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.

22 THE NAME, THE TERM, THE CONCEPT,<br />

between them the universe <strong>of</strong> discourse, not the whole<br />

universe <strong>of</strong> thought and existence. Thus,<br />

&quot;<br />

not<br />

&quot;<br />

white are contradictories in the world <strong>of</strong> colour;<br />

and only those things which may have colour must be either<br />

the one or the other. Sometimes we have a pair <strong>of</strong> names<br />

&quot;white&quot; and<br />

which themselves denote a particular sphere ; &quot;British&quot; and<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

Alien are limited to the sphere <strong>of</strong> human beings, and<br />

within th<strong>at</strong> sphere would be considered as contradictories, if<br />

the view to which we have referred is to be accepted. But<br />

it is preferable to keep to the older view and take the<br />

&quot;<br />

con<br />

&quot;<br />

tradictory in the widest possible sense, as this brings out<br />

more forcibly the n<strong>at</strong>ure <strong>of</strong> pure <strong>logic</strong>al contradiction. We<br />

may interpret the pure contradictory in such a way th<strong>at</strong> it<br />

involves no <strong>logic</strong>al absurdity. We need not, for instance,<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

use the name not-man as meaning all things together<br />

which are not man, th<strong>at</strong> is, we need not use it collectively.<br />

We may use it distributively, as being applicable to any<br />

which is not man it is exactly therefore wh<strong>at</strong> Aristotle<br />

thing :<br />

called it an indefinite name. If we try to express its<br />

denot<strong>at</strong>ion, we must think, not <strong>of</strong> &quot;a chaotic mass <strong>of</strong> the<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

most different things together, but <strong>of</strong> either this, or this,<br />

or this, or ...&quot; and so on indefinitely, through everything<br />

which is not denoted by the original term. Those who<br />

take the narrower view <strong>of</strong> contradictory names, explain<br />

contrary terms as representing opposites without exhausting<br />

&quot;<br />

between them the particular sphere <strong>of</strong> reference or universe<br />

and<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

<strong>of</strong> discourse ; thus, white<br />

the world <strong>of</strong> colour.<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

black are contraries in<br />

According to our view, contraries do not exhaust<br />

between them the universe <strong>of</strong> thought and existence;<br />

and the opposition which they express is <strong>of</strong> various kinds.<br />

The type to which Aristotle restricts the name <strong>of</strong><br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

contrary opposition is the rel<strong>at</strong>ion <strong>of</strong><br />

stand furthest apart among those <strong>of</strong> the same genus<br />

&quot;<br />

things which<br />

(C<strong>at</strong>egories, ch. vi., and elsewhere); as &quot;white&quot; and<br />

&quot;<br />

black,&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

&quot;<br />

virtuous<br />

and<br />

&quot;<br />

vicious.&quot; A more general<br />

case is incomp<strong>at</strong>ibility, i.e., the opposition <strong>of</strong> qualities<br />

which cannot be possessed by the^same thing in the<br />

&quot;

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!