aur is jinsmen kai nau shamil
haig , jaise insan aur chaupde aur parand Wg .
Jénna chabiye , ki nau bhi kai faslon par taqsim hosakti hai ; phir is hal men, balihaz nu faslon ke wubeh
jins hai . Maslan chaupaya ek nan ha1, 318 men char
tangwale janwar dakhil hair_1, aur inbin ko fasl fasl par
ham; sahte hai1_1 , maslan , ghore , hheren, kutte wg . pas
yih sah faslen nau ho jati hai1_1, our in ki banishat wuh
lafz chaupaya, jo ki nau the, abjms hfia.
Phir agar ghore ki taraf khiyal karo, yih bhi kai tarah
par ho saktahai, jaiso Arabi, Kabuli , Turki, wg . , pas, ab
is sfirat men ghora bhi ha-iatibar inqismon ke jins hfiaaur ala-haz-al-qiyas.
anu s 4 an ANW4: 47
yabaz menpoi jawe, to us ho kha’
ssa kahte hai1_1, aur ek
nan so ziyada men poi jaws, to us ho ar e i 4mm kahte hain .
Maslan khass shan so h ard hoke ohalna hi sirf insan ko
afrad men pays jashai, leba’
ssa hai ; lekin dam Iona siwao
insan he aur anwamen bhi paysjata hai, is liye are i 4mm
hfia.
Agar wuh sifat ya khassiyat nan hi afrad se judona
ho sake , us ho are i lfizim, aur agar judo ho sake , us ho arz
i mufdriqkahte hain. Misal pahle hi, Zaid Kalkatta men
paida hfia. Paida hona Kalkatte men Zaid so jnda
ho nahin sakta. Ala-hazil-qiyas dam lens. aurhhare hoke
ohalna. Misél dfisri, an i mufériqhi , jaiso Zaid chalta
hai, yih kuchh zar lir nahin, hi Zaid hamesha chalta raho,kyfinki kabbi Iota ho, yabaithé. ho . Arz hi taqsim zail
men hai
Khtssa.
5.—Jins aur nan aur fasl aur an i {1mm aur khassa in
ho pdnch kulli kahte hai1_1 . Yih hullien mahmfil hone hi
mauz lfi so zahir karti hain. Pas agar kisiqaziye men koi6mm kulli mahmfil waqi ho our mauz 1f1 hhéss kulli ho, towubamm kulli j ins hoti hai . Maslan insan haiwan hai .
”
Yahan haiwan jins hai . Anr jabhisi gaziye men koi ammkulli mahmfil ho aur us hfi mauzfi eh fard ho, to wuh hullina u hoti hai . Jaiso Zaid insan hai . Jabkisi amm kulli
so, hi mahmfil waqi ho, koi sifat mumaiyaz a ya judo karnewali khassiyat lagai jaws jis so mauzfi ko tamam ajnés yaanwa mashmfi lae mahmfil so tamiz ho jaws, to mahmfil
AJNA’S AUR ANW4. 49
ha jus i mnhhassis f ast hota hai, jaiso“i nsan si-aql
jandar”hai . Yahan
“zi-aql” ha lafz insan l o aur jandaron
se makhana karta hai . Jabmahmfi l ya us ha koi juz mauzuko lfim
’
m hai, lohin ns ki zat se hharij hai, to mahmfil arzhota hai, maslan insén hama-khor hai .
Jabmahmnl ya us ha koi junmaumi sorakhta hai, to mahmfi l lchcissa aisehai
”
ya Zaid Kalkatte menpaida6 .—Kullior_1 hi nishat, Arabi mantiqin hi rae char
tarah hi hai,“tasawi ,
”tahayun ,
”umlim o khuslis i mut
laq,” nmfim o khusfismin -wajhin . Do hullionmen tasdwihi nishat us w t hoti hai hi donon he mindaqdonon heafrad eh hon. aslan “insan
”our
“danishmand jandar .
”
use kahte hai1_1 hi do hullion he mindaqdononhe afrad nlahida alahida hon ; jaise patthar aur darakht.Urmim o Ichuszis mutiag wub hai hi ek kulli
shag khéss kulli sadiqae aur jo chiz khasskulli hi fard 0 6mm hulli bhi us par sadiqae, aur wubchiz us {1mm kulli hi bhi fard ho ; magar is ha ahs nahin.
jandar anr insén . Umzim o hhusfismin-waihinuse kahte hain hi eh kulli dfisri kulli hi nisbat ek haisiyatso [those our dfisri haisiyat so amm ho, maslan
SECTION IV.
Dnrmm on .
ANOTHER subject connected with terms and thosubject of classifi cation, and hence n ecessary to beunderstood in a system o f log ic, is dqfinition .
1 ,—Defi nition means giving the marks or cha
racteristics of an object or class o f . obje cts so that it
or they may be r ecognized by these marks. Definitionitself has be en defi ned “ laying down a boundary .
”
When applied to terms, then , it mean s describing them
in such a manner as to distinguish them fr om o th ajtorme n t
;Somefimes simply a word well understood bused for the word defined, e . g . an anthropophagus is a.
cannibal. In rea soning , true and settled definition s of
terms are v ery important from the fact that diffe rent
persons employ them with different meanings, thus
causing confusion and er ror .
2 .—Iaogicians usually divide what is called a log ica l
defi nition into two pa r ts which are called the genus and
difl'
erentia . The definition is made by uniting the genu s
to the difi'
erentia . Thuswe may define man to be
animal gifted with speech .
”Hero animal is the genus
united to “gifted with speech,
”the difler entia by which
man is distinguished from other animals, as horse,bird
,
&c . Again, the Bombay mango is a mango which came
originally from Bombay . Here mango is the genus, and
Bombay, the difl'
erentia distinguishing this mango from
o thers.
MUARRIF KE BAYAZVMEN. 55
Muarrif ke agsam aur bhi hain , lekin un aqsa’m kzi
j anna llm i Mantiqke jann e he waste ohandan zur firi n ahin.
Ba-khauf i tawalat, uII ki bahs is maqam so chhor di hai .
Q AWAID I MUARRIF .
Muarrif he banane me 1_1 chandqaide hain , chunanchi
nu me 1_1 so doqaidon ha, jO nihayat zurur hain, yahan
par bayan kiya jata hai .Pabid.
— Zar1’1r chabiye ki muar rif taim ho , 11s ko haze
mantiqin hadd'
i ta’
m bolte hair_1, yan e apn e hull afraid ho
jame ho , aur gair ke dakhil hone ko man ahare . Maslan
agar koi naqd ke mane yfi n batlawe ki wuh ek dhat hi chiz
hai, to yih tarif jame nahin hai, kyfi gki naqd men kaurian
bhi dakhil hain , halanki we dhat hi nahin hain . Ya agar
ko i y1’
1 1_1 bole , ki naqd ek chiz hai, 31s so jins hharidi jati
ha i, to yih gair ko dakhil hon e se mans nahin karts,
kyfi nki anaj wag . so bhi our 3ins hharidi jati hai, pas abissfi rat me 1_1 gair afraid bhi is tarif men dakhil h li e jate hain .
’
Is liye yih muarrif him no. hoga.
Dalsrd.— Chabiye , hi muarrif us chiz so, 31s ke mane
batlata hai saf ho, warna us chiz ki sharah bakh libi zahir
na karegzi . Is waste, agar mumkin ho , muar rif maiaz i, .
aur pechida na ho . Agar in don or; qaidon par bahhlibilihaz rahe , to har lafz he mane aise saf rahenge , hi galati
O khata na porogi.‘
Abham mutawajjih hote hain , taraf bayan tasdiqcithe, O hi tasauwurdt so bante hai
Bisi la i Shamsia meg muarrif heqaide is tarah par hai1_11 —Yih durust nahin hai, ki muarrif nafs i mahiyat ho, kyfinki
muarrif , muarraf so pahle mahim hota hai, aur koi shai apni zzit so pahchiim’
nahin jati hai .2 .
—Na muarrif aisa chahi e, jo muarraf se ammtar yakhasstar hobalk i donon umum o khusti sme1_1 anibar h0 1
_1 .
3.—Na kisi shai hi tarif aise lsiaca se honzi chibiyo jo marifat aur
jahfl at me 1_1 masawi hag .
4.—Na tarif shai hi aisi shai se honri ohahiye k i wub bagair shai
awwal h e pahchan me1_1 nahin ati hai .5.—Alfé.z i wahshi o garib313so same motIah par na pahunche,
istiami l nahin karna ohahiye .
Pm n—ms PROPOSITION
A proposition is an act of judgmen t expressed
in languag e . A proposition as used in logic has a lso
been defined,“a sentence indica tiv e .
”This dieting
u ishes a proposition from a question , command,an
e ntrea ty, &c .
,which a re n ot dealt with in log ic .
2 . A proposition is formed by combining two or
more terms, as the tre e is g re en This proposition
co nsists o f,
two terms tree and green conn e cted by is.
Eve ry proposition consist of three parts called the sub
ject, the pr edica te, and the cOpula .
The subject is that o f which something ispredicated
i . e a ffi rmed or den ied.
“The tr ee is g re en .
” Hero
tr ee is the subject o f which something is affi rmed or said,
v iz . that it is green . The predica te is that which is a f
fi rmed or denied o f the subject, as in this example the
word green”which is o f affi rmed of the subject tree .
The copula is the uniting word which shows the
ag reement or disagr eemen t be twe en the subject and the
predicate . The copu la is a lways some pa rt of the v erb
to be and a lthough this v e rbmay no t a lways be manifest
in the proposition , ye t it is unde rstood o r the proposi
tion can be resolv ed in to such a form as to bring it out,
HISSA l l—QAZ| YA~
FASL I .
Bu l ls Q AZfON mi sun UN KE AOSXM .
1 .—a tasdiqzuban se sadir ho, to us ho
haiu . Baze logqaz iye hi tarif yl’
m likhteIaf zbn se murakkabho, aur ihtima
’
l jhuth aur sach led pdgd
Ilm 1 mantiqmo1_1 gaz iga eh yumla i baya'
niga hai,
yane wub aisa jumla hai, ki na waste suwal na amr na
2
ke , balki sirf waste bayi n he howe .
2 .— Q ,aziya hai lafzon so murakkab hota hai, aur
jhfi th aur sach ha ihtimal usmen pays ,etc hai . Maslan ,
yi h darakht sabz hai ; yihqaziya, murakkab “darakht”
aur sabz”so hai, j ismen lafz hai
”hé, waste nisbat ko
sys hai . Q aziye men tin juz hoto hain , yane mauz zi, aurmahmzil
, aur nishat i hakmiya .
‘
Mauzu usko kahte hain 318 hi nishat kuchh kaha jawe ,khwah isbat he sath ho, yanafi ke sath . Misal yih darakhtsabz hai . Yahan par da rahht
”mauzu hai, jis hi nisbat
kuchh bayan hai, yane ki wub“sabz
”hai, aur mahmfi l
wubhai, jo mauz I’
I hi nishat kaha gaya ho . Q a ziyo mazkurme 1_1 lafz sabz
”
hai jo aya hai, mahmul hai . Nisbat ihukmi wub hai, j is he zaria so mauznpar mahmfi l kedarmiyan men muwafiqat ya na-muwafiqat poi jati hai .
Baz Mantiqin “mauzfi.
o“mahmfi l” ko mahln
’nn alaih aur
mabuim-bih, aur jo lafz nisbat i Hukmi ar dslalat harté. hai, use rébit
kuhte hai1_1 . NahV1yon hi istiléh me1_1 mauz ko mahkfim-alaih our musunda
ilnik aur mubtada , aur mahmii l ko mahkum-bih our musnad bih aur khabarour nisbat 1 hukmiya ho isnéd, aur jo lafz isuid par dali lat karts hai usebarf l rsbt kahte hain .
ew zozvKB 114YA’N HEN. 61
Misi l di sri . Insi n aur flrishto zi-aql aur ibid hain.
Yahi n.par mauz i aur mahmi l denon do do hain . Isqaziya 1 murahhaba he judi harhe
bani sakte hain . Maslan,
Insi n z i-aql hai.Insi n ibid hai .Firish te xi aql haig .
Fir ishte ibid haig .
Ji nni chibiyo, hi haze gaziye aise hain hi stin t mendar haqiqatmurakkabnahin, mufrad
hai1_1, Maslan gam aur khushi, ipasmenmuhhi lif hairy”
yih he i hah nahin sahti , hi“gam muhhi lif hai,
”
yi“hhu
shi muhhi lif hai .”Agar chi hou, hi is gaziye he do gaziyeto nahin ho sakti , hyfinhi dar asl wuh
2 .—G.aziya yi mtij iba hegi yi si liba . Qaz iga i mtij iba
us he kuhte hai1_1, jabmauzri aur mahmi l he darmiyi n
muwi flqat he , yane nu he bioh men nisbat i ishi t pi i jiwe .
Maslan “barf thandhi hai,” “A . B. hai .
”
Q az iga i si liba wub hai, jis ho mauzfr aur mahmi lmen ni pmuwi fiqat he , yano un he bioh men nishat i nafi
ji o Maslan ,“Kg thandhi nahin hai .
”-“A . B. nahin
si liba hoti hai, yano jaisi hi iqri r yi inhi r mahmi l himauzri he wi ste ho . Maslan , Khudi he hukm he nomi nni , gun i h hai ,
”
yih gaziya dar haqiqat mi jiba hai,hyfinki lafz gunib hi , je mahmi l hai, maumi he iqri rmeg i yi hai, inki t meg nahin .
Baze si libon men alimat nafi hi aise mauqa par hotih a i, hi us hi si liba honi bahhfibi malfim nahin hoti
Maslan “na tamim insi n na firishte kisi he gun ib so
pi h kar sakte haig .
”Aisoqaziyo he “madfila” kahte hain.
Yahi npar alimat nafi hi sabso pahloi i, aur fial se dfir
QA ZIONKE BA YA’
N MEN. 63
nahin har sakte hai1_1 . Ai soqazien ho-tartih aur peohida
he matlabhe samajh len i chibiyo aur yih bhi yi d rakhni
chibiyo, hi har gaz iya do hi l so khi li nahin , yi to mi jibahegi yi si liba hegi . Q az ion he ijib e salh he “haif i
qaz i y i ” kuhte hain .
3.-Q aziya kulliya hegi yi fuz ige hegi .
Q az iga i kulliya wub hai, 318 hi mahmi l, 1118.11l he
tamm afri d he iqri r yi inki r me1_1 iwo ; yano mahm i l
muwi fiqat yi n i -muwi fiqat rahho tamim mauz i so . Yi
is tarah par us hi hay i n samjho , hi gaziya i kulli menmahmi l hull manzu par beli j i o . Maslan , hull insi n
m im ewi lo hair_1 .”Y ih qaziya i kulliya hai , is liye h1
la mam ewi lo hi jo mahmi l hai, hull mauz1’
1 he wi ste r
je insi n”hai
, hahi gayi hai, yano lafz marnewi lo hi
sirf oh i dmi ho wi ste nahin , balki tamim msi n he wi sto
i yi hai . Kull A . B. hai Y ihqaziya bhi kulliya haiEh aur misi l di ji ti hai . Insi n darakht nahin hai,
”
yih
bhi gaziy a i kulliya hai, kyfi nhi yabi r_i par lafz darahht hi ,
tam im mauzfi yane insi n he inki r mo1_1 i yi . Koi A . B
nahinhai .”Y ihbhiqaz iya i kulliya hai . Sal), tama’m,
bar ck,
koi nahinwg . je lafz hai1_1, in so gaziye hi kulliyat sibit
hoti hai .
Jisqaziya i kulli mor_1 alimat kulliyat hi, lafzan maujudno. he , no he mubmila kuhte haig , maslan ,
Bhoren chaupi o
hain .
”Ab yahi n par biwuji de hi alimat kulliyat hi
maujud nahi n , phir bhi si f malfim hoti hai, hi matlab sah
Jhfith bolnewi le gunahg i r haig .
Ji uwa r z i-gql h abig h a ig .
Yahi n par bhi kull iyat samjhi ji ti hai , agarchi z i hirmen hoi lafz nahin hai . Guraz yih hi jahi n kulliyat hi he i1o na pi y i jiwe , to wahi g par siri matlabso samjhengo ,
Q az iga z f uz zy/a wuh hai, 315 he mauzfi he baz afri d
Q Azregy KE BAma r MEN. 65
Eye jien, yano mahmi l mauzri he hull afrid he wi sto na
i y i he ,balki baz afri d he wi ste . Masai to maslan , Bar
1865Masih he sachcho pairau nahin hai 1_1 .
IS misi l men, ohi nki fiqra saohcho pairau hi ,JO
mahmul hai,“baz Isi ion
”ho inki r men, jo mauz i wi gi
hfia hai i yi hai, is sababso isqaziye ho juz iyo. kuhte hain .
Garaz hi is jagah par mahmi l , maumi he baz afri d he
inki r me1_1 i yi hai, yano sah I'
si ien he wi ste nahin
Di sri misi l. Bahut i dmi bahi dur hain. Baz
A . B. hairy.”Yih bhi qaziye i juziyo hai, hy iinhi laiz
bahi dur ” hi , jo mahmi l hai , hull insi n he wiste si diqnahin iy i hai , aur isi tarah mahmlil B.
”hull mauz ri
“A .
”
par dali lat nahin harti . Garaz ham dekhte hai1_1, hi
gaziya i juziyo meg mauzri he baz afri d par dali lat hoti
hai, hhwi h bil -ishi t he yi bin -nafi . Juziyi t hi alimatenbaz , kuchh, wg . hain .
Baz qaa ye 1 juz 1ya bhi muhmila hote hai1_1, yano
lain juz iyat he baz , kuchh wg . nu men nahinpi e ji te hain .
Maslan ,
“i dmi shi ir hote hai1_1,”
Hindi hutparast
matlab nahin he sahti hai , hi tamim insi n shi ir ha m
kyfi nki hahutere idmi aise hai1_1, jin he shiar hahni nahini ti
, aur Hindii on men bhi aise hai1_1,hibutparast nahin hain .
hi muqarrar harni ilm imantiqhi garaz nah in . Us hi
garaz sirf itui hai, hi jabhamqaz iyon hi kulliyat aur juziya tqat i r dohar bi ham-digar zarb dog , aur phir zarb
don e so jo natija niklo, us hi sihhat yi adam sihhat hi
Ismauqa par hhiyi l rakhn i zani r chibiyo, hi harqazi ya yi mij iba hegi , yi si liba heg i , aur har wi hid
66 THE PROPOSITION.
ed by the v owels A . E: I; and let cc. and y . stand for
the subject and predica te , then we may hav eA . Un ive rsa l a ffi rmativ e A ll .v is y .
E . Un iv ersa l n ega tiv e No a: is y .
1 . Particu la r affi rma tiv e Some .v is y .
0 . Par ticula r Negat iv e ; Some .v . is no t v .
*
4. A fourth div ision o f prepositions considered as
sentences, is in to Ca tegorica l and Hypothetica l.
The ca tegor ica lpr eposition unconditionally assertstha t
the predicate does o r does n o t ag ree with the subject .
A s,man is mortal,
”A is n ot B,
”which a re simple
unconditional decla rations.
The hypothetica l pr eposition, which is compound,
makes its assertion under a condition or a lterna tive. Hy
po the ticals ar e div ided in to conjunctive and disjunctive
prepositions.
A conjunctive proposition implies tha t the parts o f
the proposition a re so conjoined that if one pa r t o t"the
proposition be true the o ther follows, as, If James
r e turn,John will go, If X isY,
it is Z.
”Thisproposi
No rm—Sir William Hamilton proposed the quantifi cation o f the
pr edica te,”by which the forms of the proposition are increased to eight,
thus
Toto-to tal . A ll a: is all y (A .)To to -
partial . All a; is some 3, (A)Toto-total . No a: is y (E)Toto-
partial . NOx is some 3, (E.
Parti-total . Some a: is all y (L)Parti-partial . Some a: is some yPatti-total. Some x is not any y (O-lParti-pa rtial . Some as is not some 31 (0
It will be obse rv ed that the words all and “some ,”that dete rmin e
thequantity of the subject are applied to the predicate a lso .This new
scheme is fo llowed entirely or in part by a few logicians. It is claimedthat it makes conversion
,the distribution of te rms, and the fo rms o f the
syllogism,mo re simple . But most logicians, some o f them as Mill, the
ablest , reject this proposed improv ement, as inv olv ing more trouble thanis av oided, and as gi ving some forms o f proposit ions nev er really used
,
while o the rs which seem to contradict the common r ules for the distribut ion o f the predicate, can be dea lt with unde r the o ld fo rms as exceptiona lo r unnatura l forms o f judgment . This po int will be no ticed under th ediscussion of rules for the distribution of terms.
MA TTER OF PROPOSITION8 .
tion may take many forms, e. g .
,If A is B,
C is D ; if
A is not B, C is D ; If A is not B,
C is not D ; If A
is B and C is D,E is F. If A is B, either C is D or E
is F. &c . If either A is B,or C is D,
E is F.
A disjunctiv e proposition, implying an a lte rnativ e ,is formed with the disjunctiv es either, or , as James is
e ither a liar or a thief.” X is either Y or Z.
”This
proposition also may take many forms, e . g. , either A
is B. e r C io D ; e ither A isB or C is D,or E is F ; A
is either B or C or D either A or B or C, is D e ither
A is not B. or C is not D e ither A is B or C is not D.
This last div ision of propositions may be indica ted
by a table thus
Ca tegorica l Conjunctiv eHypothetica l Disjunctiv e .
The hypothetical proposition will be treated o f
more fully hereafter . For the present we will deal on lywith categorica l propositions.
Mam a or Psorosm on .
This is as good a place as any to explain what is
meant by the ma tter or moda lity, of propositions. Bythe matter is meant the nature of the connection be
tween the terms of a proposition, and it has reference to
the truth or f alsity of the proposition .*
By observing the nature o f the connection of the
terms we can see tha t there can be only three kinds o f
ma tter, v iz . necessa ry, expressedby an afi rmativ e prop
osition, impossible, expressed by a negativ e proposition ,and
,contingent, expressed by a par ticular preposi tion .
Thus i f we hav e two te rms “ iron”and heavy,
”r eflec
t ion shows us tha t the truth or the na ture o f those terms
By the modality of a proposition some writers on logic moan itmodification by some adverbof tune, place, manner, degree, &c. ,
or bySome writers exclude thequestion of modality from
MA’DDE KE BA YA
’N m y.
D. ha i ; agar A . B. nahin hai to J. D . hai ; agar A .
B . nahi _ hai to J. D . nahin hai ; agar A . B. hai aur J. D .
ha i to R. S . hai ; agar A . B. hai to yi J. D . hai yi R. S .
h ai ; agar A . B. hai yi J. D. hai to R. S . hai, wg .
Q az iya munf asila wuh hai, jisme 1_1 hukm bil
piyi jawe , yan e na to denon juz onqaziya hi sachchi hen i mumkin ho, na jhri thi hon i denon hi . Harf infisi l hi“yd
”hai . Maslan ,
“Zaid yi sachchi hai yi jhfi thi .
” “A .
yi B. hai,yi J. hai . Isqaz iya hi hai stiratonho sahti hai1_1,maslan A . B. hai yi J. D . hai ; A . B. hai yi J. D . hai yi
R . S . hai ; A . yi B. hai yi J. hai yi D . hai ; A . yi B. yi
J. D . hai ; A . B. nahin hai yi J. D . nahin hai ; A . yé B.
hai yi J. D . nahin hai, wg .
Q a ziya ,
Q aziya i shartiya hi bayi n i go ohalhar mufassal hegi ,
y ahi nparqusiya i hamliya hi misi lon di ji ti hain .
BAYi N Mi nn}: Ki .
Ym mauqa achchhi malfim hoti hai , hiqazion hemddde hi bayi n kiyi jiwe .
‘ Midda us nishat hi haq1qath e, joqaz iya he juz on he darmiyi n men hai, kahte hai1_1,
yan o mi dde so yih muri d hai , hi i yi isqaz iya men ihtiasidqhi hai yi hizbhi .
Agar ham gaur harhe dekhen, hi juzon he darmiyi nn ishat hai tarah par hai, to mali m hoti hai, hi sirf tin tarah
ar hai, yano z ar tir i bil iia’
b, joqaziya i mfijibon men hoti
hai . Nisbe t z ar iir i bis salb, joqaz iya i si libon men hoti hai .Nisbe t i tasdwi, jo hiqaz iya i juz iyonme1_1 pi i ji ti hai . Mas
lan , do lair. hon ,“loha
”aur bhcir i .
”Ab agar ham in
do luisen hi asliyat par bogour lihi z haron, to malfim hotihai, hi m denon he darmiyi n nisbe t i iju
'
bbiz zar cir hai,aurqaziya y i nhegi , lohi bhi ri hai .
”
Am'
agar yih do lafz hon , yane , shahar aur hhataur in he darmiyi n msbat iji h di jiwe ,qaz iye hiBgs
manti in hi yih ri e hai ki middo hi bayin ilm i mantiqhe mutaglliqnahmhai, 1shi bayi n apni kitibon men nahin karts hain.
MA TTER OF PROPOSITION8 .
makes it necessary for us to conn e ct them affi rma tiv ely,
and we g e t the a ffi rma tiv e proposition ,“ iron is hea vy .
”
Again , if we hav e the two te rms sugar”
and
sour and wish to conn ect them in a true preposition ,
i t is impossible to do it affi rmativ e ly, and hence we g ot
the n ega tiv e proposition sugar is n ot sour .
”
Again ,if we hav e the two terms men and
learned,
”we se e tha t they cann o t be truthfully con
n ected in a univ e rsa l proposition e ither a ffi rmativ ely or
n egativ ely but they hav e a con tingent rela tion ,i . e. ,
only
some times and under ce r tain circumstances men a r e
lea rned,hence we must connec t these te rms in a par ti
cula r pr oposition ,“some m e n ar e learn ed.
”
Thus,from the ma tte r o f pr oposition s thre e rules a r e
fo rmed,the correctness o f which will be manifest on
refle ction .
’
1 . In necessa ry ma tte r a ll afli rmativ es a re true and
a ll n egativ es false .
2 . In impossible matte r all n egatives are true and
all aflirmativ os ar e false .
3. In con tingent ma tter a ll par ticula rs are true and
un iv ersals fa lse .
The impor tance of understanding this poin t in the
considera tion of proposition s will he more fully seen
when we come to trea t o f “ opposition o f propositions.
”
The student should fi x we ll in mind the following
RECAPITULATION.
S imple o r compound.
A ffi rma tiv e o r n ega t iv e .
Umv e rsa l o r pa r twular .
Preposi ti ons a re i' Ca tego r ica l.
lLH
(
dihetical Conjunctiv e .
YP Disjunctiv e .
Ha tter is
31m in 1 RAM, rm KULLIYAT sun JUZIYAT, mum?
nun MAHMfiL xi .
me nsit e makmatl apne tamcim af raid Ice shimil Icar tc beta,
to an Ice kulli kahte hain, our jabsirf baz afi'dd Ice sha
’
mil
kar tsha in, to nu ke juz i kahte hain. Masal tomaslan,qusiyahull insi n fi ni hai1_1, is n onmauzri ,
“hull in kulli
hai zeri hi apne tamim afri d ho f a’
ni hone men shimil
harti hai, magar fi ni,”
jo mahmi l hai, is gaziye
men juzi hai, his wi sto hi si f z i hir hai, hi yih lafz is jagah
apno hull afri d par dali lat nahin harti hai,balki baz par,
yane insi n par is , jihat so, hi lafz fi ni men bahut aur
mahhl tiqshimil hai . Insi n to mahhlfiqhi siri eh juz
hai .
bahhlibi samajh men na iwo, ilm i mantiqhe achchhi tarahistiami l mo1_1 nahin li sakte hain . Ch1
’1nhi istiami l ilm 1.
mantiqhi is hi par munhasar hai, lihi z i us amr hi , j1sparkulliyat aur juziyatmauqfi f hai , si f omufassal bayi n kiyiji ti hai . Yih amr bhi gibil i lihi r hai hi ism i muaiyan
aur mufrad aur ism i jins hamesha kulliyat hi fi ida doti
hai . Is liye jisqaziye menkisiqism i mazkfira hi koi ism
74 DISTRIBUTION or TERMS.
subject of a proposition it is to be treated as a universa l
and the subject is distributed. Thus,
“James lov e s
John,”
my dog is black,”
Parliament is prorogued,”
wisdom is justifi ed of her children,
”may be treated as
univ ersals. Where the subject of a preposition is a
single thing, Mill calls the preposition singular . Such
are univ ersals in the sense of distributing the subject .Both the subject and predica te of a proposition must
always be eithe r distributed or non-distributed.
The distribution of the subject of a proposition
depends on itsquantity, i. e . , on its being universa l or
pa rticular, while the distribution of the predica te de
pends on thequa lity of the preposition, i . e .,on itsbeing
afi rmatiue or negative . The truth of these statemen ts
will appear from some illustrations.
Four ldnds of categorical prepositions can be form
ed, viz .,
Universal A ll X is Y .
Univ ersa l n egativ e No X is Y .
Particular Some X is Y .
Par ticular negative Some X is not Y .
These maybe representedby g eometrical notations,
each pa ir of circles representing a proposition, thus
76 DISTRIBUTION or TERMS.
Inspection of those propositions, fi rst with reg ard
to the subject,will show that in the unive rsal proposition
the subject is distributed, that is, it is taken in its fullestextension including all its significa tes. This is indicated
by the prefixes a ll and no, and a glance at the geometr ical
fi gure shows the truth of this statement to the eye .
Hence the rule
l .-All universa l prepositions distribute the subject.
An examination further of these propositions shows
that in the particulars the subject is not distributed, i . e .,
a part only of the term is taken , as is indicated by the
prefix some, and is made plain to the eye by the goemot
rical figures, only a part of X being included in Y.
Hence the rule
2 .—Particularprepesitiensdo notdistribute the subject.Thus, it is seen that the distribution of the subject
depends on thequantity of the proposition .
Again, if we examine the four categorical proposi
tions with reference to the predica te, we will see that its
distribution isby no means implied in the distribution
o f the subject, and that it depends on thequa lity of the
preposition, i . e. , itsbeing afi rmative or negativ e. If i t
be asser ted, in a unive rsal afi rma tiv o proposition, tha t“a ll men are mortal,
”or“all X is Y
,
”it is n ot asser ted
tha t '
other beingsbesidesmen, are n ot mortal,or tha t
o ther ‘
things besides X,a re not Y. O ther beings beside
men may be mortal, and other things besides X may be
included in Y,as is seen in this figure .
Hence it is ev ident that the
whole of the predicates“mortal
”
and Y,
‘
is not considered.
78 DISTRIBUTION OF TERM’
S.
Again, if we make those propositions particular,thus,
“some men ar e mortal
”some X isY,
”it will
still be seen tha t only a part of mortal” and “Y”is
distributed. A part or all of other
things besides X may be included
in Y, as is seen in the annexed
figure . Hence whether univ ersal
or particular, we get the rule
3.—Afi rmative prqeesitiens do not distribute the
predica te.
There are exceptions to this rule,whore sfiirma
tiv es, both univ ersal and particular, by an inv erted, nu
natural, or exceptional form of expression ,may distribute
the predicate . Thus, in the propositions,“all men are
rational animals,” “
a ll tr iangles are figures bounded bythree straight lines,
“some men are poets,
”some
animals are men,
”the predicate is co-extensiv e with the
subject, i . e. , is distributed. We may trea t these ca ses a s
exceptional and understand the general rule as given
above .
If we turn n ew to negativ e propositions, we se e
that whether univ ersal or pa rticula r, the predicate is a l
ways distributed. Thus, in the univ ersal n egativ es,“n o men ar e birds,
”no
X is Y,
”it is plain that we
must consider , i . e . distribute , the
whole of the predica te“birds,
”
before we can a ffi rm tha t there are no men in it, and the
whole of Y, be fore we can asser t that no X is included
in it. Hence, in the univ ersal negativ e the predica te is
BA YA’N .l KAM
'
. 79
Aur agar ham in doqazion he juziyo. baniwen,maslan ,
“Baz insi n fi ni hai 1_1,”
yi“baz A . B.
”hai, to
is slirat me 1_1bhi mahmri l fi ni,aur B. juz i rahti hai, hy linki
aliwa insi n he, baz aur mahhliiqbhi fi ni hai1_1, aur aliwa. A . he
baz aur di iro hain, hi di ira i B.
men shimil hain .
Pasqaz iya kulliya he, yi
juz iya ,qimin yih rahi, hi
3. Q ueige i maijiba , khwcih kulliya he ydjuz iyat, mah
mzil us kci j uz i hota ha i .
Bazqaz iye m1i jibo, hhwi h hulliye hon yi juz iyo, is
immqi ido so mustasn i hai1_1 . Maslan in qaz i yi men hitamim i dmi haiwi n i n i tiqhai1_1 .
” Baz i dmi shi ir hai1_1 .
”
Baz haiwin insi n hai1_1, mahmri l maumi se masiwi ui
afr i d yane kulli hai . A iseqaz ion ho mustasniyi t men
shumi r harni , aur immqi idon mazhli ra i bi li ho sahih
tasauwur harni chibiyo .
Abagar hamqaz iya i si liba hi taraf hhiyi l heron,hhwi h wubkulli ho yi juzi, mahmi l us hi hamesha kulli
h egi . Maslan , si liba i kulliya, hoi i dm i chiriyi nahin,
y i hoi A . B. nahin . Yahi n par gaur
h arni chibiyo, hi hull mahmi l chiriyi
par jab lihi z he , to ham hah sakte hai1_1,
hi koi insi n ohiriyon men nahin hai . Pas isqusiyame 1_1 mahmi l chiriya kulli h1i i . Ali -bi zal-qiyi s, jabhull mahmi l “B”
par lihi z he , to ham hah sakte
ha in, hi kuchh hissa A . B. men nahin
hai . Pas harqaz iya si liba hi mahmii l kulli
hegi . Isi tarah par harqaz iya si liba jusiye.
80 DISTRIBUTION OF TERMS.
distributed. So also of the particular negative, for i f i t
be asserted, that some X isnot Y,
”
it is plain that the whole o f the
predicate“Y ” must be passed in
r ev iew or examined, that is distribu
ted,be fore the statement can be
truthfully made that Y does not
be long to the part of X under consideration . Hence for
a ll n ega tiv es we g ot the rule
4.- All nega tive propositions distribute the predica te .
Thus, it is seen that the distribution of the predicate
depends on thequa lity o f the proposition . All these
facts should be kept well in mind. The rules for dis
tribution , collected together, are as follows
1 All univ ersal propositions, distribute the subject.2 . Particular prepositions do not distribute the subject .3 Aflirmativ e propositionsdo not distribute the predicate .
4 . A ll negativ e propositions distribute the predicate .
The importance of this poin t in proposi tions, will be
more fully seen in part third of this book.
SECTION III.
CONVERSION.
l . The conversion o f a proposition ,consists in
transposing its te rms so as to place the subject for the
predica te and the predicate for the subject. Thus,the
proposition no men a re angels, may hav e the subje cta nd predica te transposed and become,
“no a ng els are
men Some men are good,” “
some good (beings)are men is likewise conv e rted. The pr oposition to
be conv erted is called the exposita’l‘ that into which it
is changed is called the converse .
Conv ersion is only allowable when the truth o f the
converse is implied by the truth of the eapesita . Such
is called “ illa tive”
conv ersion, and is the one used in
log ic . Any thing else would be only an apparent, n ot a
re al conv ersion . It is often useful in an argumen t, or in
de tecting an e rr or to thus transpose the subject and
predicate of a proposition .
2 . There are thr e e kinds of conv ersion, by one o f
which e v ery proposition may be conv e rted .
First—When the subject is simply made the pr edicate, and the predica te the subject without any furthe rchang e, it is called simple conv e rsion, as
No good man is a rebe l.”
Converse. No rebe l is a good man .
Some bad me n a re learned .
Converse. Some learned men are bad
No X is Y .
No Y is X .
Calledby Sir Wm. Hamilton the cenvcrtcnd.
34 DISTRIBUTION or TERMS.
Univ ersal negativ es and particular affirmativ es are con
v erted in this way .
Second—But by an examination of the four categorical prepositions, it will be seen tha t they cannot all betransposed by simple conversion . Thus
, take the univ e rsal affi rma tive
A ll horses arequadrupeds, and the simple con
v erse, allquadrupeds ar e horses,” is n ot true , for the rea re many four
-legged animals that are not horses.
Thus,also all X is Y
, cannot be conv erted to all Y is X.
”Hence , in or
der to preserv e a true proposition in
the conv erse of a univ ersa l afiirmative,we must make it a pa rticular, thus the
conv erse of the abov e propositions
should be
Some uadrupeds are horses.Some 18 X,
”
and they become true enough . Thus the converse of a
universa l afi rma tive must be a particular afi rma tive .
The quantity of the proposition is changed . This is
called conv e rsion by limitation or per accidens. A ll
univ ersal afi rmativ es,are conv erted in this way . In th e
exceptional cases of univ ersa l affi rmativos that distribu te
the predica te (page 78) of course simple conv ersion
may be used,forming an exception to this rule .
Third—By an examination of a particular n egativ e,it will be seen that its subject and predicate can be
transposed neither by simple conversion nor by limita
tion as in the last example . Here then is a peculiar
diffi culty . We can say, Some quadrupeds are no t
horses,”but we cannot conv ert this simply, and say
Some horses are notquadrupeds,” for this would not
be illativc conversion, and the proposition would not
86 CON-VERSION;
be true . Nor does it make truth to conv ert the parti
onlar into a universal, and say
A ll-horses are notquadrupedsé”Hence some writers on logic say that the particular
nega tiv e cannot be conv erted . But this particular
negative can .be -conv erted by a peculiar process. If we
detach the negative particle from the copula , and atta ch
it to the p redicate, the proposition really becomes a
particular affi rmative , and may readily be c onv erted bylimitation, thus,
Somequadrupeds are not-horses.
Some X is not Y.
”
Here we hav e chang ed thequality of the proposi
tion and have really a particula r affi rmativ e with the
term not-horses” for its predicate which may then
be conv erted by -limitation,thus
Some not-harm , arequadrupeds”or plainly expressed,
Some animals not-hom e, arequadrupeds,which is trne enough. Thus also
Some men are not-poets,”
Some not-pom are men.
”
This is called, conversion by negation, or voontraposition .
3; Thus, there are three regular kinds of conver
sion by means of which ev ery proposition may be con
v erted. An . examina tion of the process of conv ersion,
shows that a term undistributed in the m osita , remain s .
u'
ndistributed in the converse . The predica te of the
a ffi rma tive proposition,“all horses arequadrupeds
is undistributed, because aflirmativ es do not distribute
the predicate .* Hence, when we convert illativ ely and
the predicate becomes the subject, it must be undistri
ba ted, and we get, somequadrupeds are horses.
”
Except in certain unusual cases. See p. 78
SECTION IV.
OPPOSITION.
l .- Opposition in propositions, is the relation be
tween any two, which hav ing the same subject and predicate , differ inquan tity, orquality, or bo th . Thus
One may deny in whole or in part wha t the o the r
a ffi rms, e. 9 .
A ll X is Y, opposed by £33§¥Jnot Y .
One may affi rm,in whole, or in part, what the othe r
denies, e. 9 .
NO X is Yropposedby iE
O
Y
One miy afi rm in whole, what the other afi rms
in part, e . 9 .
A ll X is Y, Opposedby some X is Y .
One may deny in whole what the other denie s
in part, e . 9.No X is Y , opposed by Some X is not Y .
Now, as there are four forms of categorical proposi
tions, universa l, particula r, afi rma tive,nega tive, and any
two of these may be opposed, it is plain that with the
same subject and predica te, there are four kinds o f op
position, as is seen in the abov e statement .
If two universal propositions differ inqua lity only ,
they are called contra ries,
Ev erv X is Y .
NO X in Y .
If two particular propositions differ inqua lity only,they are called subcontra ries,
asSome X is Y .
Some X is not Y .
92 OPPOSITION.
If two propositions agree inqua lity,but difi'er inquantity, they are not actually opposed to each othe r,and are ca lled suba lterns
Every XO
is Y .
orNo X is Y .
Some X 1s Y. Some X 18 not Y .
If two propositionsdifl’
er both 1nquality andquantity, they are ca lled contradictories
Every X 1s Y. No X is Y .
Some X 18 not Y . Some X is Y .
Or to state this ma tte r in another wayUniv ersal affi rmativ es, opposed to univ ersal nega
tiv es, are contraries.
The two particulars opposed, are subcontrar ies .
The two a ffi rmativ es or the two negatives opposed,are suba lterns.
Two propositions opposed both inqua lity andquantity, are contradictories.
The four kinds o f Opposition may be illustrated bya figure thus,
2 . Opposition is a form of immediate inference in
which, from the truth o r falsity o f one proposition, th e
truth or falsity o f anothe r proposition, hav ing the same
subject and predica te , may be inferred. By recollectingwha t was said On the tru th or f a lsity of prepositions
under the head o f ma tter, an inspection of the above
scheme shows that,
NA QI’Z X E BA YA
’
NMEN. 93
Time—Doqaziye, ijibo salbmenmuwi fiqhor_1 magar kulliyat 0 juz iyat me1_1 mutan iqiz hon . Magar aisi
n aqiz , hi li nhi haqiqi nahin hai, phir bhi eh tarah hi
taniquz ismen pi yi ji ti hai .M isi l, SabA . B. ha i, M isi l, Koi A . B. nahinhai.Naqiz, Baa A . B. hai, Naqiz, Baz A . B. nahin ha i.
Chanihe .—DOqaziye, ijib O salb, aur kulliyat aur
juziyat, donon men mutaniqiz hon ,M aslan
,SabA . B. hai.
Naqiz , Baz A . B. nahig hai.Koi A . B. nahig hai.
Naqiz, Baa A . B. hai.
Garaz hi mnhhtasar bayi n yi nhai hi
mk. aur sé. mutaniqiz .
m7. aur sj. mutan iqiz .
mk. aur mj . mutanaqiz .
eh. aur sj . mutan iqiz .
In chi ronqism hi naqiz hi shah l zail men mastfir hai .
II.—Bahs i middo men sidqo hizbqazion hi jo
bayi n ho chuhi hai, agar yi d ho, anr shahl i mazhfira i
bi li par bhi lihi z rahe, to malfim hogi , hi
RECAPITULATION.
Having thus gone ov er the second great div ision o f
logic, it may be well to collect what has be en said on
propositions, in a tabular form to be memoriz ed.
A preposition is an act of judgment ewpressed in words .
A preposition consists of three par ts, the subject,the copula, and the pr edica te .
Simple and compound.
A ffi rmativ e and nega tiv e . (quality)Un iv ersal and particular. (quantity){Categorical andHypothetical, i33331223?
Divisions ofpropositions.
The ma tter of propositionsNecessary
fiafi rmativ es)
is of three kinds.Impossible negativ es)Contingent (particulars)
Row s roa Mar-ran.
l .- In necessary matter all aflirmativ es are true
,
and univ ersals false .
2 .-In impossible matter all negatives are true and
afi rmativ es false .
3.-In contingent matter all particulars are
and univ ersals false .
The terms, i . e. ,the subject and predicate of propo
sitions, are distributed when they are taken univ ersally,n on-distributed when only taken in part .
Roms roa Drsramu'n on .
1 -A11 univ ersal propositions distribute the subject.2 .
-Particular propositions do not distribute the
subject.
Q AZIYE X X MUJMAL BAYAN.
Mantiqhi di sr i hissa tamim hi i , ab bihtar hai,
hi hirqazion hi bayi n yi d-di sht he wi ste mujmalan
jae .
1 .—Jabtasdiqba zaria laiz he z i hir ho, us hoqaziya
kahte hai1_1 .2 ,—Q azion men tin juz hote hain, yane maaz ii, aur
mahrmil, aur nisbat i hakmiya .
Mutrad ho yi murakkab.
3.—Aqsim Mfijiba ho yi si llba .
iqaz iya , Kulliya ho yi juziya .
Hamliya ho yi shar tiya,
4.—Q az iog Nisbat i zarfi ri b1l-ijab mfipbog meg.
meg n lsbat tinZar firi bis sa lb, si libog
’
meg.
taur pa r hai,
yane,Masawa t, juzxog me1_1.
Pahle .—Nisbet zarfir i bil-i] ab men,qaziye i mfijibe
sabsahih, aur si libe sabgalat hote hain .
Di sre—Nisbat i zar li ri bis salb men ,qaziye i si lihesabsahih , aur mfijibe galat.
Tisre .—Nisbat i tasiwi men ,qaziye juziye sabsahih,
6 ,—Mauz1i o mahmi l agar apne tamim afri d par
dali lat haren , kulli hain ; aur agar baz stri d par to
juz i hain.
7. Q awi id kulliyat o juziyat he .
Pahhi . - Q .aziya i kulliya hi mauzri kulli hoti hai .
M ar i —Q aziya i juziya hi mauzti juzi hoti hai .
PART I".
SECTION I.
Russosms on Anauursr .
l . -The third Operation of the mind with which
logic is concerned is reasoning . An act of reasoninge xpressed in words, is called an argument.
* Every g r
g ument consists of two par ts, the point to be prov en ,
and that by which it is prov en . The term argument, is
by some writers, confi ned to this part alone . It is here
used in the more popular way .
The part to be prov en is called the conclusion, and
that by which it is prov en the premisses. In the logical
o rder, the premisses are stated fi rst, and after them the
c onclusion, conn ected by the illative conjunction there
f ore . Thus, an a rgument
Whatev er exhibitsmarks of design, must have an intelligent author .
The wor ld ia wh ich we liv e, exhibitsmarks of designTherefore, The world must have an intelligent author .
Here the fi rst two statements are the premisses, andconsist of judgments or prepositions, in an argumen t
proving tha t the world has an intelligent Creato r . Thesta tement beginning with ther ef ore, is the conclusion.
Sir William Hamilton insists that ornamentation, not out,shouldbe used for the com 161 act of reaso the i t out be
' mi
n
fromwhich the conclusion is drawn.
mug, gum mg part
104 rm: sn z oazsm
An argument, then, is an expression of reasoning in
which, f rom something laid down and granted as true, i. e.
the premisses, something else beyond this, v iz . the conclu
sion,necessari ly f ollows, and must be admitted as true.
The two parts of an argument then, are made up of
propositions. The propositions in the fi rst part, called
the premisses, are as hasbeen seen, admitted to be true,and from them another proposition or other propositions
are drawn,which is the conclusion, or second part of the
argument . Now, logic teaches us to draw from known
or admitted propositions, true conclusions.
2 .-An argumen t sta ted in its full, regular, logical
f orm is called a syllogism.
In the syllogism,the conclusion follows from the
more force of the expression or arrangement of the pro
positions, wi thout considering the meaning of the terms.
Thus
All X isY .
Z is X .
Therefore Z is Y .
It is manifest that the conclusion must follow what
ev er the te rms X ,Y,and Zmay stand for, i . e. , the con
e lusion follows from the more force of the expression as
may be seen by a geometrical figure .
All X is contained in Y .
Z is contained in X .
Therefore Z is contained in Y.
Or to express the same thing in plain propositions.
Zaid, Amr , Bakr are men .
Therefore,Zaid, Amr, Baht are mortal.
Q IYA‘
S KA’BA YA
’N. 105
Ddll aur'
madhil, jeisa ki is misi l se malfim hoti
hai,qaz iye hai1_1 . Q aziya i dalla , yaqini hots hai1_1 , an
nu 89 sh, ya se ziyadaqaziye yaqini hasil hots hai1_1,aur wubjo hasil hots hai1_1, 1m ko madlzil ye. na tifa kahte
Ilm i mantiqse yih malfim ho jaté. hai, ki natija i
yaqiniya be. zariamuqaddamét i yaqiniya ke ,kis tarah parnikalna chabiye .
II.-Jo hujjat ba tar tibi kémil, bamfijibilm i mantiq
ke, bayan ki jaws, us he gig/(is kahte haig .
Q iyas meg qaziye is tartfbpar hots hai1_1, ki na tifakhud ba khud hasil hota hai, bagair samajhne manzuaurmahmfil ks ; maslan,
J. A . hai .
Pas, J. B. hai .
Yih sai zahir hai, ki in harfon se koi matlabnahin malfim hota hai,hai . Chunénchi is ki shakl i zail so
A . B. men shamil hai .
PasJ. B. men shamil hai .
M isdl (Mara—Sal) insan féni haig .
Zaid, Amr , Bakr insan hai1_1.Pas, Zaid, Amr, Bakr fani hain.
Q iyés murakkab hota hai kull tinqazion as 315 menable ko kubr ci
, aur dfi sre ko sag ra, aur tisre ko natij ahte hain . Pahl e do muqaddama’t kahlate hain .
arabi mantiqin tartibiqiyzis men, sugrako auwal,aur kubr i t o
us he niche rakhte hain . Is so natija nikalne me 1_1 kuchh farqnahin ati .Arabi mantiqin faqat do mnqaddamon, yane mgra o kubré he is tarah
tartibdens ko, ki natijamkal awe,qiyds kahte hain.
THE SYLLOGISM’
.
SYLLOGIBM’
.
Ev ery desire to gain by another's loss, is sin .
All gammg , is a desire to gain by another’s loss.
Therefore, All gaming is am .
Here are three propositions ; the fi rst is the major
premiss, the second the minor premiss, and the last the
conclusion .* Each proposition has its subject and pre
dicate connected by a copula . In the fi rst proposition,or major premiss, the subject is ev ery desire to gain byanother
’s loss,
”the predicate is In the second
proposition, called the minor premiss, the subject is, all
g aming ,”
and the predicate is, a desire to ga in byanother’s loss.
”In the last proposition, called the con
elusion,“all gaming
”is the subject, and
“sin is the
predicate . By observing, it will be seen tha t the syl
logism really contains only three terms, i . e. , desire to
gainby sin ; and “all gaming .
” “Desire
to gain by anothe r’s loss
,
”is the middle term, being tha t
with which the other two terms are compared. Sin
in the major premiss,is the major term,and all gaming ,
”
in the minor premiss, is the minor term. As always
must be the case , all gaming,”the minor term, is the
subject of the conclusion, and sin,
”the major term,
is
its predicate .
SYLLOGISM.
All murderers deserve death.
Nana sahibwas a murderer .Therefore,Nana sahibdeserved death .
Here are three propositions, the two fi rst are the
premisses, themajor and minor, the last is the conclusion .
Q IYA’S KA
’BA YA
’
N.
Apne nafa ko wisto, gair Ira unqafin taknfi, gunibhai.Jfie meg a isi nafa ha i, jis ki badaulat gairon hé nuqsan taki
ji ta ha i.
Pas, jfi fi gunfih ha i.
Yahan par tinqaziye hain , auwal Icubrd, ddsra sagra,tisra natifa ; aur harqaziye menmauz 1j, aur mahmfil, ournisbat i hukmiya, jo nu donon ko darmiyan ek waste hai,
hoti hai . Pahle gaziye, yane kubré. men, apne nafa ke
waste gairog ka nuqsan takn mauzfi hai, aur gunfih,
mahmfil . D1’
1sreqaziye yano sugre me1_1, naj”mauzfi hai
,
aur apne nafa ko waste gairon hé nuqsan takua, mah
ml’
i1 hai . Piohhleqaziye, yane natije meg, jua manzu,aur gunah, mahmfil hai .
Dekhn e so malfim hota hai, ki i sqiyas me1_1 siri tinjuz hai1_1 , pahle, apne nafa ke waste gairon ka nuqsantakua, dfisra gunah, tisra jua. Apno nafa ke
waste gairon ks. nuqsan takua, hadd 1 ausat hai,31s so do
aur juz jo hain mildo jate hai1_1. Kubramen, gunah”
akbar hai, aur sugra men,“juzi
”asgar hai ; aur natije
meg , jua jo asgar hai, mauz lfi hai, aur natije men
gunah”
jo akbar hai, mahmfil hai, jaiaaki natije men
hamesha hone. chabiye .
Sabkhfini W641!) 111qatl haig.
Nani R60 khuni thi .
Pas,NinaRi o wéjib111qatl thi .
Dokho, yahan tinqsaiye hain, 1111 menpahli. kubra,ddsré sugré, aur tisra yane akhir ko, natija hai. Her
1 10 THE SYLLOGISM
Each proposition has its subject and predicate, ye t ther eare only three terms in the syllog ism fi rst
,the middle
term murderer,
second,the major term dese rv e
death, and third
, the minor term Nana sahib. The
minor and major terms, are the subject and predica te o f
the conclusion .
SYLLOGIBM.
Avarice is a sin .
Sin loads to hell .
Therefore, Avarice leads to hell .
Sin is the middle term,
avarice is the minor
term,
“ leads to hell is the major term.
SYLLOGISM.
Every (doctrine tending to bring dishonor on God),
(should be rejected.)
Minor term.
The (doctrine of fate), (tends to bring dishonor on God.)
Ill inor term. Major term.
Therefore, the (doctrine of fate), (should be rejected.)
5 . Let it be remembered that ev ery valid a rgu
ment may be reduced to a syllogism. It is not nece s
sary that every argument be stated in this form in full,
but if an argument is correct, it may be put into this
form . Thus if one should deny that the world has an
intelligent Creator, one claiming that it has, would bringfor th a number of facts to prove that the world is full
of design, and the proof would be considered valid and
112 THE SYLLOGISM’
.
the argument good, although one point is left out, namelythat wha tever contains design has an intelligent Crea tor .
Now this argument stated in full and reduced to a syl
logism would be
Whatsoever contains design, has an intelligent Creator .
The world containsdesign .
Therefore,The world has an intelligent Creator .
The syllogism then,is a kind of touch-stone that
may be applied to all argumen ts to test their quality o f
truth or falsity. Or it may be represen ted as a straigh t
edge, which applied to arguments, shows them to bestraight and truthful or crooked and err oneous.
6 . The syllogism in the fi rst fi gure, a term to beexplained herea fter, is founded on wha t is called Aris
totle’s dictum. The dictum is
Wha tever ispredicated of a universa l term or class
may be predica ted of any or a ll things conta ined in tha t
term or class.*
Thismay be stated more at length thus If we
predicate, i . e .,afiirm or deny that some thing belongs to
any termor class,and then show that some thing come s
under that term or class,we may likewi se predica te, i . e .
ofi rm or deny of it what is affi rmed or denied of the te rm
or class. Thus if we show (predicate), that All X is contained in Y
,
and then show (predicate) that Z iscontained in X, we may predica te
that Z is contained in Y, as seen in
the figure .
Nothing can be more simple and plain than thislaw of thought. If we a ffi rm or deny something of an
This dictum asHamilton,Mill, and other notedlogicianshave showmis not the solo law of ayllo
'
c roaso Mill ob'
octs to the'
scelebrateddictum, as savourid
s
g
h
of roalis
l
hl
ijgi‘ . e., as iml
ilying that $3
8
52; lid?11 real existence, separate from individuals.
arm '
s Ks BA YA’
N. 1 13
nahin ; kyfinki ok bat rah gai, yano jw chiz men hilcmatp65
idti hai, us [at hakim sar tir hoga.
Abagar yih dalil puri bayan ki jaws, aur ba’
tartibf
qiyas likhi jaws, to yfi g hogi :Jis chiz meg kuchh hikmat psi jati hai, us hé. hakim zara,
hoga.
Kli ilqat men tarah tarah ki hikmat pai jati hai .Pas dunya ka hakim zarfi r hoga.
Malum karne. chabiye ki qiyas, dalil ko sidqo kizbke parakhne ki kasauti hai .
VI. Bina i qiyas Ar istatalis koqanl par hai, aur
wubqanl yih hai , kiJo kuchh kisi kulli hi nisbat kahd jdwe, as Ice sabaf rad
par bhi si diq(iwogi .
°Is kamufassil bayan yng hai, ki agar kisi kulli ya
Jms ki nisbat kuchhkaha jao, khwéh ijébko sath yé salb
he saith , aur yih dokbe jaws,ki is kull i ya Jmsmeg fulani
fulani fard dekhil hai, to is sfirat me 1_1 jo kuchh is kulli ya
jins ki nisbat kaha gayé hai, W111! 118 01112 ya fard ki
nisbat jo usmen dakhil hai ,118116 Jéwe . Maslan agar koi
SabA . B. men dakhil hai, aur
malfim kare , ki
SabJ. A . me1_1 dakhil hai to
wub kah sakta hai, ki SabJ; B.
men shimil hai .
Geraz yih ki jo kuchh kisi kulli ki nisbat kaha jawo,ushe kull aired ki nisbat kaha jaws. Yihqam’
m bahut
1 14 RULES OF THE SYLLOGISM .
e ntire class of things, and then prov e or assert that a
ce rtain thing comes under this class, we may justlya ffi rm or deny the same of it. The term or class here
spoken of, is the middle term of the syllogism.
7. Logica l Axioms and Rules for the Syllogism .
Ev ery correct syllogism agrees with certain
rules. It was stated tha t ev ery syllogism con tains thr e e
and only three terms,the major, the min or, and middle
with which the major and minor are compared.
Axroms.
( l .) If two terms agree with one and the same third
they agree with one another .
If one term agrees with, and another disagrees
with the same third, these two disagr ee with one another .
The third term,of these axioms
,is the middle te rm
in a syllogism
From those two axioms, sev eral rules are drawn for
testing the v alidity of syllogisms.
RULE.- 1 . If bothpremissesqfa syllogism are afi rm
a tive,the conclusion must be afi mna tivo.
This comes from the fi rst axiom,because if the major
promiss be affi rmativ e , i . e .,expresses the agreement o f
the major term with the middle,and the minor promiss
also be affi rmativ e, expressing the ag reement of the min or
term with the middle,it is plain tha t the conclusion in
which those two terms are compared with each o the r
must be afi rmativ e, i . e .,it must express their agr e e
ment wi th each othe r,because they wer e a ffi rmed to
agree each with the same third or middle term. Thus,
i f we affi rm that “All in tellig en t beings were made to
serv e God, (major premise) and also we affi rm that
A ngels a re in te lligen t be ings, we (minor premise)must sfi rm in the conclusion that Ang els were made
to serv e God.
”
1 16 RULES OF THE SYLLOGISM
Here the two terms, se rv e God, and angels,
were found to agree with the same third, i . e .,intelli
g ent beings,”henco they were declared to agree in the
conclusion.
Runs— 2. If either of the premisses be afi rma tive
and the other negative, the conclusion must be nega tive.
This comes from the second axiom. It isplain that
if a term in one o f the propositions agrees with, i . e .,
is affi rmed of the middle term,and a term in anoth er
proposition disag reeswith, i . e . ,is denied of the middle
term, the two n ot agre eing with the same, cannot agr ee
with each other, hence a negativ e conclusion follows.
Thus
Goodmen are not liars.
Those who go to heav en are goodmen .
Therefore, Those who go to heav en are not liars.
Here the major premiss is negativ e , i . e .
,the major
term “lia rs,
”doeshot agree with the middle term good
men . The minor premiss is afi rma tiv e, i . e .,the minor
term,
“those who go to heav en,
”is affi rmed of the mid
dle term, and hence these two terms agree and the con
elusion,“those who g o to heav en are not liars, must be
negativ e according to this rule .
RULE—3. If bothpremissesbe negatives,we can drawno conclusion . Thus
Zaid is not a diligent student .Amr is not a diligent student,
A statement like thisprovesnothing .
No relation is established,as is seen in the figure .
Q IYA‘
S KE' QAWA’
1D. 1 17
Abyahanpar Khudaki itaat karne ko, sur firish
te , yih donon juz mutabiqtisre juz z i-aql ke hai1_1 , is
sababso natijo men mutabiqhai1_1.Dfisxl Grimm—A gar hubra aur sugrd men eh si liba
ho, to natfia zar iir saliba hayd.
Y ihqaids dfi sreqam’
m i badihi so nikalta hai . Yih
zahir hai , ki kubra aur sa gra. men so kisi ka ek juz agar
hadd i ausat so muwafiqat rakhe , yano mansfibbil- ijibho ,aur dfi sr e ka ek juz hadd i ausat ke gair mutabiqho, yanemansfibbis-salbho, to is sfirat men , yan e jabki ek mutabiqaur dusra gair
-mutabiqhadd i ausat ko hai, apesmen bhikisi tarah mutabiqat na hogi : pas natija. si liba niklegé,
jeisamisal so zahir hai .
Nek log , jhuth-bolnewélo nahig hain.
We jo bihisht ko jato hai1_1, nek hoto haig .
Pas, We jo bihisht ko jate haig , jhuthe nahin hain .
Is misal men kubra saliba hai, yan e juz i akbar
jhuth-boln ewale” mutabiqat 118.t rekhta hai nek log”
so, jo hadd i ausat para hai . Sugramujibs hai yane fiqra,we jo bihisht ko jate hai1_1, jo juz i asgar hai, mutabiqhai hadd i ausat ko, pas bamfi jib d1
’1sre qaids ke natija.
saliba nikalta hai, yan e we jo bihisht ko jate , jhutho
n ahin hain .
Tfsna Grimm—Agar hubrd aur sagrei donon si libe hon,
to kuchh natiia na nilf legci . Maslan ,
Zaid mihnati talibi ilm nahig hai .
Amr mihnati talibi ilm nahig .
Is so kuchh natija nahin nikalta.
Daisr i misdl
1 18 RULES OF THE SYLLOGISM.
It is nothing to the point to say Zaid is not Amr,
for although it is true enough, this does n ot follow
from the premisses, but is simply a fact,n o t sustain ed
by these two propositions. We must keep in mind tha t
the syllogism is a form o f expression in which two . terms
are compa red with each o the r by means o f a middle
term n ow,a t least one o f the termsmust ag ree with the
middle te rm or standa rd o f compa rison , or n o compa rison
c an be efi ected be twe en them. We a r e supposed to be
trying to fi nd some re la tion be twe en these te rms,bu t w e
can draw n o compa rison be twe en them,unless a t lea st
one o f them agr e es with the thing by which we propo se
to measure o r compare them . Thus,if we hav e before us
two larg e stones, and wish to compa re them andlsay whattheir weight is with r eference to each othe r , we can con
clude n othing about them by hav ing a weight put into our
hand by which ne ither o f them can be weighed, i . e . , with
which n eithe r o f them agr ees. Thus,also if we say
Zaid is not a diligent student.Amr is not a diligent student .
We hav e learned n othing about Zaid and Amr a s
compared with each o the r, o r in other words,we hav e
failed to establish any relation between them . But if we
make one of the premisses a fii rmativ eand say,
A good boy is a diligent student .Zaid is not a diligent student .
We can compare Zaid with“good boy and draw the
conclusion
Zaid is not a good boy.
The conclusion thus sta tes the relation between themajor and min or te rm,
found out when both or one o f
them agrees with the middle, the term of comparison .
124 RULES FOR THE SYLLOGISM.
part of it . There would thus really be two middle
terms,i . e. , the major and minor terms would not be
compared with the same thing . Hence the syllog ism
would hav e in reality four terms.
This will be plain from a figure .
Some X is Y .
Some X is Z.
Therefore, Some Z is Y .
’Here X is not distributed as is seen
some ,”and from the fi gure it
is plain tha t the conclusion does
n ot follow,a lthough it might
happen that some Z is Y, as
seen in the figure .
The following are syllogisms violating rule 5th .
Some animals are sheep.
Some animals are horses.
Therefore, Some horses are sheep.
White is a color .
Black is a color .
Therefore, Black is white .
. It is manifest that the middle term color,
only taken in part in both premisses, hence the err or
in the . conclusion . The middle term then, must bedistributed at least once .
In the syllogism
Some men are
Some men are
Therefore, Some learned men are tyrants.
-we hav e an example of a conclusion which is
correct thoug h not following from this reasoning .
126 RULES FOR THE SYLLOGISM.
RULE.-6 . A term must not be distributed in the
conclusion tha t was not distributed in the premisses.
The reason is,that if a term be distributed
,i . e .
taken entire in the conclusion, which was undistrib
u ted or taken but in par t in the premisses, things
would be compared in the conclusion which were n ot
compared in the premisses, and in r eality a fourth te rm
would be introduced into the syllogism,while three is
the rule . We can only compare that part of a te rm
with another in the conclusion that was compar ed
with the middle term in the premisses, but if on ly
a part of a term be compared in the premiss, and then
the whole o f it be compared in the conclusion , some
thing would be introduced that had not been compar ed
before .
A figure will make this error
A ll X . is Y.
No Z . is X.
Therefore, No Z. is Y .
Not true .
Or
AIIX is Y.
Therefore All Z isY.
In the fi rst of these examples, Y the major term,is
not distributed in its premiss because the predicate of
an affi rmativ e proposition, i . e. , a part only ofY is taken,asmuch as is included inX . But in the conclusion Y is
128 RULES FOR THE SYLLOGISM.
distributed because it . is the predicate of a negativ e
proposition, i . e . ,the whole of Y is taken and hence the
mistake of saying that no part of Z corresponds with Y.
In the second of these examples the minor term Z is
not distributed 1 o., it is taken but in part, because the
predicate of an affi rmativ e preposition but in the con
elusion being the subject of a universal, it is distributed
hence the error .
The fi rst example is the same as saying,
Allquadrupeds are animals.
No bird isTherefore, No bird is
The second example is,
All men are sinners.
A ll men are animate beings.
Therefore, All animate beings are sinners.
Neither of these can be true . If the major term be nuduly distributed, it is called illicit process
”o f the
major, if the minor be unduly distributed it is ca lled
illicit process of the minor .
Roma— 7. If both premisses are particular, no
conclusion can be drawn.
This rule follow from rules 5th and 6th . The reason
is plain . We are left without any medium of compari
son . Thus a conclusion from particular premisses, would
be either a case of “undistributed middle, illicit
process. For instance to say,
Some men are wise .
Some men are foolish,
arm'
s KE onWAID. 129
B. Lokin natije men B. kulli hai, is sababso ki mahmfi l
haiqaziya i salibe ka, yane kull B. liye. jatahai, pas yihkahné. galat thahartahai ,ki J. kull B. men nahin.
Dusri misal men asgar J. juz i hai, yano tamam A .
par nahin aya hai, is sababso ki mahmfi l para haiqaziyai mfi jiba kfi, magar natije men babais mauzfr honeqaziya ikulliya ks,kulli hai, aur yihi bais galati ké. hai .
Pahli misal men aisi galati hai, goya koi kahe , ki
Sabchaupi o haiwan hain.
Koi parand chaupaya nahin hai .
Pas, Koi parand haiwan nahin hai1_1 .
Dfisri misi lmen is tarah ki galati hai, jaise koi kahe,
Subinsan unahgar hain.Babinsan aiwan hain.
Pas, Sabhaiwan gunahgar hain.
Jo akbar ki kubra men ya asgar ki sug'
ra men juzi
ho, aur natije men akar kulli ho jée, us ko “kulliyat i
mi-fliiz”kahte hain, pas agar akbar natije men kulli ho
ji o, jis hal men ki kubra men juz i the, us ko“kulliyat i
mi-fdic akbar lei”kuhte hain, aur jo asgar, ki sugramen
juzi the, aur natije men kulli ho jae, us ko kulliyat i nd
j aiz asgar hi”kuhte hain .
Bi rwi n Cl ima x —Agar lubrci our sugrd donon j uz i
ha in to natiia kuchh nahin nihlegd.
Yihqaids panohwen aur chhathwonqoide so nikalta
hai . Yih zahir hai, ki jabdonon juzi hon, to koi wists i
kamila , akbar aur asgar ko muqabals karne ka na hoga.
Doqaziye juzion so natija nikalna, do galation so
khéli na hogs, ya hadd i ausat juz i hegi, ya kulliyat i
na-jaiz akbar ya asgar ki pai jaegi. Maslan koi kahe,
a admi nqlmand hain.
a admi bowaqfif hain
130 RULES FOR THE SYLLOGISM.
prov es n othing , for we have an undistributed middle
and are n ot justifi ed in saying ,
Therefore, Some foolish persons are wise .
This is the same a s to say
Somo X is Y .
Some X isZ.
Therefore,Some Z is Y .
which is not true .
Again , if W9 make one of the premisses negativ e
and say,
Some animals are sagacious.Somequadrupeds a re not sagacious,
we would hav e an illicit proce ss to infer that
Somequadrupeds are not animals.
The same as to say
Some X is Y .
Some Z is not I .
Therefore, Some Z is not X .
Ther e may be exceptions to this rule about par ti
cular premisses, in the case o f a fiirmativ es tha t distr i
bu te the predicate , as mention ed on page 78 ; e. 9,
Some animals are men .
Some men are Wi se .
Therefo re,Some m ss (bowge) are ammals.
Here the conclusion is correct, and the middle
term,a lthough the predicate of an a ffi rmativ e proposi
tion , is distributed because the“some animals
” men
tioned, includes all men,so tha t in fact is
distributed.
Runs— 8. If one premiss be particular, the con
clusion must be particula r .
onms EE onmap. 133
Subut iska is tarah par hai, ki wubmuqaddams juziyo,ya mujibs hogs ya saliba . Farz kar o, ki mujibs juziyoho . To chunki ekqiyas men (qaids 7)donon muqaddamsjuz iye nahin rakh sakte hain, is waste d1
’1sra muqaddams
zun ir mujibs kulliya ya saliba kulliya hoga. Farz karo,
ki m1’
1jiba kulliyaho, to usmen faqat ok juz kulli hogs, aurwub jna zurur hadd i ausat hone chabiye . Warna kisi
muqaddams men hadd-i-ausat kulli na rahega, ky 1’1nki
mujiba juziya mafruza kisi juz kikulliyat nahin zahir
karoga. (Q aids Is bahs so yih natija nikalta hai, ki
akbar o asgar donon muqaddamon men kulli waqi na honekulli nahin asakongo . (Q éida Yih bat
faqat m1’1jibe jusiye men,yane jabki natija mfijiba juziyo.ho,pai jati hai . Lekin farz karo,ki wubqaziya saliba kulliya
ho , to muqaddams si libe so natija zurur saliba nikloga.
(Q aids Chunki s1’
1rat i mazklira men do muqaddamatmen so eh yane mujibs juziyo men koi juz kulli na hoga,
aur ddsre yane saliba kulliya men ok kulli hoga, khwah
akbar ho ya asgar, to faqat ok juz rah gaya. jo natije menkulli ho . (Q aids Is waste wuhqsaiye faqat salibajuziya hi ho sakté. hai , jaisa kiqa1de 8 men mazkfir has.
Désr i carat—Yams agar muqaddama mujiba juziyan ahin hai, to saliba juziyo farz karo . Aur jabek saliba juziyahai to dusramuqaddama zurur m1
’
1jiba (qaida 3)our kulliya(qéida 7) yane m1
’
1jiba kulliya hona chabiye .Donon
muqaddamat men ok m1’
1jiba kulliya aur dusra saliba
juziyo. zurur hogs, to donon muqaddams ke tin juz on (yansakbar o asgar o hadd-i-ausat)men so faqat do ki kulliyatzihir hogi . Aur shunki ek in men so zurur hadd i ausathona chabiye, (qaida 6)to faqat ek juz rah gaya., jo natijemen kulli ho, aur natija zurur saliba hogs, kyunki ek
muqaddams si liba hai ; aur natijajuziyahogaissababsoki us
RULES FOR THE SYLLOGISM.
Row s roa SYLLOGISMS.
1 . If both premisses of a syllogism are affi rmativ e ,the conclusion must be affi rmativ e .
2 . If either of the premisses be negativ e, the con
slusion mustbe negativ e .
3. If both premisses be negativ e, we can draw n o
conclusion .
4. The middle term must be univocal, i . e .
, hav e
but one meaning in the premisses.
5 . The middle term must be distributed a t least
once in the premisses.
6 . A term must not be distributed in the conclu
sion that was not distributed in its premiss.
7. If both premisses are particular, no conclusion
can be drawn .
8. If one premiss be particular , the conclusion
must be particular .
SECTION II.
Frsuas .
I.
—Special a ttention has not yet been called to th e
fac t, tha t the syllogism may hav e a v ariety of forms,
according to the position o f the middle term . Some
times it may se em best and most natural to make the
middle term the subject o f the major premiss and th e
predica te o f the minor , some times the predicate o f bo th
premisses, 850. It is not r equired to be in any particu la r
position , but may take its place in the premisses acco rd
ing to the way the a rgument strikes the mind o f the
r eason e r . Thus, take the syllog ism,
Good men do not go to hell .
Liars go to hell .
There fore , Liars are not good men .
This may be stated thus
None that go to hell, are goodmen .
Liars go to hell .
The refore, Liars are not good men .
In those two syllog isms, the middle te rm go to
hell,is the predica te o f bo th premisses in the fi rst ex
ample- in th e second example it is the subject o f th e
major and the predicate o f the min or preml ss.
Figure , is the word used to denote the drj’
er en tpositions
of the middle term in syllogisms. The subject o f fi gu re
m ay seem diffi cult to the learner , but by a little applica
tion it will become pla in . It is impo rtant to be familiar
wi th i t in o rder to deal r eadily with the v arious forms
taken by syllogisms.
144 THE SECOND FIGURE.
Hence the re can be but four forms of syllogism in
this fi gure . The other figures, not be ing in the form to
which Aristotle’s dictum applies, must be tested by th e
axioms and rules for syllogisms.
SECOND Frauen.
Taking up the second figure , it is found tha t the con
e lusion o f syllogisms in it must a lways be n ega tiv e , be
cause the middle term is the prediea te o f both premisse s,
and as it must be distributed in at least one o f th e
premisses, this requires that on e of the pr emisse s be
negativ e , since only negativ es distribute the predicate .
If,then
,on e o f the premisses be n egativ e the con clusio n
a lso must be n egativ e according to rule . [p. 1 16,r .
We may obser v e fur ther , if the conclusion be nega tiv e
it distributes its predicate , which in this figur e is the
subject o f the major premiss ; hence the major premisswith a subject distributed, will be a un iversal .
Three spe cial r ules are thus obtained for the second
fi gure, v iz .
l . The major premiss must be universa l.
2 . On e of the premisses must be nega tive.3. The conclusion must be nega tive .
Any syllogism in this figure , which violates these
rules is inv alid.
Tnmn FIGURE.
This fi gure is of the form, M is P
M is S
S is P.
The syllogism as varied byquantity andquality, mayhave a greater variety of form in this figure than in any
SHAEL I DOYUM . 145
1 .-Kubra hakulliya honci z ar cir chdhige.
2 .— Sug.r (i kci mzij iba hon/i z ar zir ohahige .
Gara z ki is shakl menqiyas ki sirf char sfiraten hai1_1 ,Jm ki sibh at A rastatalis keqaul se mall’im hoti hai ; magaraur shaklen chfinki ba Surat iqanl i Ar astatalis nahin hain,isjibat se z ar lir hai, ki joqawanin ibadihi aurqawaidwastesibhat aqsarnqiyas kc, muqarrar hain, nu so an ki sihhatdaryaft ki jaws .
BAYXN SHAKL 1 DOYUM .
Malfim hota hai, ki shakl i doyum men natijaqiyasonké zarfir saliba hona chabiye, is sabab se
, ki sugré. aur
kubra donon men hadd i ausat mahmul waqi hota hai, auragar kubra o angra donor_1 mfijibe hon, donon men hadd i
ausat juzi hoga, halanki chabiye yih tha, ki ck men kulli
ho . Is waste z arfir hai, ki ckqaziya saliba ho, kyfinki
salibon kamahmfi l kulli hai . Pas agar kubra aur angra
men so ck saliba ho, to natija bhi bamfijibqaids i mazkura ,zar l
'
u'
saliba hoga. [Suf i 1 17 ; Q .
Aur alawa is ke agar natija saliba ho, to us kamahmul
jo is shakl men kubra kamauz gi waqi has tha, kulli hoga.
Paskubré. kulliya hoga. Lihazabamfi jibbayan i mazkl’
i ra
e bala, dncri shakl kc liye tinqaidc nikalte hain, yancI .—Kubra
’
zur zir kulliya honci chabiye ,
2 .
—Kubr ci sagrei men se eh zurzir sa’
liba hand chcihige .
13.—Nati/a zur zir si liba hand eha
’
hige .
Jo koiqiyas is shakl kaqawaid mazkfira e bale. kc
khilat hoga, galat hoga.
BAYAN SHAKL 1 se r um.
Misal is shakl ki
Auron ki banishat is shaklHIn ? 811111139 9 hain. Is kc
liye tinqade hain. new ». name juz ira hood. faisaki
SHAKLON KA’
KHA‘
SS MAUQ4. 153
hota hai, j i s ko fariqi sani, 31s as bahs ki jéc , taslim kar
lcwc . Phir yih sabit kiya jata hai, ki dawa fariqi sani kasahih nahin ho sakta hai, is sababse ki ya to us kc dawe
men ck bat nahinpai jati hai, joqaziya i kul liya imusallamamen hai, yayih ,ki us dawe men pai jati hai,magarqaz iya imusallama mcn nahin hai pas us he dawaqabil i taslimnahin hai .
Maslan koi kahc, ki Khudawand I’sa Masih dagaibaz
thé , is waste ki spue liye ck guroh ko mutia karne. chahta
tha, aur nu ki bihtari se kuchh sarokar us the, to ham is
kc radd men yihqaziya i kulliya lawen, ki Jo dagabziz
spue matlabkc waste ck guroh ko mutia karta hai, is amr
ki ittila us guroh ko na dcta ki tumharc upar mere mutia
hone kc sababsc barf barf musibatcn awcngi . Jabham
donon is ko taslim karen , to sabit karne. chabiye , ki Khudawand YeaMasih nc spue shagirdo
'
n ko is tarah ki ittila di
pas n atija yih niklcga, ki wuh dagabaz us the.
Dzisr t’
misdl.—Farz karo, koi kahc ki Baibal insan ki
banai hfi i hai, kyunki bahut batcn us men insan ki malfim
hoti hain, ya yih, ki bahut batcn usmen aisi hain , jin men
insan ki galati malum hoti hai, to is surat men shayad
har koi 1sqaz iya i kulliya ko tasli zn karcga , ki
Koi kittib, 31s ki ta lim aur khassiyat aisi ho, ki insan ki
taqat sc bahar ho, go ki baz maqamat men kaisi himushkil batcn hon, z urur ilhami hogi.
Jabham isqaz iye koqiyas men milawcn , to is tarahpdri dalil bana sakte hain
Baibal da r haqiqat aisi kitabmalfim hoti hai .Pas, Baibal zurfi r ilhami hai .
se am enK4: gre ase MA van. 157
Bar ck bat, jo samajh men nahin ati, us ko nahinmanna chabiye .
Fulani bat samajh men nahin ati .Pas, Us ko nahinmanna chabiye .
Yahan par kubra kulliya se , jo dalil nikalti hai, us
dalil se , us sc bhi barhkar sabit hotahai, jith a ki fariqsaniko manzur tha, yanc khud us kc upar tisri shakl ki rfi se,
iatiraz warid hota hai ,Maslan
Rr’
ih aur jl sm kc darmiyan ilaqa jo hai , samajh men nahin ate,Rubaur jism kc darmiyan jlaqa jo hai, ham us ko mantc hain,
Pas, Baz baten, jo samajh men nahin ati hain, ham mantc hain.
Isqiyas se slaniya sabit hai, ki agar dawa fariqsanikaba sibh at likba jac, to kubra galat thaharta hai . Aur
isbab men ki khass mauqaon par ck z arb ko dfi sri par
tarjih hai , yih lihaz rakhne. chabiye , ki fikr yih chahti hai,ki wasia lafz kam wasia ka, aur jins nan ka, mahmfil
waqi ho . Maslan ham yun nahin bolte hain ki Haiwan
ghoga hai,” balki Ghona haiwan hai, ya aqlmand Zaid
hai,
” balki Zaid aqlmand hai .” Isi waste jahan kahinmuqaddamat men hadd i ausat z iyada wasiaul mane ho , to
tartibiqiyas dfisri shakl men achchhi malum hoti hai,
kyfinki usi sfirat men mahmfi l pagti hai . Lekin hadd i
ausat agar kam wasia ho , to use mauzndalna achchha malfim hota hai, aur tartibiqiyas tisri shakl men ho jati hai
Bayan shaklon aur un kcqawaid ka ho chuka. Ab
h am ck aur bayan mutanlliqiqiyas, yanc zarbhé bayan
shur i’
l karts hain .
SECTION III.
Moon .
1 By themood of a syllogism is mean t, the designation by symbols, o f thequan tity andqua lity o f its thre e
propositions in their o rde r . Itwillbe r emembe red tha t th e
four v owelsA E I 0 ,we re used to designa te thequan tity
andquality o f all propositions, via ,unive rsal aflirma tiv c
,
univ ersa l negativ e , particu lar afi rma tiv c, pa rticula r
n ega tiv e . For example take the syllog ism,
Ev ery desire to ga in by another’s loss, is sin . (A
Gaming, is a desir e to gain by another’s loss. (A
1Therefore, All gaming is sin . (A
The three propositions o f this syllogism,a r e a ll
univ ersal afii rmativ cs, hence the mood o f the syllogism as
indica ted by the appropria te symbols is A A A .
Now,it is man ifest that the four ca tegorica l proposi
tions A E I 0, can be arranged in 64 combina tions or
ads,by the law o f permuta tion . The re ar e three pr op
ositions in the syllogism,and each of these may be v ar ied
in four diffe ren t ways, a s A E I 0 . Each o f these sym
bols may be a majo r premiss, and each o f these four
majors may hav e in turn all the four ca teg orica l proposi
tions as minors, g iv ing sixteen se ts, and to each of these
sixte en se ts, the four catcgoricals may be used as con
elusions, making the 64 combinations of syllog ism .
160 MOOD .
Mfi ma
Minors, A E IO. ditto .
Conclusions, A E I O.
This operation may be gon e through with for ea ch
of the letters,and sixty
- four moods, or forms of syllogism
will be the r esult .
Now many of these moods are n ot allowable be cau se
they v iolate the rules laid down for syllog isms, and for
the figures. Thus all moods hav ing affi rma tiv e pr e
misses with a n egativ e conclusion ,as A A E
,—A I O
,
a r e inadmissablc because they viola te the fi rst axiom.
All moods with n egative pr emisses as E E,- O O,
E O,&c cannot be used because they vi olate a r ule
[p. 1 16,'
r . All moods with particular premisse s are
n ot a llowable , as they v iolate a rule [p. 1 28, r . Some
of the moods a s I E 0,must be rejected for an illicit
process. Twenty-eight of the sixty
-four moods, a re
r ejected on a ccoun t of n egativ e and par ticula r premisse s
alone . It will be found tha t out o f the entir e sixty- fo ur
moods,only eleven arc allowable as n ot v iolating th e
rules for syllogism,viz .
Four afi rma tivcs.
A A A .
A I I.
A A I.
I A I.
2 . As there are four figures, it might seem that
by applying these elev en moods to all the fi gures, we
would hav e forty-four in a ll
,but some o f the moods
which a re v alid in one fi gure are n ot in an other,be
cause they violate the rules against the undistributed
168 REDUCTION.
Mood fig . 2 Reduced to fig . 1
A all X is Y no Y is Z. (By simple conversion .)E no Z is Y all X is Y.
E no Z is X no X is Z.
no Z is X. (By simple conv ersion .)
Mood fi g . 3 Reduced to fi g . 1
I some Y is X all Y is Z .
A all Y is Z some X isY . (By simple conv ersion .)I some Z is X some X is Z .
some Z is X . (By simple con v ersion.)
Reduced to fi g . 1
E no X is Y no Y is X . (By simple conv ersion .)A all Y is Z soc isY . (Conv ersionby limitation.)0 some Z is not X some Z is not X .
The cross lines x show tha t the premisses are trans
posed in forming the n ew syllogism . A single illustra
tion by propositions, o f the mood A E E giv en abov e ,must suffi ce . It will be a good exercise for the student
to work out some illustrations for himself. Example
Ev ery cov etousman is discontented.
No happy man is discontented.
Hence,no happy man is a cov etousman .
This syllogism may be r educed to the mood E A E
o f the fi rst fi gure by conv erting the mino r premiss bysimple conv ersion and then transposing it to the pla ce
o f the major premiss, thus
No discontented man is a happy man .
Ev ery cov etousman is a discontented man .
Hence, no cov etousman is a happy man .
This conclusion becomesby simple conv ersion ,N0
happy man is a cov etous man,”the same as before
reduction .
170 REDUCTION.
Second,it remains to illustrate the reductio ad impas
sibile, or indirect reduction . By this mode o f reduction
,
we prove that our conclusion is true,because when the
contrary o f this conclusion is inse rted as a premiss in a.
syllogism of the fi rst fi gure , a conclusion manifestly fa lse
is drawn . Take the mood A O O, o f the 2ud figure
All good men are contented.
Some rich men are not contented.
Therefore, Some rich men are not good men .
Now if this conclusion is not true, then substitute
the contrary of it as a premiss in a syllogism of the fi rst
figure thus
men are contented.
All men are good men .
Therefore, All r1ch men are contented.
Now this conclusion is not only manifestly false, but
it is untrue because it is con trary to the minor premiss
o f the original syllogism in which the premisses are sup
posed to be true . Hence one of the premisses in this
syllogism must be false, o r the fault must be in the form
o f the syllogism . But the reasoning or form o f the syl
logism be ing in the fi rst figure , we know to be corr ect,
hcncc one of the premisses must be false , and it is the
minor,because the major is granted in the original syl
logism .
We may work this out in symbols thus
All X is Y .
All Z is not Y .
Therefore . Some Z is not X .
This conclusion must be true,but if it is claimed
that it is not, then its contradictory must be, true i . e. ,a ll Z is By using this as a pr emiss, we may form
a syllog ism in the fi rst figure thus
All X is Y .
All Z is X .
Therefore, All Z isY .
172 REDUCTION.
But from the premisses o f the forme r syllogism,we se e
that some Z is n ot Y,
”and thisbeing the contradictory
o f the conclusion just drawn , both cannot be true . Now
as the premiss all Z is n ot Y,
”o f the forme r syllog ism
is assumed to be true , the conclusion a ll Z isY must
be false . If then this conclusion is fa lse,either the erro r
is in the form o f the syllogism,or one of the premisse s
is false . But the form of the syllogism a ccording to the
fi rst fi gure is valid, hence on e o f the premisses must be
false, and it cannot be the major, because this in the
original Syllogism is assumed to be true . Hence the
minor, a ll Z is Y
,
”must be false , and its con tradictory
some Z is n ot Y,
”is true in the fi rst syllog ism .
The v erses constructed to aid in remembering the v alidmoods of the four figures, are also arranged, as was inti
mated, to facilitate reduction . The student is referred to
these lin es, (page 164)with this explanation that in the
scheme, the consonantsb, c, d, f, in the beginningwords in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th figure, show to which mood
of the fi rst figure the reduction may be made . To illus
trate, f estino (E I O)of the 2nd figure , f elapton , f er isaE A. O, E I O)of the third, and f esapo, f resison (E A O,
I O)of the fourth, may be reduced to f er io (E I O of
the first figure . The letter m . shows that the premisses
are to be transposed. Thus, in reducing from camestr es
of the second fi c, to celerent of the first, the premisses
A E become E The letter s showsthat the proposition
for which the preceding vowel stands, is to be converted
simmy ; p shows that the proposition , indicated by the
vowel, is to be converted per accidens or
on . The letter k shows that the mood is to be
reduced ad impossible , i . e . , the premiss immediately prai
ccding k . is to be substituted by the contradictory of the
conclusion , and then the proof of the original conclusion be
worked out, as was shown in illustratin this form of no
duction . It will be seen that baraho o the second, and
bohardo of the third figure , are to be reduced thus. Otherletters in the scheme not mentioned, have no meaning in it.
SECTION IV.
Or Hrrorun'rrcar. Aucununrs.
THE HYPOTHETICAL SYLLOGISM.
So fa r we hav e considered only purely categorica l
arguments and syllogisms, that 18, such as are formed
from categorical propositions. We come now to con
sider hypothetical forms of argument, and the syllog isms
formed from them. An argument containing a hypoth
e sis may be called a hypothetica l a rgument .
A syllogism containing a pure hypothetical propo
sition, or more than one,is called a hypothe tica l syllog ism,
a nd the syllogism will take its name as“conjunctive
”o r
“disjunctive,”from the proposition contained in it, [see
page 66 In the hypothetical syllogism, the hypoth
e tical proposition is the major premiss, the minor is a
categorical, and the conclusion is a lso catego rical. In
the hypothe tica l proposition, the fi rst membe r is called
the a nteceden t, the second member the consequent. The
antecedent and consequent may be inv e rted, as John
willbe fi t to tra v el, if he is not sick. We fi rst examine
I. THE consuuo'rrv n sr LLocrsM, which in its most
common form,has for its major premiss a conjunctive
proposition and for its minor a ca tegorical . For ex
ample
If Zaid has a fever, he is sick.
Zaid has a fev er.Therefore, He is sick .
176 CONJUNOTIVE SYLLOGISMS.
If A in B, A is C.
But A is B.
Therefore, A is C.
In this example it is plain that if we afiirm the an
tecedent, the affi rmativ e of the consequent n ecessarilyfollows
,and we get the fir st rule for conditional propo
sitions.
1 .—1f the antecedent be granted the consequent must
be granted a lso.
But if we deny the antecedent, we cannot there fore
deny the consequent thus
Zaid has not a fev er .
Therefore, He is not sick .
For it is plain that he may be sick from some other
cause than fev er .
If we deny the consequent, we may deny the
antecedent a lso, thus
Zaid is not sick .
Therefore, Hc has not a fever .
For it is plain that if Zaid is not sick, he cannot
hav e a fev er,hence the second rule
2 .—Ij
’the consequent be denied, the antecedentmustbe
denied a lso.
But it must be obse rv ed, that if the consequent beaffi rmed
, we cannot therefore afi rm the anteceden t
and say,
Zaid is sick .
Therefore, He has a fev er ;
for he may be sick from some o ther cause .
Putting these two rules toge ther we may draw
from them a third rule
3.— If the consequen t be afi rmed or the antecedent
denied no conclusion can be drawn .
arm's ITTISALI
‘
. 177
Wuhi misal be. zaria hurri f,
Agar A . B. hai , to A . D. ha i .
Lekin A . B. hai .
Pas, A . D. ha i.
Ismisal se bakhribi roshan hai, ki agar muqaddamtaslim kiya jac, to tali ko bhi taslim karuc. parcga. Pas
y ih pahlaqaida nikla, ki
1 .—A gar muqaddam tash
’m hiyd, jdwe, to tdli ho bhi
taslim harndparegd.
Lekin agar muqaddam hé inkar kiya jac , to kuchh
z ar lir nahin , ki tali kabhi in kar kiya jac . Maslan,
Zaid ko bukhar nahin hai .Pas, Wubbimar nahinhai .
Yih kuchh z arri r nahin hai , ki agar bukhar na ho , to
bimar bhi na ho . Shayad kisi aur sababse bimar ho .
A gar tali ka inkar kiya jawe , to muqaddam ka bhi
inker karnaparega. Maslan ,
Zaid bimar nahin hai .Pas
,Us ko bukhar nahinhai .
Saf zahir hai ki agar Zaid bimar nahin hai, to us ko
bukhar bhi nahin hai . Pas drisraqa ida yih nikla ki,
2 .- A gar tdli hd inhdr hiyd jda, to muqaddam hd inhdr
bhi ha rndparegd.
Lckin gaur kam a chabiye , ki agar tali taslim ki jawc,to kuchh z arlir nahin
,ki muqaddam bhi taslim kiya jawe .
Maslan , yun na kahna chabiye ,
Zaid bimar hai .Pas, Us ko bukhar hai .
Kyfi nki shayed kisi aur sababse bimar ho .
Dononqaidon mazktira c bald. se tisraqaids nikalta
3.—A gar tdli taslim hi jda, yd muqaddam hd inhdr
hiyd jdwe, to kuchh natija nahin nihlegd.
180 GONJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISMS.
O ther examples con forming to the form of th e
conjunctiv e proposition can be made upby the studen t .
There may be cases o f conjunctiv e syllogisms in
which both premisses are conjunctiv e, e. g.
If A is B, G ie D.
If C is D, E is F.
Therefore, If A is B, E isF.
We may r emark here that a conjunctive pr opositionis rea lly a univ ersal affi rmativ e, whether the anteceden t
and consequen t be univ ersal o r par ticula r , a ffi rmativ e
o r negativ e . For instance , if a man is sick he is n o t
fi t to trav el . Here the anteceden t is a univ ersa l a ffi rm
a tiv e and the consequent a univ e rsal nega tiv e, yet the
entire sentence is a univ ersal affi rmative proposition .
The truth or falsity o f the conjunctiv e propositiondepends on the consequent, that is, if the consequentfollows from the an tecedent the proposition is true
,
o the rwise it is false . The conjunctive proposition maybe true as a proposition , and yet the anteceden t and
consequent be false, thusIf science is a bad thing, it should be n eglected.
This proposition is true, a lthough both its members
are false .
The conjunctiv e syllogism may be r educed to a
simple categorical one by removing the conditiona l
character of the major premiss.
The form of condition may be r emov ed by the
phrases The case of”
put in place of the condition al“ if.
”The proposition then be comes categorical, with
the antecedent for its subject and the consequent for itspredicate thus,
The case of Zaidhaving a fever isa case of hisbeing sick .
Zaid has a fever .
Therefore,Zaid is sick .
czm s ITTISA’LI
'
. 181
bana sakta hai . Q iyas 1 ittiséli ki aisi sfiraten bhi ho saktihain ki donon muqaddame muttasile hon . Maslan
Agar A . B. hai, to J. D. hai .
Agar J. D. hai, to R. S. hai .
hai, to R. S. hai
Janna ohahiye kiqaziya i muttasila dar haqiqat mujiba ku11iya hota hai, khwah us 116. muqaddam aur tali kulli
ho ya juz i, mujiba ho ya saliba . Maslan ,
A gar koi shakhs gunah kare, Khuda us so khush na hoga.
Dekho, agarebi yahan par muqaddam mu] ibakulliya hai, téham kul lqaniya,mfijiba ku111ya
0
Sidqaur Icizbqaziye muttasilc hé, us ki tali par mauqui hai, yane agar tali muqaddam ko lazim hai, toqaz iyasachcha , warna jhfitha. Maslan ,
Agar Zaid ko bukhar hai, to wubbimar hai.Yihqaziya muttasila sachcha hai kis waste ki tali
muqaddam ko lazim hai .Lekin agar koi kahe ki
Agar yih admi chor hai, to Hinduhai ,
qaziya jhutha hai ky l’mki 1ski tali muqaddam komutlaqlazim nahin hai, z eraki tali aur muqaddam ke darmiyan
kuoh ilaqa z arfi ri nahin hai . Aur aisa bhi hota hai, ki kull
gaziya mattasila sadiqhota hai, lekin muqaddam aur tail
donon kazibhote hain . Mas1an ,Agar ilm huni chiz hai, to chhor dena chabiye .
Isqaziye ke sadiqhone me1_1 kuchh kalam nahin, magar
do non juz is ke kazibhaig , yane na to ilmbur i chiz ha i, nayih ,
ki us ko chhor dena chahiye .
Q iyas ittisali ko hamliya ki taraf pherte hain, yaneqiyas hamliya banate hain , 1sytarah par ki kubra ki alamat-iittisal agar
”ko dur karke us ki jaguh lafz jismauqe
par’’
yé 1s halat me1_1”
a, u.r“1smauqepar”, ya “ishalat
znen”
, bar te hain . Maslan,
J1s halat men Zaid ko bukhar hai, wubbimar hai.Is hal meg , Zaid ko halat bukhar ki hai .
Pas, Ishal men,wuh bimar hai .
182 DISJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISMS.
The same rules apply for testing the v alidity of
conjunctiv e syllogisms a s for categorical.
1 1 .—DISJUNcn vE SYLLOGISMS .
The disjunctiv e syllogism is on e , the major pr emissof which is disjunctiv e, and the minor categorical. It is
of the form,
Either A is B, or it is C.
A is B.
Therefore, A is not C.
Example .
This metal is either gold or silv er .
It is not silver .
Therefore, It is gold.
It will be seen tha t the major premiss consists of
an altern ativ e between two members. The minor pre
miss afiirms the one,and the conclusion denies the other ,
or,as in the second example, the minor denies the one ,
and the conclusion affi rms the other .
We may hav e instead of two alternativ es, three or
more thus,
Either A is B, or C, or D.
A is not B or 0.
Therefore , It is D.
Example .
Either the.
world is eternal, or it produced itse lf , or1t 18 the work of an intelligent Being .
But the world is not eternal, nor produced by itself .
Therefore, It must be the work of an intelligent Being .
Again
The angle A must be equal to, or greate r, or less, thanthe angle B.
But it is neither equal to, nor less than B.
Therefore, It must be greater than B.
The simple rule for disjunctiv es is that,If one or more of the a lternatives be denied
, the r emainingone
,or some one of those that remain, may be afi rmed
,
and vice versa .
184 DISJUA’O'TIVE SYLLOG’ISMS .
This rule , howev e r, is not without exception, for
in some instancesby affi rming one alte rna tiv e , we are no t
authoriz ed deny the other thus,
Vir tue tends to procure us,either the este em o f
mankind,or the fav our of God.
” He re both parts o f
the proposition may be true . In such cases we must
determine from the context, whe ther the two member s
are intended to exclude one another or n ot .
III. THE DILEMMA .
THE di lemma is a hypo the tical a rgument or syllo
gism of which the major premiss is a compound con
junctiv e proposition, and the minor pr emiss a disjunctiv e
proposition .
In the dilemma the re are in r eality two or more
conjunctiv e syllog isms blended in to one,so that the
statement isbriefer than if each syllogismwere separatelyunfolded in the argument.
The dilemma has se veral forms, as,
Simple dilemma .
If A isB, or C isD, then E is F.
But either A isB, or Cis D.
Therefore, E isF.
Another form of the simple dilemma is,
If A isB, then C isD, or E is F.
But C is not D, nor E isF.
Therefore, A is not B.
Complex dilemma .
In this there are sev eral antecedents each with its
own consequent ; thus,If A isB, G isH ; and if CisD, L isM ; and if E isF ,
X is Y .
But either A is B, or C isD, or L isM.
Therefore, G isH, or L isM, or X isY .
czms INFISA’LI
‘
185"
Janna chabiye ki kabbi is 15mmqaide ke khilaf bhiwaqi hfia karta hai . Maslan
Basababneki ke, ham ya insan ki nazar meg pasand ate ,yaKhuda ki nazar meg .
Yahan par mumkin hai, ki donor_1 juz sadiqhon . Jis
bayan me1_1 aisaqaz iya waqi ho to wahag par tarz i bayanse malfim ho jaega ki donon juz sadiqhain , ya sirf 0k :
III. Q IYAS MURAKKAB SHARTIYA .
Q iya'
s murakkabsha r tiya us ko kahte haiu, 11s is
qaziya munfasila .
Isqiyas men dar haqiqat do ya is se ziyada qiyésittisali hote hain , j1n sabko ikhtisar ke liye milakar ek kar
dete haig .
Q iyésmurakkabshartiya ki kai sfir aten ham, maslan
auwa l szirat wuh jisme1_1 kai ek muqaddam hote hai1_1, aurtali ek hoti hai, ya tali kai eh aur muqaddam sabhé ek .
Misal l .
Agar A . B. hai , to J. D. hai, yaR. S. hai.
Lekin na to J. D. hai , na R. S. hai.Pas, A . B. nahin hai .
Dasr i szirat wubhai, 11sme1_1 kai eh muqaddam hote
h ain, aur har muqaddam ki tali juda hoti hai,—Maslan :Agar A . B. hai, to J. D. hai, aur agar R. S. hai, to F. K
hai , aur agar L. M. hai , to N. W . hai .
Lekin yaA . B. hai, yaR. S. hai .
in . K. hai .
Pas,J. D. hai, yaF. K. hai, yaN.W. 111.
1 90 THE DILEMMA.
ditional syllogism to a'
categ orical the phrases, the case
o f”,and th e present case,
”are used, thus
The case of A being B, or of E being F, are cases of Xbeing Y.
The present is a case of A being B, or of Ebeing F.
Therefore , This is a case of X being Y .
If the premisses ar e admitted, of course the conclu
sion must follow,and the rules for testing syllogisms
must be applied to asce rtain the validity in this case
a lso .
SECTION V.
01m m Forms or Anew sn'r .
Iansounsa AND con romrn SrLLoersns.
Tnn Enram nns.
Tm: enthymeme is a syllogism with one premiss
omitted. It is thus a con tracted syllogism . As was
remarked in another part of this work on the syllog ism,
(page 1 10,5) in r easoning , some proposition s in the
chain of argument are usually suppressed because the
mind readily takes in the argument without un foldingall its steps at length . The enthymeme is a common
form of abridged argument . Either premiss may beomitted from the syllogism. For example,
All men a re mortal.Caesar 1s a man.
Therefore, Caesar 1s mortal .
In this we may omit the major premiss, thus,Caesar is a man .
Therefore,Caesar 1s mortal.
Or we may write it thus, suppressing the min o r
premiss,
All men are mortal.Therefore, Caesar is mortal.
Now,both these statements are satisfactory, because
the suppressed proposition is readily supplied in the
mind.
Q IYA'
s 1 DE-TABTfB o MURAKKAB.
cur l s 1 MUKHAFFAF .
Jisqiyas hé ekqaziya yane kubra ya sugremuqaddarho, us ko gig/as i mulchafl
‘
af samajhna chabiye . .Jaisa ki i
kitabme 1_1 bayan ho ohuka hai (Saf . 1 11 , V.) aksar yfin
hfia kartahai,ki dalflonmen mufassal bayan nahin hotahai,is liye ki us dalil ko ham waisa hi samajhte hai1_1, agarebi
baz qaziye chhorta jaen. Mukhaft'
af dalilen aksar isi
mt men hfiakar ti hain. Aur yih ikhtiyar hai, ki kubra
sugrame 1_1 se jaun sé chahenmuqaddar karen. Maslan ek
dalil hai, ki
Kull insan fani bain.
Zaid insim hai.
Pas, Zaid fani hai.
Abagar ham chahen , to kubra ko is dalil men na zikr
karen,Maslan,
Zaid insan hai.Pas, Zaid fi ni hai .
Donon tarah dalilpuri hai, ky l’inkiqariya i muqaddam
ihnan samjha jatahai, go ki lafzan maujtid na ho.
arms I amsaLSAL’
.
lafz pas barha degge , to is halat me 1_1 pfiraqiyasbanne kolaiqhoga. Pas 1
’
1par ki misal ko agar is surat men 16
Wen, to yfig hogi,
Zaid insan hai,Pas, Zaid féni hai .
Agar kisi muqaddame men maaszl natiie M pdgdjamto wuh sagrci ha i, anr agar mahmzil peg/d jde to kabra
’
.
end s 1 MUSALSAL .
Q igsts i Masa lsa l shakl i auwal ke kaitasar ke silsile ko kahte hai1_1. Yih fiparhas
,ki bahs mubahise me 1_1 har dal il ko baj
1qés plahida alahida karke nahin bayan karte hain,balkibazqamye aise manqa par muqaddar karte hain.
k ai ehqiyas silsilewar is tar tib se bayan kiye jawenatija harqiyas hé d1’1sre ka muqaddams waqi ho , to aiselkhtlsar ko Q igds i masa lsal kahte hai1_1 . Aur yad rakhna0115l 9 , kiqiyas i ntusalsal me 1_1 mahmulqaziya i auwakfi
, dfisreqaziye kamauz 1f1 hota hai, aur tiere ka mahmul ,chapthe kamauz ii waqi hota hai ; hatta ki sabse akhir ke
ké mahmfi l,qaz iya i auwal ka mahmfil parta hai .
111i aksar dalil lane ka hai . Misalqiyas i ma salsal ki, zail men mundarij hai
Aur agar in hur 1’
1f ke iwaz
jaen, to misal y1’
1 1_1 hogi
Zihn, ekquwat i darraka hai.Q uwat i darraka , ruh hai .Ruh gait ji sm hai.Jo chiz gair 318m hai, —fani hai .Jo chiz gait
-fani hai,gel-r
d tak rebegi .Pas, Zihn abad tak rahegé.
PART IV.
APPLIED LOGIC.
BY applied Logic is mean t the practica l use of th e
science for g eneral purposes, as distinguished from a
mere knowledge o f the science in the abstract,i . e a
mere knowledge of the laws and rules of logic, withou t
any special reference to their use and application . It is
one thing to hav e merely a knowledge of the nature and
structure, so to speak, of a science , andquite anothe r
thing to be familiar with its practical use in ev ery day
life . For instance , one may know the names of a ll the
implements used in carpentering, and the mode o f usingthem,
and hav e a knowledg e of the rules used in that
useful ar t, and yet may not be able to make furniture .
The knowledge required for this, isquite different froma mere acquaintance with names and rules . Again , bystudying a book, one may g ain a knowledg e of the
nature and rules of sur v eying, but a practical or
applied”use of the science of surv eying , is obtained
in the fi eld and by observ ing , how under different cir
cumstances, these rules a re applied. Having gon e ov e r
the laws, rules,and terms
,that constitute the science o f
Logic, we propose in this part o f ou r book to treat
more of a practical applica tion o f the science, showing
how it is applied in e ve ry day life . We will fi rst
classify the different forms o f error commonly me t, and
illustrate the mode o f treating them,and then explain
some modes or forms in which arguments are commonly
used.
HIS SA IV.
MANTIQ I ISTIAMA’LI
’.
MANTIQ i Istiamali se yih muradhai, ki is ilm ko,J811611
kahin héjat page , amal men lawen . Chunag chi mantiq1istiamali us ilm i mantiqse , jo sirf z ihn men ho , faqt isibatmen mukhtalif hai . Kisi ilm hé. jan lena aur bat hai, aur
uska. mashqrakhna is tarah par ki roz-marra kém men
awe , aur bat hai . Maslan, yih mumkin hai ki koi sh
el ibis
j 1tne hathyar barhai ke kam karne ke hon , sabhé nam
bakhfibi janta ho , aur is bat se bhi waqif ho, ki fulanahathyar fulane kam men a s hai, aur is ko is tarah istiamal
men lane chabiye . Garas ki sabkam barhai ka janté. ho,magar bain hama , chabiye ki koi chiz nu hathyaron se
ha apne z ihu men aur bat hai . Isi tarah agar koi shakhs
ek k1tabko paghkar , paimaish keqaidon se waqif ho jaweto ho jaws, magar mashqjo eh chiz hai
, wuh, jabtak kheton kheton napta na phire , aur tarah tarah ki baten uskin azar se na guzren, kabhi nahin hasil hoga.
Bayan qawa id aurqawan in , aur istilahat imantiqsefaragat pai . Ab irada hai, ki age chalkar is kitabmenmufassal bayan istiamal i mantiqke tariqon hé likhen , aur
batlawen, ki kis tarah is ko roz -marra amal me 1_1 lens
chabiye . Auwal bayan mukhtalif sliraton mugalte hé joaksar ake parte hai1_1, likhenge ; aur phir tariqa nu mugél
tog ke rafa karne hé, ba z aria misalog ke batlawenge aur
phir chand tariqe dalil li ne he samjhawenge .
SECTION I.
Fant acms.
Hav ing described the v arious forms of argumen t
and syllogism, it is important tha t we now conside r
more at leng th, the v ariouskinds of fallacy that may be
used inten tionally in r easoning , or into which one mayinadv ertently fall. A fallacy is an invalid argument . A s
much of the practical usefulness o f logic depends on the
r eady detection and exposure of fallacies, it is v ery im
portant that the subject be well understood. The learner
should strive to ge t a thorough acquain tance with all
forms of fallacy . We are not simply to guard against
the false weapons of o thers, but also against the mis
takes in to which we ourselv es are liable to fall in rea
soning . The fallacy may be in one,or all
, of the thr e e
par ts of the argument or syllogism . Some word o r
term may be used in a doubtful or double sense , o r a
proposition may be false, or the form of the syllogism
may be invalid.
Now,it is plain that all fallacies may be divided
into two g rea t classes, f irst, where the error is in the
form of the reasoning, i e. wher e the conclusion
does not follow from the premisses second, where
the error is not in the form of the reasoning , i . e . where
the conclusion does follow from the premisses, notwith
2 12 FA LLA C'IES .
standing an err or in some term or proposition of the
syllogisms.Here the e rror is in the ma tter o f the
syllogism . The fi rst are called logica l or f orma l f a lla
cies,
”the second non - logica l or ma ter ia
lf a lla ci es.
”The
fi rst gr ea t class will n ow be described.
I . LOGICAL on FORMAL FALLACIES .
The fa llacies of this class include all v iolations o f
Aristo tle’s dictum,
and the r ules for syllogisms. They
a re o f fi v e kinds
Undistributed middle .
Illicit process of the major or minor term.
Nega tiv e premisses.
A ffi rma tiv e conclusion from a nega tiv e prem
iss,or v ice v ersa .
5. More than thre e te rms in the argumen t .
In all these forms o f falla cy, the e r ro r is manifest
from the form of expression , whenthe syllogism is fully
stated. But in practice , frequently the difi culty o f
detecting the e rror , arises from the argument bein ge lliptical, i . e. one of the propositionsmay be suppressed,o r the fallacy may be so cov e red up in a v olume o f
words, that the e rror does n ot r eadily appear . In such
case , if the a rgument is drawn out to its full form,o rstripped of its v erbosity and put in the syllogistic form ,
the e r ror fbecomes man ifest. These e rr ors we re illus
tra te d t o some exten t in drawing out the ru les fo r
te sting the v a lidity o f syllogisms, and we n eed do but
little mor e here than classify them as abov e , and g iv e
a n additional illustration o f each . Let it be well bo rne
in mind,that in these falla cies, the conclusion does not
f ollow f rom the premisses. Ev en if the conclusion be
,true
,the argument is ye t a v icious one .
EA 134717 M UoA'
LTON KA’
. 2 13
me1_1 galati waqi hai . Pahl iqism kc mugalte ko, yane jabkiqiyas ki tartibme 1_1 galati waqi hoti hai, Muga
’
lta i Sar i
kuhte hain, aur dfi sriqism kc mugalte ko, yane jabkiqaziye kc manon men galati Waqi hoti hai, Magritte i Mana
wt, kuhte hain .
Q ISM AUWAL, MUGALTA 1 Sent.
Isqism me 1_1 wuh mugaltc dakhil hain
, jo ba bais'
khilaf hone qanl i A rastatalis kc, aur qa1dor_1 qiyaskc, Waqi h l'ui karte hail). Aur y ih panch ta rah par hain :
1 .—Hadd i ausat juz i .
2 .—Kull iyat i najai z , akbar ya. asgar kil3.—Muqaddamat sil ibe .
5 .— Ekqiyas men tin juzon se z iyada ké.hona.
In sab suraton ki galati, s1’
1rat 1qiyas se mahim ho
jati hai, jabki apni sur at men bayan kiya jawe . Lekin
galati kc pakarn e men aksar mushkil uswaqt ake parti hai,jabdalil mulghaffaf ho , yane koiqaz iya wahap muqaddarho, yayih ki bahut se lafzon ki tah me1_1 galati aisi chhip
gai h o, kiba asani na malfim hoti ho . Aise waqt me g agar
dalil ko p1’
1ri s1’
1rat me1_1 lawcp , ya yih ki un bahut se
lafzon kc janjal ko dfir karkar ba tartibiqiyas rakhcg , to
i 1s waqt galati saf zahir ho jdcg'i . Gelation ké kuch
hal,qiyaski sihhat daryaftkarn e keqa 1de nikaltc me 1_1 , hamal e bayan kiya hai, is wajh se yahan kuchh z iyada bayan
k i hajat nahin hai, sirf mugalte kiq1smor_1 kabayan likba'
jawega, aur har bayan kc sath wisalen boggi . Yad rakhna
chéhiyc, ki isqism kc mugalte me 1_1 jo natija n ikalta ho , .
agarchi ba iatibar apno mane kc sahih ho, lekin muquddamét Be wub natija na nikaltafl 110, to dalil néqis rebegi . .
216 FALL ! CIES .
2 . Illicitprocess of the major or minor term.
Fo rm of th e fallacy .
All A isB. All A isB.
No CisA . A ll A is 0 .
Therefore, No C isB. Therefore,All C is B.
Suppose some one should argue that a certain man
was not a bad king, because he was not a tyrant . His
a rgument unfolded would be ,A ll tyrantsare bad kings.Zaidwas not a tyrant.
Therefore, Zaid was not a bad king.
Here the major term bad king”is distributed as
the pr edicate of a n egativ e [p. 78,r . 4] in the conclu
sion but not in the major premiss, because the predica teo f an affi rmativ e . [p. 76, r .
Again, suppose some one should argue that a ll
instruction of women in science isbad, because certain
bad women were instructed. His argument when
written in full, would show an illicit process of the
minor thus,
Certain women were bad.
Theywere women instructed in science .
Therefore, All instruction of women in science isbad.
Here the min or term instruction of women in
science,”is distributed in the conclusion but not in the
minor premiss, because it is the predicate of an afi rmative
,hence the argument is not valid.
BAYA’
N MUGA’
LTON KA’
. 217
2 .
—Ndj ¢iz’
z kulliyat akbar yd asgar lei .
Surat isqism ke mugalte ki yih haiSabA . B. hai, SabA . B. hai.Koi J. A . nabig , SabA . J hai .
Pas,Koi J. B. nahin, Pas, SabJ. B. hai .
Farz karo, koi shakhs dalil lawe , ki fulana badshahbura na thé, kyfi nki wub zalim na tha. Y ih dalil agar
be tartibiqiyas likhi jawe , to yun hogi :Sabzalimbadshah bure badshah, hote .haig .
Zaidbadshah , zalim na tha.
Pas, Zaid burabadshah na tha.
Is misal men akbar , bure badshah, kulli hai natijesalibe men , kyfigki us 116 mahmfi l para hai, [Saf 79 , Q .
4 lekin kubramen kulli nahin hai, kyfinkiqaz iya i mdjibe hé mahmn
’
il para hai, [Suf i 77, Q . pas kulliyat mi
j ciz'
z akbar ki hfi i .M5861 z
’
doyum—Fara karo , koi shakhs dalil lawe , kitalim kisi tarah ki ky t
’
i n na ho, auraton ko talim denaburah ai
,kyfinki fulan i fulani kharab auraton ne talim pai thi .
Y ih dalil agar puri Surat me 1_1 likhi jawe , to kulliyat najaiza sgar ki zahir ho jawegi . Maslan
,
Fulani anratenburi thin.
Un auratog no ilmon k i talim pa l thi .Pas, Kisi tarah Ira ilm kyfig na ho, auratog ko sikhénfi
bura hai .
Ismisal men asgar auraton ko ilm sikhlna, natijeme 1_1 kulli hai, lekin sugramen kulli nahin hai, ky t
’
inki
mijiba ké. mahmfi l para hai, pas dalil sahih nahin hai .
BA YA’
N J] UGA’
LTON KA 221
D ci sr i szira t. —Muqaddamat mfijibon se natija saliba
nahin n ikalta hai, aur agar nikle to goya a i sa hoga, ki do
]11Z j o kubra sugrameg tiere juz , hadd i ausat se ni sbat
ishat ki rakhte the , n atije men akar ek dfi sre ke munafi ho
Jawenge , aur yih batqiyas keqam’
i n i badih i ke khi laf hai,
[Saj l 1 15, Q . 1 pas jo koiqiyas aisa ho , jis ke muqaddamat mfijibon se n ati ja saliba n ikle , galat hoga.
5 .
-E /iqiya's men tin juz on se z iy/dds hri hona’
.
Y ih zahir hai, ki jo koi dal il, ba tartibiqiyas sahih
likhi jati hai, to z arur us me 1_1 sir f tin juz hote hain, Pas
jis dalil men tin juz se z iyada honge , wubdalil z ar i’
i r galat
hogi .
Isqism kamugalta do surat men akar parte. hai, ye’
.
to yih ki akbar ya asgar mushtarak ul mana hon , ya hadd
i ausat mushtarak ho . In don on sfi raton men se jis kisi
sur at men hadd i ausat ke ek hi man e kullqiyasmenqa imn a rahen , to be - shakkqiyas men tin juz se z iyada ho ja
wenge . Misal isqism ke mugalte ki, jo sugramen akar
par ta hai, is tarah par hai,
Fulane admi par zulm bfi a.
Us ko né -haqq,qaidlghéne mendi ddiya.
Pas, Q uid- khana
,z ulm ki jagah hai .
Yahan par is sababse gal ati waqi hfi i hai, ki “na-haqqqaid-Khane men dal diya ke, aur qaid-khane ke , ek hi
m ane liye hain, yan e is dawa karne se ki jo sugra ka
a sgar hai, wubi n atije kabhi asgar waqi hfia hai, lekin darh aqiqat aisanahin hai . Dusri misal,
Hindu ek tarah hé iman rakhte hain .
Hindugunah aksar karte haig .
Pas, Baz e gunahgér, imandar hote hain .
BA YA‘
N MUGA’LTON KA
‘
.
mushabahat maqsad ke , eh hi laiz bola j awe , jaise lafzPé'yé
”ké. ki waste paya i chauki, aur waste paya i shami
yana , donor_1 ke bola. jata hai . Dononpae ek hi maqsad kewaste hai1_1 , yane eh chauki thamn e ke waste , aur dusra
shamiyane ke thamne ke waste ; yamaslan mithi”chiz ,
aur“mithi
”awaz
,donor_1 me 1_1 yih mushabahat hai, ki
tabiat ko khush karti hai1_1 . A ur chaluir um,kahin par
ba sababqarabat ke ek nam mukhtalif chizon ke waste
bola jata hai, jaise lafz“sawari
”hé ki waste chiz ke
jo baithn e ke liye hoti hai , aur waste us fi al ke josawar se hota hai, yan e donon ke waste mustamal hai ;maslan koi kahe , kibaggi eh sawzir i hai, ya y iin t i fulana
shakhs achchhi sawar i karta hai ; as haz - aI-qiyas lafzgar
-ti hé . Agar is bayan par bageur , lihaz rahe , to
hadd i ausat mushtarik hé janna aur zahir karne. ajaega.
Tariqa rafa karne mushtarika mane aur pakagne galati hé
yih hai, ki j o laf z hadd i ausat wa’
gi ho, us he cl' hi mane
muqar rar kiye j a’en aur phir yih dehha’
gae, hi rig/a'
in denon
muqaddamenmenwuhi mane ga zm rahte hain g/ (i nahin
Do sfiraten aur mugalte ki hai1_1 , j in hé bayan yaha’
m
par zurur karna ohahiye , kyfinki un ke sababse hadd i ausat
me n galati par jati hai .
AUWA L, MUeA’
L'
rA I Amz f.
Jab {1mm se har khass ko sabit karen to isqism kig al ati kabhi waqi hoti hai .
Yih galati us surat men bhi ake parti hai, jabki ek
muqaddame me1_1 hadd i ausat ke z a’ti mane liye jawen ,
aur diisr e men dr iz i mane , yan e mana i ittifaqiya, yahantak ki natije me 1_1 akar do aisi baten, jo ek dri sre ke munafi
h oti hain, jama ho jati hain . Ek sahl si misal isqism ki
g alati ki yahanpar di jati hai :
Bazar se wuh ohiz en kharidi jati haig , jo ham khate haig .
Kachcha gosht ek chiz hai, jo bazar se kharida jati). hal .Pa s, Kachcha gosht ek chiz hai, jo ham khate haig .
228 FALLACIES .
THE FALLACY OF DIVISION AND COMPOSITION.
This e r ror a rises whe re the middle term is used in
a collective o r additive sen se in on e premiss, and in a
distr ibutive sen se in the other . If it is fi rst used in the
major premiss in a colle ctiv e sen se,and then in a dis
tributiv e sense in the min o r premiss, this is the fallacyo f div ision .
”If the middle te rm is used in a distr ibu
tiv e sense in the major premiss, and in a collectiv e sen se
in the minor, this is the fa llacy o f composition .
”
Familiar examples follow .
Hindus are idolaters. (collectiv ely)Ram Chandar is a Hindu . (separately)
Therefore , Ram Chandar is an idolater .
This is the fallacy o f div ision,for in the major pre m
iss, Hindus a re conside red collectiv e ly or as a people ,
and as such a r e idola te rs but in the minor pr emiss
they are consider ed a s indiv idua ls, and hence it cann o t
be said o f all tha t they a re idola te rs,and Ram Chanda r
may n ot be an idola te r .
Again ,
Zaid, Amr , Bakr are Mohammedans. (separately .)Mohammedans were engaged in the mutiny . (collectiv ely . )
Therefore, Zaid, Amr , Bakr were engaged in the mut iny
Her e we hav e the fallacy o f composition, for in
the major premiss the middle te rm Mohammedans is
considered separately, or as r e ferr ing to ce r tain indiv id
nals, but in the minor premiss the te rm Mohammed
ans”is used colle ctiv e ly for a people who wer e g ene ra lly
engaged in the mutiny . Hence, as the m iddle te rm is
used in a distr ibu tive sense in the major premiss, andin a colle ctiv e sense in the minor , there arise s the
fallacy o f composition in saying tha t Zaid, Amr,
Bakr wer e engaged in the mutiny, for they may hav e
had nothing to do with it .
This e rro r is checked by se e ing that the middle
term be used in the same collectiv e or distributive
sense in both premisses.
BAYA’N MUGALTON KA
‘
. 2295'
Dfisn ii MUcAL'
rA 1 TAosfM AUR JAMA .
Y ih galati us surat me 1_1 waqi hoti hai, jabehmuqaddama men hadd i ausat ba mani jama istiamal ki jawe , aurek me 1_1 bataur i taqsim . Pas agar kubra me 1_1 ba mani
jama istiamal ki jawe, aur sugra me 1_1 bataur i taqsim,
to us ko “muga lta i taqsim”kahte hain ; aur agar hadd
i ausat kubra men bataur i taqsim istiamal ki jawe , aur
sugra menbamani jama, to us ko mnga’
lta i j amg”kahte
hain . Ek sahl si misal yahan par di jati hai :
Hindfi but arast hai1_1 . (ba mani i jama)Ram Chan ar Hinduhai . (ba man i i taqsim .)
Pas,Ram Chandar butparast hai .
Y ih mugalta i taqsim hai, kyfi nki kubra me1_1 Hindii ba mane jama istiamal kiye gae hain, yan e ba lihazqaumiyat butparast hain,magar sugremenbataur i taqsim,
is wajah se yun nahin kabsahte hai1_1 , ki sabHindubut
parast hai1_1 , ky iinki mumkin hai, ki Ram Chandar but
parast na ho .
Duisri Misél,
Zaid, Amr ,‘
Bakr , Musalmbn haig .
Musalmanon no gadar par kamar bandh i thi .
Pas, Zaid, Amr , Bakr ne gadar par kamar bégdhi thi .
Yih mugalta i jama hai, kyiinki kubrame 1_1 hadd i
ausat Musalman bataur i taqsim he a hai, yane fard fard
ke waste ai hai ; lekin sugrame 1_1 hadd i ausat Musalman ,
ba mane jama mustamal hai , waste ekqaum ke , jis ne
g adar machane parkamar bandh i thi . Pas jabki hadd i
ausat kubra men he taur i taqsim,aur sugramen he mane
jama istiamél ki jawe ,to wahan mugfl ta i jamspar; jata.
h a i ; pas yih kahna, ki Zaid, Amr , Bakr
me gadar par
kamar bandhi thi, galat thaharté.hai ; shayad unhon ne
kuchh bhi na kiya ho .
230 FA LLAores.
Another simple example of both errors is,
Fiv e is one numbe r .Three and two are fi v e .
Therefore, Three and two are one number
making the fallacy of div ision .
Three and two are two numbers.Fiv e is three and two .
Therefore, Five is two numbe rs
making the fallacy of composition .
II .—Nou-Lo ercAL on MATERIAL Fannscms.
Non -logical fallacies ar e those,as was remarked
,
wh er e the fallacy is not in the f orm o f the a rg ument,but in the ma tter of the propositions tha t make up the
a rg umen t . In this kind of fallacies, the conclusion
does follow from the premisses, so that the err or is n ot
in the f orm of reasoning but, as said, is in the ma tter o f
the propositions which are,in the case of the pr emisses,
e ithe r false or unduly a ssumed, or the error may bethat the conclusion is ir relev an t, i . e . not the one required. Non - logical fa llacies then may be divided into
Fa llacies in the premisses.
Fa llacies in the conclusion .
First,whe re the e rror is in the premisses. The r e
a r e sev e ra l forms o f this er ror , as a premiss may e ithe rdepend on the conclusion, or be in itself entirely fa lse .
We notice,
I. The Petitio Pr incipi a, in wh ich a premiss dee nds on the conclusion . This is the fa llacy called
pbegg ing thequestion and consists in prov ing the
BAYA'
N NOGALTO‘
N EA . 233'
ya aise muqaddamat se jo mane men natije ke‘
muwaqifho ; pas jab n atija aise muqaddamét se niklo, jo us par
manquf hain, ya’. inane me 1_1 e k hi hai1_1, to natija kya sabit
hoga. Balki chabiye ,t i natije ke suhut me 1_1 aise muqaddamatawen, jo us se al ahda hain . Isqism ke mugalte me 1_1 yihbat hai, ki natija nikalta hai aise muqaddame se , jo manqufho natije ke suhut par , ya aise muqaddame se , jo manem e 1_1 n atije ke runwafiqho . Farz karo ki koi shakhs is
qa z iye ko , ki Khuda azali hai,”is tarah par sabit karna
chahe , ki wub bagair ibtidé. aur intiha ke hai, to sub1’
1t
n atije hé, aur nati ja jo nikla hai, donor_1 fil -waqai ek hi hojziwenge . Yih dalil agar ba Surat iqiyas likhi jawe , to *
yun hogi
Jo zat ki be - ibtidaaur be - intiha hai, az al i hai
l
.
Khudabe -ibtida aur be-intiha hai .Pas
, Khuda az ali hai .
Is misal men muqaddamét bilé-shubha sahih ham ,
lekinqiyas usi -durust hai, kis waste ki muqaddke manon me 1_1 hain, aur yih dalil sahih nahin hai . Eh aur
misal isqism ki galati ki di jati hai . Farz karo , koi shakhs
dalil lawe , ki fulana mazhabbar haqqhai, kyfinki usmazhabki kitaben Khuda ki taraf se ai hai1_1 . Is dalil men
sibbat i mezbah ke sub1’
i t me 1_1, jo qaz iya aya hai, us hemane haqiqat me1_1yih hain, ki mazhabbarhaqqhai kyfi nkiagar mazhabi kitaben Khuda ki taraf se hai1_1, to yih bit
bhi ni kalti hai, ki mazhabbarhaqqhai . Lekin is sfir at
men dawa aur dali l donor_1 eh hi hai1_1, balaghi yih chabiye
tha ki dawa sabit hota aise muqaddamét se , 31 11 men na to
koi natije par mauqii f ho , aur na koi manon me1_1 muttahid
ho . Agar isbit par bakhiibi lihiz rahe , ki dya yih muqaddamat natije par mauqii f hain, ya natije ke manon menhai1_1, to isqism ki galati zahir ho jawegi .
2 .—Daur i tasa lsul
, usmugalte ko kahte hain , jabénmuqaddamat beja istiamal kiye jawen, yane natije parm auqfi f hon ; magar mugalta i mazkfira i has se ismen
i tna farqhai, ki is ke muqaddamat aur natije yih kuchh
234 FALLAems.
that the premiss and conclusion n eed not be the same in
impo rt. It consists in making the premiss and con
e lusion prov e each other . Thus one proposition (premiss)is ofi ered in proof of an o ther (the conclusion), andwhen the proof o f that proposition is demanded the con
elusion is o ffe red the same as to say,-A is true because
B is true,and B is true because A is true . Suppose tha t
one should argue that female educa tion should n ot be
main tain ed beca use it is wrong ,a nd then argue tha t it
is wr ong beca use it is fema le education this would be
re asoning in a circle and the same as to say,—A is no t
true be cause B is n ot true,and B is not true because A
is no t true . This e r ro r is checked by demanding an in
dependen t proo f for bo th propositions.
The wide r the circle,that is, the mor e propositions
inv o lv edbe fo re r eaching the last which depends on the
fi rst, the more diffi cult is the error of de tection , because
the fallacy maybe thus lost sight of in the leng thenedargumen t . Thus, A is true because B is true, B is true
because C is true , C is true because D is true , D is tru e
because E is true , E is true because A is true, is a wide r
cir cle in which the mind might lose sight o f the un fa ir
dependence o f the la st proposition on the fi rst . Of course
the way to che ck the erro r would be to demand pro o f
fo r the last proposition independent from anything giv e n
in the circle .
3. Non causa pro causa . This is the assign
ing o f a false cause or reason fo r some e ffe ct or conclu
sion . In this case the premiss is false , or a t least
unsupported. Ther e is no mor e common form of fa llacy
than this. Some ev en t o ccurs, or some fa ct is stated,
for which a cause is a ssigned tha t has n o connection
wi th it . Thus ignorant people especially are ev er r eady
BA YA’
N MUGA‘
LrON EA . 237
tarah ki afaton ke batlate hain. Maslan gahan ko , béis
batlate hain tarah tarah ki tasiron ka, j 1n he 11qgahan
se mutlaqan nahin hai . Koi admi bimar ho jawe ya mar
jawe , to kahte hain, fulana deota. yabh ii t us so na-khush
15116, is sababse aisa has. Ek badshah hé sar kat gaya,
aur us kabeta takht par baitha. Ek martaba aisa ittifaqhfia, ki isbete ne us shakhs ko , j is ne us he bap ka muqabala kiya thri , dekha ki andha ho gaya. hai, to kahns laga,
Kaho abtum nahin jan te , ki tum n o kaisi bari khatamere
bap ke sath ki thi
, jis ke sababse Khuda ne tum ko aisi
saza di , ki tumbar i ankhen jati rahin . Us andh e ne jawab
diya, ki Nahin khudawand i niamat, jahan -
panah , agar is
khata ke sababse meri ankhen jati rahin to malum hota
hai, ki zip ke bap ne koi is se bhi bari bhari kha ta ki hogi ,
jo Khuda ne aisi sazé. di , ki us hé sar kat gaya., meri to
sirf ankhen hi gain. Badshah apn i wajh gair muwajjih
ke jawabhé sawah ko sunkar bahutqail hfia, aur dekha,ki jo iatiraz main is par karta hfin, wub khud mere lipar
a1d hota hai . Isi tarah ek misa wajh gair muwajjih
ki yih hai, ki aksar log Sarkar i Angrez par ittiham rakhte
hain, ki bais bagawat hé Hindustan men Angrez on hé
zulm tha ; agarebi dar haqiqat sababis he. kuchh aur hi
tha, yane bararat i din i, aur bewase mul kgir i ki , Baz
manqa par wajh gair muwajjih hé, jabba sfi rat suwal akeparta hai, to galati chhip jati hai . Eh martuba eh shakhs
no suwal kiya, hi pani hhare bartan men machhl i (1610, to
wubbartan banishatqabl ke ky iin nahin bhari hota hai
Dusra shakhe is ké. sabab daryaft karne laga, magar yih
n a soch1i , ki yih suwal hi galat hai , kyfi nki machhli daln e
se wuh bartan bhari ho jawega. Is galati ke paka rne hé
y ihqaida hai , ki maliim karna ki aya yih sababdurust
hai ya nahin; aur jabtak dalil i shafi isbat ki na di jawe,
242 FALLAOIES .
2 . Thef a llacy of shifting ground. Le t it be kept
in mind that we a re discussing the“ irr e lev an t conclu
sion”
,i . e .
,cases where the r equired conclusion is n o t
drawn but something foreign to it, and which,i f estab
lished, g iv es the appearance only, o f ha v ing gained the
poin t in dispute . The fa llacy of shifting ground is a
common ar tifi ce for this purpose . Often during a discus
sion, when on e fi nds tha t he cann ot ma inta in his poin t,
he slyly shifts the discussion to some o ther proposition
diffe rent from the on e unde r considera tion in whole o r
in part . Thus, suppose on e is trying to prov e that the
drinking of a single drop of ardent spirits is wrong , but
failing in this, he quie tly se ts about prov ing tha t the
dr inking a rdent Spirits in excess is wrong , which is
quite another que stion This fallacy is e ffected in
v a rious ways. Some times an ambiguous o r g ene ra l
te rm is used, and when it cann ot be maintained in on e
meaning , a second or third meaning is cla imed fo r it .
Thus, an a ttempt may be made to prov e that a cer tain
people hav e fa ith in God in the sense o f knowing him
aright and obeying him,but on failing in this, an attempt
may be made to prov e tha t they hav e faith in the
ewistence o f one God, which is a differen t conclusion o r
“g round.
” Sometimes a par ticular is prov ed when a
universa l should be prov ed . Thus, some persons o n
failing to prove tha t the Christian re lig ion is not g ood,shift, their g round by showing tha t par ticula r
persons a re n o t g ood, which is not the required conclu
sion , and if it be prov ed ev en,the realquestion is not
touched.
Some times the discussion is shifted from one to the
o ther o f an oppon en t’spremisses a lternately . The a tta ck
on failing on on e is chang ed to the o the r, and on fa ilingthe re ,
’
18 shifted ba ck again without se ttling finally any
one point . No fallacy is more common than this in a
only a part to argue there for e that the book is a g ood
one . Thequestion to be prov ed 18 is the book upon
the whole a g ood one . To prove anything short of
this is “ irrelevan t .
”Again, suppose thequestion is,
whether a certain gov ernment is a good one or no t .”
Now,to prov e two or three good points in the g ov ern
men t is n ot en ough, but the g ov ernmen t should be
considered as a whole anything shor t o f this is provingbut a part, and a partial conclusion is irre levent
”he re .
The fa llacy o f prov ing a par t should be met with a
demand that while proof for the whole question is
n ot brough t forwa rd it must not be decided. The caution
may he re be giv en that in ev ery que stion , ca re should
be taken n ot to a ttempt to main tain too much, for if
more is claimed in thequestion than can be fair lyprov ed,the argument is open to the obje ction tha t it inv olv es
the fallacy o f prov ing only a pa rt .
”
These four kinds o f fallacy then,argumentum a d
hominem”—“shifting ground
’
f a llacy of Objectionsand “f a llacy 01
°
proving only a pa rt 01°a question”
clude the usual forms o f “ irr e lev ant conclusion .
We may g iv e here some g eneral rules for th e
examination o f argumen ts and then conclude the subjec to f fa lla cies with a r ecapitulation .
To Di scovss FORMAL FALLAcrss.
First, r educe the reasoning or argument to the form
o f a syllogism . This can be don e in the followingmanne r whether it be an o ra l discourse , a book, chapter
o r section .—Observ e what the concluding assertion of
position is, for this is usually the conclusion . Go back
from this and asce rtain on what grounds this asser tion is
made or from what reasons this conclusion is drawn .
These grounds”o r r easons
”will be the premisses,
and from the conclusion and premisses thus obtained th e
250 FA LLA CIES.
syllogism or syllog isms,a s the case may be , can be
constructed,which may the n be tested by the rules for
syllog isms.
l st. Obse rv e whe the r the syllogism be ca teg o r i
ca l or hypothe tica l . If hypo the tica l the r ules fo r the
hypothetical syllog ism must be applied.
2nd . If ca teg orica l coun t the te rms .
3rd. If the re a re o nly thr e e terms,asce r ta in
whe the r the middle te rm is distributed,and is used in
on ly one sense .
4th . Obse r v e whe the r the pr emisses a r e both
nega tiv e in rea lity or in appearance me rely . If but on e
is negativ e , see if the con clusion is n ega tiv e a lso o r i f
both ar e afi rma tiv es,
obse rv e if the conclusion is
a ffi rmativ e .
5th . Ma rk wha t te rms a re distributed in the con
clusion,and asce rta in whe the r they a re distributed also
in the pr emisses.
6 ik . If the syllog ism is in the fi rst figure , observ e
if it is in the form o f A ristotle’s dictum .
To DISCOVERMATERIAL FALLAcrns.
If no fault appe ar s in the syllogism a s such,th a t
is in the f orm o f the r ea soning ,then proceed to try th e
truth of the premisses and the releva ncy of the con
e lusion . Take each premiss separa tely and obse r v e
l st. Whe ther it is self- e v ident or no t .
2nd. If n o t self- ev iden t,but r equ iring proo f
mark if the g round o r proo f on which it rests is v alid or
3rd. Obse rv e whe the r the premiss is the same
a s the conclusion in rea lity, o r whe ther it depends upon
If the premisse s a re true and unobjectionable , turnto the conclusion and obse rv e
252 FALLA CIES .
l st. If it is relevant,that is, the one required
in this argument.
2nd. If it is the o ne that the r eason er se t out to
prov e or has thequestion be en chang ed.
3rd. If it is the whole or on ly a part of wha t
should be prov ed.
Some such analysis a s this will gene rally lead to
the detection of any e rrors in an argument. Each form
o f fa llacy in the recapitulation , should be studied and
dwelt on till its na ture is fully understood and till it can
be illustra ted by a numbe r of instances.
RECAPITULATION or FALLACIES.
Undi stributed middle .
Illicit process.
Negative premisses.
A ffi rmativ e con clusion
4 from negati v e pi emi ss Amblguous major ores and v ice versd. minor .
Ambiguousmiddle .
5More than three terms in
Fallacia accidentis.
L the argument .1 Fallacy of div ision or
L composition.
Petitio principii .
First fallacy in
the,
premisses.Argumg m a cl rcle.
Non causa pro causa .
Argumentum ad hominem .
Second fallacy in
the cobclusion , igSh1ft1ng ground,
noratio elenchi,”or Fallacy of objections.
irrelevant conclu
L sion.
Fallacy of provmg only a
L part.
BAYA’
NMUGA’LTONKA
’. 253
Fabien—Yih dekho, ki natija matlfiba hai , yane wuhi
hai jo is dalil men chabiye tha
Di v a—Yih, ki natija wubi hai, jobahs karnewale ne sébit karna chaha tha, yabahsbadal gai hai
Tiara—Yih dekho ki natija jitne. sabit karne. chabiye
tha, utua hai ya juz us ha
Pas in sab baton mazkfira i balapar lihaz rakhne se
agar kisi tarah ki galati dalil men ho, balghfibi malum ho
jaegi . Ma galta ki har surat par, jo zail ke bayan i mujmal meg likhi hai, tawaqte ki us ki kaifiyat bakhfibi malfim na ho jawe, aur har sfirat ki misal apni taraf se na bana sake , khfibdhyan dené. aur gaur karna chabiye .
Mugadlton locimujma l baycin .
Hadd i ausat juz i .Kulliyat i najaiz .
Muqaddamét i si libe .
Natija mujaba mugaddamat salibonse , ya Akbar , yé asgar, yabaraks is ke .
Ehqiyasmeg tin juzon 231i;
ausat mush
se z iyada ka hona. Mugélta i {in iMugalta taqsim o
jama.
Muqaddams aur natijak l i b a.
A a liyah—Muffi n muqad Da
o
ur itagdl
lsul .damét meg . Wajh i gair -muwajjih.
i tamalukamez .
Doyum,—Mugalta n at i ] e i tagaiynr i maz
meg ,Zane natija gait
Mugfl ta namin g ha.L Magalta subfi t juzi .
SECTION II.
I
Or onnu m neu rons or APPLYING LOGIC .
There are certain peculiar methods of applying the
reasoning process in practical life , to which appropr ia te
names are giv en. We propose to describe these briefly,and illustrate the ir mode of application . It will be
seen that the reasoning process, although always rea llythe same, in practical use in the search for truth or in
the refutation of error,is v aried in method .
INDUCTION.
1 . Induction, is the inferring of g eneral laws or
truths, from particular truths or facts,tha t hav e pass
ed under observ ation . It is also the process of discov
ering causes from effects. A number of facts o r
things are found a lways associated in the same way, o r
a ccompanied by the same phenomena ; hence we con
clude that this class of facts are always so, and in fe r
some general law or truth in regard to them. Fo r
instance, it has been observ ed that lead, iron, silv e r ,
g old, &c .,melt when a suffi cient degree of heat is
applied to them. Hence,the general truth is in ferr ed
that metals are fusible . Again, it is observ ed tha t
cows, sheep, goats, deer, and other horned anima ls
ruminate, hence the rule is infe rred that horn ed anima ls
ruminate . Again, it hasbeen observ ed in hundreds of
trials, that pur e water resolv ed into its elementsby chemi
cal analysis, yields but two gases, oxygen and hydrogen,
The full syllogisms are,
Le ad is fusible .
Le ad is a metal.Therefore
, Some metal is fusible .
Silver is fusible .
Silv er is a metal.Ther e fore Some metal is fusible .
From a number of such inductiv e syllogisms, r e
duced to one single syllogism, we g e t a general fact o f
law as a conclusion . Thus,
Lead, silv er , gold, iron , &c.,are fusible .
These are metals.Therefore
,Metals are fusible .
OP DEDUCTION.
Deduction is just the Opposite of induction . In
induction we deduce general laws or principles fromf a cts,in deduction we infer certain efl
'
ects from general laws.
By induction we hav e learned that ce rtain things a re
poisonous. With this general fact be fore us, we con
clude, that if a certa in person has e aten on e of these
things he is poisoned. This is a deduction . In the
same way we conclude tha t any horned animal newlyfound, is a ruminant
, because the general fact has
been discov e red by induction that horned animals a re
ruminants. Deduction, then , is reasoning from the
g enera l to the pa rticular, while induction is r easoning
from the particular to the general .
EX AMPLE.
Re asoning from e xample is somewhat of the n atur e
both of induction and deduction . It may be called im
per fect induction . In induction,we infer a g eneral fa ct
from a numbe r o f particular cases, but in the argument
264 ANALOGY.
from example, we in fe r some thing in regard to one
particular case from an o ther case or other cases. Thus,
we might infe r that a. c er tain traitor will come to a bad
end because the traitor Néné Ri o came to a bad end .
But perhaps ther e is some thing of the nature both o f an
induction and deduction h ere,it hav ing be en se ttled
from the example o f Néné Réo, that tr a itors genera llycome to a bad end hence
,since this man is a tra ito r ,
he too will come to a bad end. The apostle Pe te r
r easons by example [2 Peter 2, 4 when he re fe rs
to the destruction o f the ang els tha t sinned, and of the
a n tediluv ian world, and o f the inhabitan ts o f Sodom and
Gomo rrah, to prov e that the wicked shall be punished.
This form of reasoning is v ery plain, and n eed n ot be
fur the r illustrated he re .
ANALOGY.
1 . Ana logy, as commonly used, means r esemblance
and the resemblance may be in the thing s themse lv es,
o r in their uses, and their rela tions. The earth and
moon both being round and both rev olv ing on their
axes,is an example o f ana logy in things themselves.
”
The fi n of a fi sh and the wing of a bird, being both
u sed for propelling each anima l in the medium whe re
it liv es, a fford an example of analogy of use .
”The
capital of a country bears somewhat the same relation
to that country a s the heart does to the body this is
an analogy of r ela tion .
”
Now in reasoning from analogy, we in fer tha t
because things resemble, in some known particulars, they
will resemble in others. The strength of the argument
o f course will be in proportion to the strength o f the
r esemblance . The following is an example o f reason
ing from analogy . We see a great resemblance be
tween the earth on which we live, andMars, Jupiter,
BAmwexam s KA’
. 265
diya jata hai. Maslan koi n atiia nihale , hi fulane bagiha anjam burs. hoga, kyfi gki NanaRao bagi hé anja
’
m bure’
.
hI’
Ia. Shayad yahag par istiqra aur istihhraj donog paejate haig , kyI
’
n i tamsil i Nana llao se istiqra t e taur par
yihi bat ni kalti hai, Li kul lbagiog hai. an'am bura. hota hai .
Pas chfi nki yih admi bégi hai, is sababse us {1mmqaids se
e taur par y ih bat n ikalti hai, ki is rebhi anjambura ho PatrasRasI
’
Il ne , jo gun ahgar fi rishtog ki halakat ha,f; Pat . 2
,4 aurqabl tfi fan i NI
’
Ih, jo log dunyameg abad the, an 116. aur SadI
’
Im o Gamfira ke logog ka
hawala diya hai, taki sabit ho jawe , ki sharir budzat, saza
pawegge , wubdalil i tamsil hai . Y ih tariqa dalil lane ta,bahut sai aur sahih hai, kuchh hajat aur misal lane hi yahan par nahin hai .
BAYAN Q ARfNE Ki .
1 .-A
'
mm muhaware ke mutabiq, gar ine ke manemushébahat ke haig, aur mushabahat is meg hhéss dotarah par hai,ya sar i hai , yamanawi . Misal auwal,qar inai seir i
, jaise z amin aur chagd donog hé. go l hona aur donor_1
ksi. spue apne mihwarog par ghI’
Imna. Misal doyum ,qar inai mqnawi ki, jaise bazu machh li hé. aur parand hé, ki donog waste eh hi matllibke bane haig , yane waste urns aur
daugne ke , aur juise mulk ha sadr maqam dar -us-saltanat
hai, isi tarah jism hé sadr maqam dil hai . Dehho, yahagpar jo nisbat mulk ko spue dar
- as-saltanat se hai, wubi
jism ko spue dil se hai, pas yih bhi misal mushébahat ki
huI.
Q arine Iz i mi se dalil lane meg is tarah par natija ni
kalte haig , ki jabeh chiz dI’
Isri chiz se chand batog menmushabahat rakhti hai, to aur batog me g bhi mushabih
hogi . A ur besha kk jisqadr mushabahat hogi usiqadr dalil pukhta hogi . Eh , dalilqarina ki mundarija e misal i zai lhai . Maslan ham dekhte haig , t i yih zamin s par ham
r ahte haig , saiyarog Utérid, Muslntar‘
i, Zubl wg . se bahut
baton meg mushabahat rakhti hai. Sab, zamin ki misl
BAM N orRI’NE 1 m
aise janwar hi khagkar, jis ko ham no kabhi na dekha ho
kahig par mi le, a ur ham dekheg , ki us khagkar ke tez dagt
haig aur tez panje, toqarine se daryaft Icar 'legge t i yih janwar shikari the. Agar yih dalil 1qarina, ba sI
’
Irat iqiyaslikhi jawe, to yug hogi
Jin j{inwarog ke tez dfigt aur tez panje hote haig, we shikari hote haig .
Is jénwar ke tez dégt aur tez panje the.Pas, Yih jénwar shikari thi .
Isi tarah ek misal Baibal ki, jo abhi ho chuki hai,basfirat iqiyas ho sakti hai .
Khilqat ke dekhne se mgl t’Im hota hai , ki us lfifintiha
Khaliqse bgz bateg aisi hog , jo insi n ki samajh megnahig ati hog .
Kal fim i ilrihi us li - intihaKhaliqse hai .Pas, Kalém i iléhi meg bgz bateg aisi hog, jo insén ki samajh
meg na ati hog.
Dalil iqarina bari hoshyari se lane. chabiye, kyfigki
bagair dekhi bat meg , aksar gunjaish iatiraz ki hoti hai ,aur bahuteri chizeg aisi haig , jo baz batog meg bahamdigar mushabahat rakhti haig , magar itui batog meg nahin
ki ham natija ni kaleg . Maslan agarebi Zamin, saiyérOLl
Utarid,Mushtari, Zuhalwg . se bahut beiton men musheba
hat rakhti hai, tahamba yaqin i kamil ham yih natija nahig
nikal sahte haig , ki we z amin ki misl abad haig , kyI’
n i
shayad halat i garmi o sardi, aur pan i, aur jo jo ohizen zin
dagi ke liye ohahiyeg ,zamin t i mi sl, un saiyarog meg na hon
to wabag parwarish jan hi gair mumkin hai.
Baze yih samajhte haig , ki chfi nki haiwénat aur na
batat ke darmiyan meg barbue aur ghatne aur marne
meg mushabahat hai, haiwénat maa insan aur nabatat,
donog ek hi taur par nest ho jate haig . Lekin yih
n atija nikalna gair jaiz hai, ky i’
n i haiwanat z i-hiss o har
kat jism haig , aur is l et meg haiwanat, nabatat se musha
272 REA SONING'
A POSTERIORI .
manner we in fer numerous other results or conclusions .
And we reason in the same wayin all scien ces.
2 . Reason ing a posteri iri,”is just the rev erse o f
apriori reasoning . In this, cause s are deduced from
e ffects. For instance , from the round shadow o f the
earth on the moon in a lunar eclipse , we in fer tha t the
e ar th is round. We re a son that a round shadow a s an
ej ect, must come from a round substance as a cause.
Othe r familiar examples o f reason ing a poste
rio ri” may readily be found in cases, where from efi'
ects
produced, we try to fi nd out their cause . In cases o f
murder, often the cause and manner o f dea th, ar e thus
traced upand the murde re r de tected.
By reasoning a poste riori,”we in fe r the existence
and a ttributes o f God, from our own existen ce and the
existence o f nature a nd manifestations o f de sign and
g oodness, &0. a round us. Thus also , from the sublime
teachings and superhuman spirit of the Bible,we in fer
that it has a div ine Au tho r . In the same way, from
the e vil tenden cy of a book claimed to be inspired, we
might infer that it is simply a human pr oduction .
This kind o f reason ing should be used with can
tion . A n inference sh ould n ot be drawn till some clea r
r e la tion of efi'
ect and cause is established, o the rwise the
e rror o f non ca usa pro causa will be committed .
The cautions against that e rro r shouldbe obse r v ed he re .
3.
“A f or tiori, is a fo rm of a rgumen t in which
from an admi tted case o r proposition ,we proceed to prov e
ano the r case o f the same na ture , for the a cceptance o f
which, the r easons se em e v en strong er than for th e
admitted case .
The form o f the argument is,
A is equal to , or greater than B.
C isgreater than A
Therefore,C is greater than B.
MALU’L SE ILLAT SA’
BIT KARNA'
. 273
bahut aur nataij sabit kar lete haig , aur sabilmon se isi
tariqpar bahs t i iéti hai .2 . Istidln
’
l i gane mqlzil se illat sribit karud.
Y ih auwal ke baraks hai . Ismeg mahil se illat sabit ki jatihai ; maslan jabchag d gahan parta hai to chagd hé aks
z amin par gol parta hai, pas is se mall’
Im hota hai, ki zamin
gol hai . Aks gol parnamaliil hai, j is se illat, yan e zamin
hé gol honé. malum hota hai . Isqism ki dalil ki bahuteri
misaleg usmanqa par ati haig , jabag ki wujI'
id i malI’
Il se
wujI’
Id i illat hé. sabit karné. chahte haig . KhI’
In kemuqaddama meg aksar is amr ki tahqiqat, ki kis chiz se mare. gaya.plur kiskis tarah par hfia, isi tariqse qatil malI’Im ho jataaI .
Isi dalil k i ru se ham apne. wujI’id, aur khilqat he
W11] ud, aur tarah tarah ki bihmsteg wg . dekbkar , Khudahé a iid, a ur us k i zat o sifat sabit karte haig . Isi tarah
ham dekhte haig , hi Baibal ki tal im nihayat umda hai, aur
aisi bateg us me g pai jati haig , t i insan t i taqat o liyaqatse bahar hai ; pas is se sal ~it hota hai , ki Baihal ilhami
kitabhai . Ala-haz - al-qiyas agar kisi kitah ki talim bur iho , aur us hi nishat I<o i dawa. kare , ki yih hiteh asmani hai,to hameg sabit ho jawega, ki yih siri admi ki banai hai .
Isqism ki dalil ko bagi hoshyér i aur khabardari se istiamal karne. chabiye . Jab tak illat aur malfil ke
darmiyan koi jlaqaqarar waqai na pays. jawe, us waqttak kuchh natija nikalna nahig chabiye , warna surat“mugalta i wajh gair muwajyih
”ki paida ho jaegi . Jo
jo bateg mugalta i wa ih gair muwajjih se mahffi z rahne
ke Waste I’
Ipar bayan ho chuki hain, un ks. lihaz yahag
par bhi rakhna chabiye .
3. A dna’
se dla'
Iro sa’
bit karnd.
”— Is dalil men kisi
amr ya dawa e musallam se , usiqism ke kisi aur amr , ya
dawe ko sabit karte haig . Aur jo amr ya dawa ki sabit
kiya jata hai, us ko taslim karne ke waste us se bhibarh
kar subI’
It hote haig , t na ki us amr ya dawa e musallam
ke subI’
It ke liye hote hain . Yih dalil issfir at ki hoti hai :
A . barebar hai B. ko, yigus se bard hai .J. A . se ba re. hai .
Pas,J. B. as bays hai.
274 REASONING A FORTIORI.
Christ reasoned thus with his disciples and others,
in many instances. For example (Mat. v i. 28
And why take ye thought for raiment Conside r the
lilies o f the fi eld, how they g row,they toil not
,neithe r
do they spin ,and ye t I say unto you, that Solomon in all
his glory was not arrayed like on e o f these . Wherefore
, if God so clothe the g rass o f the fi eld, which to
day is and to-morrow is cast into the ov en, shall he no t
much more clo the you, O ye o f little faith ?”
Thisput into the form of a syllogism would stand
The lilies and grass of the fi eld, are clothed by God;You are much eater
Much more Wlfir
you b
Again And behold there was a man which had
his hand withered. And they asked him saying is it
lawful to heal on the sabbath days that they might
accuse him . And he sa id unto them,what man shall
there be among you that shall hav e one sheep, and if
it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold
on it and lift it out 1’How much then is a man better
than a sheep Where fore it is lawful to do well on the
sabbath days.
”[Ma t z u z 10
This then is the a rgument a f ortiori , in which we
reason from a less obvious but admi tted proposition to
one with str onger reasons for its adoption .
RECAPITULATION.
An argument according to the mode of its reason
ing may be
l .—Inductive .
2 .—Deductiv e .
3.—By example
4.—By analogy.
5 .—A priori .
6 .—A steriori .
7o—A ortiori o
CONCLUSION.
We hav e now gone ov e r the subject o f Logic, andit only r ema ins to add a wo rd by way o f conclusion .
The subject o f logic, as g enera lly taught, has be en presented in these page s. The student n e ed not be pe r
plexed by the pre ten sions o f any on e who may, by way
of magnifying his own lea rning , cla im tha t the subjecthas no t been fully trea ted in this bo ok
,be ing to o v ast to
be comprehended in a v o lume o f this siz e . The sub
sta nce o f log ic , as taught by the ancien ts and moderns,
is pr esen ted in compa ct fo rm in this book . If it be
maste red,a co r rec t and pra c tical outline o f this science
,
as far as it may be ga ined from a book,will be obtained .
The works on logic found in this coun try, should be
studied in orde r to be familiar with the diffe rent modes
o f treating the subjec t, and with the v arious terminologyand phrase o logy in use .
But the leai ne r must not imagine tha t the mer e
r eading o f any book or number o fbo o ks on logi c, how
e v e r comple te , willmake him a log ician . If this boo k
be thrown aside when read,or ev en when i ts te rms
,
rules, and phraseology are memorized, and the subje c tbe le ft the re , the learner will n o t be a logician . Pra e
tice make s perfect,”in ev e ry scie nce and a rt . It is
the da ily use o f too ls tha t ma kes the ar tisan a skillfu l
workman a fter he has le arned wha t is taught in bo oks .
Thus a lso,an application must be made of the science
o f logic, before on e can ea rn a just r eputa tion as a
logic ian . The principles, termin ology, a nd r ule s o f the
science should be we ll unde rstood, and then an e ffort
KHA’TIMA .
MANTIQ ke bayan se faragat pal ; absir f itna aur raha
hai, ki ek’
a lh bat khatime ke taur par likheu. Mantiqka hal j isqldr ki aksar sikhlaya jata hai, is kitab me 1_1
maujl’
ld hal . Agar koi shakhs az r ah 1 dhokha -dihi,apna
ilm jatane ko , kisi talib1 ilm se yih dawa kare , ki“is kitab
men kull hal ilm 1 mantiqka n ahin likba hai,mantiq
bahut bara ilm hai, 1s zara si kitabmen nahin sama sakta.
hai,”to is bat par hargiz yaqin 11 11 151 1111, chabiye . Baz
maqamat me 1_1 Arabi o Farsi kitabon se farqhai, lekin
matlab ek hi hai, aur bahut se maqamat, kutub-i-Arabi oFarsi se z iyada muk ammal haig .
Matalib a ur mane sahih mantiqke , jaisa t i muta
qaddamin a ur muta zi khkhirin sikhlate chale ae hai1_1, is
kitabme 1_1 ma 11j1’
l d hai1_1 . Jo k uchh 11131 11 1 1 1 i mantiqké.aur kitabon ke parhne se 51111. hai, W 1h sab is kitab se
mukhtasar hasil hai . Jo kuchh kitaben ilm 1 mantiqkiism ulk me 1_1 111 11ra 1 1waj hai
o
n,
11n ka parhna is garaz se
chabiye , t i mukhtalif tarz 1 I ayan a nr istilahat wg . se ki
har kitabhi 111 11khtah f hoti hain , waqif ho jawe , a ur istiama lme 1
_1 lawe .
Magar koi talibl ilm yih 11a samjhe , ki ek adh kitabyé.bah ut si kitahen jlm i mantiqki agarchi W ub kamil hi
kyl’
l n na hon , parh len e se mantiqi ho jawega . Agar koi
is kitabko pa rkhar 1 1s ke istilahat a nr qawaid a nr alfaz
ba r z aban 1 ad ka rke 1 1s ko tah kar rakhe , aur us ko istiamal me 1_1 n a lawe , to mantiqi na ho awega, ky 1
’
l r_1ki karbe.
kasrat hai . Har 11m 0 h un ar 11 11e r_1 ma li/cu chabiye .
Karigaron ko dekko , ki a uwal ha h 1’
aro r_1 ke n an1 , a 11r nu
ke istiama l karn e ke tariqon se waqif hokar badah l'l roz
marra nu hathyaron t o kam me late haig , to kahig ek
muddat me 1_1 jake hoshyar ho 1ate hain . Isi tar 1h pai
maishi ko dekho , ki bad 1ann e qawaid pai 11 1a ish ke eh
muddat tak a1s ka mashqLarta h '
l i, to pairuaish me 1_1 pukh
ta ho jata hai . AJa - u1a z - al-qij as bar shakhs koqabl ls se ,ki wuh apne ko mantiqi kahlawe. iS i1m ke istiamél so
Q UESTIONS
REVIEWS AND EXAMINATIONS .
Ism onucrl os .
Wa a 'r is Logic ?
When is Logic a Science and when an Art 1?
Is there more than one mode of reasoning ?
What is the effect of the true study of logic on the mind
regard to truth
Point out an e rror into which many fall ?
A mong what ancient naticns is the science of logic fi rst found?
Among what people did the science of logic originate ?
Among what nationsand fi'
om whomdid this science spread ?Name different writers on the science and the time in which
they liv ed ?
What is the confi tion of the science of logic among Mahom
medans
What among Hindus 2
P A RT I .
What is the real province of logicWhat ismindWith what three operations of mind is logic concernedDefi ne and illustrate each of these ?
What is attention as a mental state
What is comparing, abstraction, generalizationWhat is language ?What are words?
Sac-1 1011 I
Define and illustrate simple apprehension ? complex apprehension ?Wherein doesa notion or idea formedby an act of apprehensiondiffer from a term
