Find A ProjectSign Up To TranscribeSign In
EN
DeutschEnglishEspañolFrançaisPortuguês

99

OverviewVersionsHelp

Here you can see all page revisions and compare the changes have been made in each revision. Left column shows the page title and transcription in the selected revision, right column shows what have been changed. Unchanged text is highlighted in white, deleted text is highlighted in red, and inserted text is highlighted in green color.

2 revisions
laika at Apr 03, 2018 01:19 PM
laika
jeffdown1

99

Logic 99

we could conclude: Some B is not B which absurd.
Hence if no A is B it cannot be true that some A is B that is it must be time that No A is B.
The sollogistic form Ferio is
No B is A
Some C is B
therefore Some C is not A.
If for C we put A we get the premisses above used.
Now in my view observation comes in to assure us that when A is substituted for C we do get these premisses and it also enters in other similar ways.

Aristotle seems to reason that if we were to assume that some A is B supposing C to represent an A that is B we should be abliged to conclude
C is A
C is B
therefore some B is A.
There are reasons why I think this somewhat objectionable; But it seems to me to depend upon the same kind of

99

Manuscripts, Logic Notebook, Robin Catalogue, SPIN Omeka Page