10.04.2013 Views

An introductory text-book of logic - Mellone, Sydney - Rare Books at ...

An introductory text-book of logic - Mellone, Sydney - Rare Books at ...

An introductory text-book of logic - Mellone, Sydney - Rare Books at ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

86 IMMEDIATE INFERENCE.<br />

In obverting propositions, we must try to make the <strong>logic</strong>al<br />

forms as ne<strong>at</strong> or <strong>at</strong> least as little removed from the com<br />

mon usages <strong>of</strong> speech as possible; and to avoid using<br />

terms <strong>of</strong> the form &quot;not-P&quot; when there is a more familiar<br />

expression with the same meaning. Frequently the phrase<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

other than P may be used with advantage. Obversion<br />

may produce exceedingly cumbrous and uncouth forms, but<br />

with a little care this result may be avoided.<br />

(1) &quot;Some <strong>of</strong> our muscles are without volition.&quot;<br />

(a) our muscles ;<br />

(b) things which act without volition ;<br />

(c) affirmed <strong>of</strong> part <strong>of</strong> the subject.<br />

&quot;<br />

Hence SiP, Some <strong>of</strong> our muscles are things which act<br />

without volition.&quot; To obvert we substitute &quot;are not&quot; for<br />

&quot;<br />

are,&quot; and take the contradictory <strong>of</strong> the predic<strong>at</strong>e. For<br />

mally, this &quot;<br />

contradictory is, not things which act without<br />

volition&quot;; and this is exactly equivalent to &quot;things which<br />

act with volition.&quot; Hence the ne<strong>at</strong>est form <strong>of</strong> the obverse<br />

is,<br />

&quot; Some <strong>of</strong> our muscles are not things which act with<br />

volition.&quot;<br />

(2) &quot;Every mistake is not a pro<strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong> ignorance.&quot;<br />

(a) mistakes ;<br />

(b) a pro<strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong> ignorance ;<br />

(c) denied <strong>of</strong> some <strong>of</strong> the subject.<br />

&quot;<br />

Hence SoP, Some mistakes are not pro<strong>of</strong>s <strong>of</strong> ignorance.<br />

Obvert by substituting<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

are for<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

are not and taking the<br />

contradictory <strong>of</strong> the predic<strong>at</strong>e, which is<br />

&quot;<br />

other than pro<strong>of</strong>s<br />

&quot; some mistakes are other than pro<strong>of</strong>s <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>of</strong> ignorance,&quot;<br />

ignorance.&quot;<br />

The original proposition has a secondary implic<strong>at</strong>ion,<br />

&quot;some mistakes are pro<strong>of</strong>s <strong>of</strong> ignorance,&quot; with obverse,<br />

&quot;<br />

some mistakes are not other than pro<strong>of</strong>s <strong>of</strong> ignorance.&quot;<br />

(3)<br />

&quot; No one is free who cannot command himself.&quot;<br />

(a) those who cannot command themselves ;<br />

(b} free;<br />

(c) denied <strong>of</strong> the whole <strong>of</strong> the subject.<br />

&quot;None <strong>of</strong> those who cannot command them<br />

Hence SeP,<br />

selves are free.&quot; Here the most convenient contradictory<br />

<strong>of</strong> &quot;free&quot; is the neg<strong>at</strong>ive term &quot;unfree&quot;; and the obverse<br />

is &quot;all who cannot command themselves are unfree,&quot; SaP .

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!