Ragnarr49 at 01:52, 16 February 2025

2025-02-16T01:52:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:52, 15 February 2025
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\|CAP. 16. DE ILLIS QUAE COMMUNITER CONVENIUNT OMNIBUS PRAEMISSIS DEMONSTRATIONIS.		\|CAP. 16. DE ILLIS QUAE COMMUNITER CONVENIUNT OMNIBUS PRAEMISSIS DEMONSTRATIONIS.

	\|		\|Chapter 16. On things that agree in general with the principles of a demonstration

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
Line 14:		Line 14:

	\|		\|
			But what is common to all the premises of any demonstration, whether those premises are only principles or also conclusions, is that the premises are better known than the conclusion.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Quod patet ex definitione demonstrationis: quia ex quo omnis demonstratio est syllogismus faciens scire, et nihil ignotius potest facere scire notius, nec aeque ignotum {{p\|532}} facit scire aeque ignotum, necesse est quod praemissae sint notiores conclusione.		\|Quod patet ex definitione demonstrationis: quia ex quo omnis demonstratio est syllogismus faciens scire, et nihil ignotius potest facere scire notius, nec aeque ignotum {{p\|532}} facit scire aeque ignotum, necesse est quod praemissae sint notiores conclusione.

	\|		\|This is clear from the definition of demonstration: since every demonstration is a syllogism making one to know, and nothing more unknown can make one know better, nor does an equally unknown make one know something equally unknown, it is necessary that the premises be better known than the conclusion.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Non solum autem praemissae sunt notiores conclusione, sed etiam quaelibet praemissarum potest tempore cognosci ante conclusionem. Potest enim ista maior ‘omnis triangulus habet tres’ etc. cognosci hac conclusione ignota ‘iste triangulus habet tres angulos’, propter ignorantiam istius minoris ‘iste triangulus est triangulus’.		\|Non solum autem praemissae sunt notiores conclusione, sed etiam quaelibet praemissarum potest tempore cognosci ante conclusionem. Potest enim ista maior ‘omnis triangulus habet tres’ etc. cognosci hac conclusione ignota ‘iste triangulus habet tres angulos’, propter ignorantiam istius minoris ‘iste triangulus est triangulus’.

	\|		\|Now not only are the premises more known than the conclusion, but also any of the premises can be known at the time before the conclusion. For it is possible that the greater premise 'every triangle has three', etc. be known by this unknown conclusion, 'this triangle has three angles', because of the ignorance of this lesser one, 'this triangle is a triangle'.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Similiter potest ista sciri ‘iste triangulus est triangulus’ hac ignota ‘iste triangulus habet tres angulos’ etc., si ignoretur ista maior ‘omnis triangulus habet tres’ etc.. Sed si nota ista maiore ‘omnis triangulus habet tres’ etc. sumatur sub ista minor ‘iste triangulus est triangulus’, simul cognoscetur ista conclusio ‘iste triangulus habet tres’ etc..		\|Similiter potest ista sciri ‘iste triangulus est triangulus’ hac ignota ‘iste triangulus habet tres angulos’ etc., si ignoretur ista maior ‘omnis triangulus habet tres’ etc.. Sed si nota ista maiore ‘omnis triangulus habet tres’ etc. sumatur sub ista minor ‘iste triangulus est triangulus’, simul cognoscetur ista conclusio ‘iste triangulus habet tres’ etc..

	\|		\|In the same way, it can be known that 'this triangle is a triangle' and this unknown 'this triangle has three angles', etc., if the greater known 'every triangle has three', etc., is taken under the lesser known 'this triangle is a triangle', the conclusion 'this triangle has three', etc., will be known at the same time.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et ita frequenter vel semper maior praecognoscitur conclusioni, sed scita maiore et sumpta minore simul cognoscitur conclusio. Propter quod ante demonstrationem conclusio scitur in universali et ignoratur in particulari, hoc est ante demonstrationem scitur una universalis sub qua continetur conclusio et ignoratur conclusio, ita quod non est nota cognitione propria sibi, sed est nota una cognitione communi sibi et omnibus aliis conclusionibus sibi similibus.		\|Et ita frequenter vel semper maior praecognoscitur conclusioni, sed scita maiore et sumpta minore simul cognoscitur conclusio. Propter quod ante demonstrationem conclusio scitur in universali et ignoratur in particulari, hoc est ante demonstrationem scitur una universalis sub qua continetur conclusio et ignoratur conclusio, ita quod non est nota cognitione propria sibi, sed est nota una cognitione communi sibi et omnibus aliis conclusionibus sibi similibus.

	\|		\|And so the conclusion is frequently or always known to be greater, but when the greater is known and the lesser is taken, the conclusion is known at the same time. Because before the demonstration, the conclusion is known in the universal and is unknown in the particular, that is, before the demonstration, one universal is known under which the conclusion is contained and the conclusion is unknown, so that it is not known by knowledge peculiar to itself, but is known by one knowledge common to itself and to all other conclusions similar to it.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et talis notitia generalis sufficit ad hoc quod investigans sciat illud esse quod quaerit, si occurrat ei.		\|Et talis notitia generalis sufficit ad hoc quod investigans sciat illud esse quod quaerit, si occurrat ei.

	\|		\|And such general information is sufficient for the researcher to know that it is what he is looking for, if he encounters it.



	\|}		\|}
	==Notes==		==Notes==
	{{reflist}} [[Category:Untranslated]]		{{reflist}} [[Category:Untranslated]]

Edward Ockham at 10:59, 13 June 2015

2015-06-13T10:59:54Z

New page

{{Nextpage|[[../Chapter 15|Chapter 15]]|[[../Chapter 17|Chapter 17]]}}

{| border=1 cellpadding=10
!valign = top width=45%|Latin
!valign = top width=55%|English
|- valign = top
|CAP. 16. DE ILLIS QUAE COMMUNITER CONVENIUNT OMNIBUS PRAEMISSIS DEMONSTRATIONIS.

|

|- valign = top
|Commune autem omnibus praemissis cuiuscumque demonstrationis, sive illae praemissae sint principia tantum sive etiam sint conclusiones, est quod praemissae sunt notiores conclusione.

|

|- valign = top
|Quod patet ex definitione demonstrationis: quia ex quo omnis demonstratio est syllogismus faciens scire, et nihil ignotius potest facere scire notius, nec aeque ignotum {{p|532}} facit scire aeque ignotum, necesse est quod praemissae sint notiores conclusione.

|

|- valign = top
|Non solum autem praemissae sunt notiores conclusione, sed etiam quaelibet praemissarum potest tempore cognosci ante conclusionem. Potest enim ista maior ‘omnis triangulus habet tres’ etc. cognosci hac conclusione ignota ‘iste triangulus habet tres angulos’, propter ignorantiam istius minoris ‘iste triangulus est triangulus’.

|

|- valign = top
|Similiter potest ista sciri ‘iste triangulus est triangulus’ hac ignota ‘iste triangulus habet tres angulos’ etc., si ignoretur ista maior ‘omnis triangulus habet tres’ etc.. Sed si nota ista maiore ‘omnis triangulus habet tres’ etc. sumatur sub ista minor ‘iste triangulus est triangulus’, simul cognoscetur ista conclusio ‘iste triangulus habet tres’ etc..

|

|- valign = top
|Et ita frequenter vel semper maior praecognoscitur conclusioni, sed scita maiore et sumpta minore simul cognoscitur conclusio. Propter quod ante demonstrationem conclusio scitur in universali et ignoratur in particulari, hoc est ante demonstrationem scitur una universalis sub qua continetur conclusio et ignoratur conclusio, ita quod non est nota cognitione propria sibi, sed est nota una cognitione communi sibi et omnibus aliis conclusionibus sibi similibus.

|

|- valign = top
|Et talis notitia generalis sufficit ad hoc quod investigans sciat illud esse quod quaerit, si occurrat ei.

|

|}
==Notes==
{{reflist}} [[Category:Untranslated]]

Authors/Ockham/Summa Logicae/Book III-2/Chapter 16 - Revision history

Ragnarr49 at 01:52, 16 February 2025

Edward Ockham at 10:59, 13 June 2015