Authors/Ockham/Summa Logicae/Book III-2/Chapter 37 - Revision history

Ragnarr49 at 13:58, 23 March 2025

2025-03-23T13:58:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:58, 23 March 2025
Line 18:		Line 18:
	\|Quando enim utraque praemissarum potest esse evidenter nota ante conclusionem, et ipsis notis potest accipi evidens notitia conclusionis, tunc potest talis conclusio per illas praemissas demonstrari, quod de tali conclusione potest accidere.		\|Quando enim utraque praemissarum potest esse evidenter nota ante conclusionem, et ipsis notis potest accipi evidens notitia conclusionis, tunc potest talis conclusio per illas praemissas demonstrari, quod de tali conclusione potest accidere.

	\|For when both premises can be clearly known before the conclusion, and from these very facts evident knowledge of the conclusion can be obtained, then such a conclusion can be demonstrated by those premises, which can happen ~~about~~ such a conclusion.		\|For when both premises can be clearly known before the conclusion, and from these very facts evident knowledge of the conclusion can be obtained, then such a conclusion can be demonstrated by those premises, which can happen from such a conclusion.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
Line 38:		Line 38:
	\|Et sic de consimilibus; quamvis talis passio quae importat illud idem quod subiectum in recto et rem inhaerentem sibi in obliquo non possit Deo competere, eo quod nulla res Deo inhaeret, quamvis multae aliae passiones sint Deo attribuendae.		\|Et sic de consimilibus; quamvis talis passio quae importat illud idem quod subiectum in recto et rem inhaerentem sibi in obliquo non possit Deo competere, eo quod nulla res Deo inhaeret, quamvis multae aliae passiones sint Deo attribuendae.

	\|And so with similar things; although such an attribute which implies the same thing as a subject in the ~~direct~~ and a thing inhering in it in ~~the~~ oblique cannot belong to God, because no thing inheres in God, although many other attributes are to be attributed to God.		\|And so with similar things; although such an attribute which implies the same thing as a subject in the nominative case and a thing inhering in it in an oblique case cannot belong to God, because no thing inheres in God, although many other attributes are to be attributed to God.

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

Ragnarr49 at 11:45, 27 February 2025

2025-02-27T11:45:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:45, 27 February 2025
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\|CAP. 37. QUOMODO PASSIO POTEST DEMONSTRARI DE INFERIORIBUS AD SUUM SUBIECTUM PRIMUM SINE OMNI DETERMINATIONE?.		\|CAP. 37. QUOMODO PASSIO POTEST DEMONSTRARI DE INFERIORIBUS AD SUUM SUBIECTUM PRIMUM SINE OMNI DETERMINATIONE?.

	\|Chapter 37. How can ~~a property~~ be demonstrated of the inferiors of its primary subject without any determination?		\|Chapter 37. How can an attribute be demonstrated of the inferiors of its primary subject without any determination?

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et ista passio, licet non possit demonstrari de subiecto suo primo sine omni determinatione, potest tamen demonstrari de inferioribus ad subiectum suum primum sine omni determinatione.		\|Et ista passio, licet non possit demonstrari de subiecto suo primo sine omni determinatione, potest tamen demonstrari de inferioribus ad subiectum suum primum sine omni determinatione.

	\|And this ~~property~~, although it cannot be demonstrated about its first subject without any determination, can nevertheless be demonstrated about things inferior to its first subject without any determination.		\|And this attribute, although it cannot be demonstrated about its first subject without any determination, can nevertheless be demonstrated about things inferior to its first subject without any determination.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
Line 28:		Line 28:
	\|Et tamen istis praemissis notis potest fieri nota ista conclusio ‘omnis leo est alterabilis’, quamvis prius fuerit ignota, et ideo ista conclusio per istas praemissas est demonstrabilis. Et in tali demonstratione non erit medium neque definitio subiecti neque definitio passionis, sed primum subiectum talis passionis erit medium demonstrandi passionem de qualibet specie inferiori.		\|Et tamen istis praemissis notis potest fieri nota ista conclusio ‘omnis leo est alterabilis’, quamvis prius fuerit ignota, et ideo ista conclusio per istas praemissas est demonstrabilis. Et in tali demonstratione non erit medium neque definitio subiecti neque definitio passionis, sed primum subiectum talis passionis erit medium demonstrandi passionem de qualibet specie inferiori.

	\|And yet, with these premises known, the conclusion ‘every lion is alterable’ can be known, although it was previously unknown, and therefore this conclusion is demonstrable through these premises. And in such a demonstration there will be neither a medium nor a definition of the subject nor a definition of the ~~property~~, but the first subject of such ~~a property~~ will be the medium of demonstrating the ~~property~~ of any lower species.		\|And yet, with these premises known, the conclusion ‘every lion is alterable’ can be known, although it was previously unknown, and therefore this conclusion is demonstrable through these premises. And in such a demonstration there will be neither a medium nor a definition of the subject nor a definition of the attribute, but the first subject of such an attribute will be the medium of demonstrating the attribute of any lower species.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et per talem modum possunt multae passiones de Deo demonstrari. Unde haec potest esse demonstratio ‘omne ens est unum; Deus est ens; ergo Deus est unus’.		\|Et per talem modum possunt multae passiones de Deo demonstrari. Unde haec potest esse demonstratio ‘omne ens est unum; Deus est ens; ergo Deus est unus’.

	\|And in this way many ~~properties~~ can be demonstrated about God. Hence this can be the demonstration ‘every being is one; God is being; therefore God is one’.		\|And in this way many attributes can be demonstrated about God. Hence this can be the demonstration ‘every being is one; God is being; therefore God is one’.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et sic de consimilibus; quamvis talis passio quae importat illud idem quod subiectum in recto et rem inhaerentem sibi in obliquo non possit Deo competere, eo quod nulla res Deo inhaeret, quamvis multae aliae passiones sint Deo attribuendae.		\|Et sic de consimilibus; quamvis talis passio quae importat illud idem quod subiectum in recto et rem inhaerentem sibi in obliquo non possit Deo competere, eo quod nulla res Deo inhaeret, quamvis multae aliae passiones sint Deo attribuendae.

	\|And so with similar things; although such ~~a property~~ which implies the same thing as a subject in the direct and a thing inhering in it in the oblique cannot belong to God, because no thing inheres in God, although many other ~~properties~~ are to be attributed to God.		\|And so with similar things; although such an attribute which implies the same thing as a subject in the direct and a thing inhering in it in the oblique cannot belong to God, because no thing inheres in God, although many other attributes are to be attributed to God.

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

Ragnarr49 at 03:02, 27 February 2025

2025-02-27T03:02:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:02, 26 February 2025
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\|CAP. 37. QUOMODO PASSIO POTEST DEMONSTRARI DE INFERIORIBUS AD SUUM SUBIECTUM PRIMUM SINE OMNI DETERMINATIONE?.		\|CAP. 37. QUOMODO PASSIO POTEST DEMONSTRARI DE INFERIORIBUS AD SUUM SUBIECTUM PRIMUM SINE OMNI DETERMINATIONE?.

	\|Chapter 37. How can ~~an attribute~~ be demonstrated of the inferiors of its primary subject without any determination?		\|Chapter 37. How can a property be demonstrated of the inferiors of its primary subject without any determination?

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et ista passio, licet non possit demonstrari de subiecto suo primo sine omni determinatione, potest tamen demonstrari de inferioribus ad subiectum suum primum sine omni determinatione.		\|Et ista passio, licet non possit demonstrari de subiecto suo primo sine omni determinatione, potest tamen demonstrari de inferioribus ad subiectum suum primum sine omni determinatione.

	\|And this ~~attribute~~, although it cannot be demonstrated about its first subject without any determination, can nevertheless be demonstrated about things inferior to its first subject without any determination.		\|And this property, although it cannot be demonstrated about its first subject without any determination, can nevertheless be demonstrated about things inferior to its first subject without any determination.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
Line 28:		Line 28:
	\|Et tamen istis praemissis notis potest fieri nota ista conclusio ‘omnis leo est alterabilis’, quamvis prius fuerit ignota, et ideo ista conclusio per istas praemissas est demonstrabilis. Et in tali demonstratione non erit medium neque definitio subiecti neque definitio passionis, sed primum subiectum talis passionis erit medium demonstrandi passionem de qualibet specie inferiori.		\|Et tamen istis praemissis notis potest fieri nota ista conclusio ‘omnis leo est alterabilis’, quamvis prius fuerit ignota, et ideo ista conclusio per istas praemissas est demonstrabilis. Et in tali demonstratione non erit medium neque definitio subiecti neque definitio passionis, sed primum subiectum talis passionis erit medium demonstrandi passionem de qualibet specie inferiori.

	\|And yet, with these premises known, the conclusion ‘every lion is alterable’ can be known, although it was previously unknown, and therefore this conclusion is demonstrable through these premises. And in such a demonstration there will be neither a medium nor a definition of the subject nor a definition of the ~~attribute~~, but the first subject of such ~~an attribute~~ will be the medium of demonstrating the ~~attribute~~ of any lower species.		\|And yet, with these premises known, the conclusion ‘every lion is alterable’ can be known, although it was previously unknown, and therefore this conclusion is demonstrable through these premises. And in such a demonstration there will be neither a medium nor a definition of the subject nor a definition of the property, but the first subject of such a property will be the medium of demonstrating the property of any lower species.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et per talem modum possunt multae passiones de Deo demonstrari. Unde haec potest esse demonstratio ‘omne ens est unum; Deus est ens; ergo Deus est unus’.		\|Et per talem modum possunt multae passiones de Deo demonstrari. Unde haec potest esse demonstratio ‘omne ens est unum; Deus est ens; ergo Deus est unus’.

	\|And in this way many ~~attributes~~ can be demonstrated about God. Hence this can be the demonstration ‘every being is one; God is being; therefore God is one’.		\|And in this way many properties can be demonstrated about God. Hence this can be the demonstration ‘every being is one; God is being; therefore God is one’.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et sic de consimilibus; quamvis talis passio quae importat illud idem quod subiectum in recto et rem inhaerentem sibi in obliquo non possit Deo competere, eo quod nulla res Deo inhaeret, quamvis multae aliae passiones sint Deo attribuendae.		\|Et sic de consimilibus; quamvis talis passio quae importat illud idem quod subiectum in recto et rem inhaerentem sibi in obliquo non possit Deo competere, eo quod nulla res Deo inhaeret, quamvis multae aliae passiones sint Deo attribuendae.

	\|And so with similar things; although such ~~an attribute~~ which implies the same thing as a subject in the direct and a thing inhering in it in the oblique cannot belong to God, because no thing inheres in God, although many other ~~attributes~~ are to be attributed to God.		\|And so with similar things; although such a property which implies the same thing as a subject in the direct and a thing inhering in it in the oblique cannot belong to God, because no thing inheres in God, although many other properties are to be attributed to God.

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

Ragnarr49 at 21:10, 16 February 2025

2025-02-16T21:10:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:10, 16 February 2025
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\|CAP. 37. QUOMODO PASSIO POTEST DEMONSTRARI DE INFERIORIBUS AD SUUM SUBIECTUM PRIMUM SINE OMNI DETERMINATIONE?.		\|CAP. 37. QUOMODO PASSIO POTEST DEMONSTRARI DE INFERIORIBUS AD SUUM SUBIECTUM PRIMUM SINE OMNI DETERMINATIONE?.

	\|		\|Chapter 37. How can an attribute be demonstrated of the inferiors of its primary subject without any determination?

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et ista passio, licet non possit demonstrari de subiecto suo primo sine omni determinatione, potest tamen demonstrari de inferioribus ad subiectum suum primum sine omni determinatione.		\|Et ista passio, licet non possit demonstrari de subiecto suo primo sine omni determinatione, potest tamen demonstrari de inferioribus ad subiectum suum primum sine omni determinatione.

	\|		\|And this attribute, although it cannot be demonstrated about its first subject without any determination, can nevertheless be demonstrated about things inferior to its first subject without any determination.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Quando enim utraque praemissarum potest esse evidenter nota ante conclusionem, et ipsis notis potest accipi evidens notitia conclusionis, tunc potest talis conclusio per illas praemissas demonstrari, quod de tali conclusione potest accidere.		\|Quando enim utraque praemissarum potest esse evidenter nota ante conclusionem, et ipsis notis potest accipi evidens notitia conclusionis, tunc potest talis conclusio per illas praemissas demonstrari, quod de tali conclusione potest accidere.

	\|		\|For when both premises can be clearly known before the conclusion, and from these very facts evident knowledge of the conclusion can be obtained, then such a conclusion can be demonstrated by those premises, which can happen about such a conclusion.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Potest enim evidenter sciri quod omne corpus est alterarabile, quamvis nesciatur quod omnis leo est alterabilis; et similiter potest evidenter sciri quod omnis leo est corpus, non obstante quod nesciatur quod omnis leo est alterabilis.		\|Potest enim evidenter sciri quod omne corpus est alterarabile, quamvis nesciatur quod omnis leo est alterabilis; et similiter potest evidenter sciri quod omnis leo est corpus, non obstante quod nesciatur quod omnis leo est alterabilis.

	\|		\|For it can be clearly known that every body is alterable, although it is not known that every lion is alterable; and similarly it can be clearly known that every lion is a body, despite the fact that it is not known that every lion is alterable.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et tamen istis praemissis notis potest fieri nota ista conclusio ‘omnis leo est alterabilis’, quamvis prius fuerit ignota, et ideo ista conclusio per istas praemissas est demonstrabilis. Et in tali demonstratione non erit medium neque definitio subiecti neque definitio passionis, sed primum subiectum talis passionis erit medium demonstrandi passionem de qualibet specie inferiori.		\|Et tamen istis praemissis notis potest fieri nota ista conclusio ‘omnis leo est alterabilis’, quamvis prius fuerit ignota, et ideo ista conclusio per istas praemissas est demonstrabilis. Et in tali demonstratione non erit medium neque definitio subiecti neque definitio passionis, sed primum subiectum talis passionis erit medium demonstrandi passionem de qualibet specie inferiori.

	\|		\|And yet, with these premises known, the conclusion ‘every lion is alterable’ can be known, although it was previously unknown, and therefore this conclusion is demonstrable through these premises. And in such a demonstration there will be neither a medium nor a definition of the subject nor a definition of the attribute, but the first subject of such an attribute will be the medium of demonstrating the attribute of any lower species.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et per talem modum possunt multae passiones de Deo demonstrari. Unde haec potest esse demonstratio ‘omne ens est unum; Deus est ens; ergo Deus est unus’.		\|Et per talem modum possunt multae passiones de Deo demonstrari. Unde haec potest esse demonstratio ‘omne ens est unum; Deus est ens; ergo Deus est unus’.

	\|		\|And in this way many attributes can be demonstrated about God. Hence this can be the demonstration ‘every being is one; God is being; therefore God is one’.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Et sic de consimilibus; quamvis talis passio quae importat illud idem quod subiectum in recto et rem inhaerentem sibi in obliquo non possit Deo competere, eo quod nulla res Deo inhaeret, quamvis multae aliae passiones sint Deo attribuendae.		\|Et sic de consimilibus; quamvis talis passio quae importat illud idem quod subiectum in recto et rem inhaerentem sibi in obliquo non possit Deo competere, eo quod nulla res Deo inhaeret, quamvis multae aliae passiones sint Deo attribuendae.

	\|		\|And so with similar things; although such an attribute which implies the same thing as a subject in the direct and a thing inhering in it in the oblique cannot belong to God, because no thing inheres in God, although many other attributes are to be attributed to God.


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

Edward Ockham at 11:24, 13 June 2015

2015-06-13T11:24:35Z

New page

{{Nextpage|[[../Chapter 36|Chapter 36]]|[[../Chapter 38|Chapter 38]]}}

{| border=1 cellpadding=10
!valign = top width=45%|Latin
!valign = top width=55%|English
|- valign = top
|CAP. 37. QUOMODO PASSIO POTEST DEMONSTRARI DE INFERIORIBUS AD SUUM SUBIECTUM PRIMUM SINE OMNI DETERMINATIONE?.

|

|- valign = top
|Et ista passio, licet non possit demonstrari de subiecto suo primo sine omni determinatione, potest tamen demonstrari de inferioribus ad subiectum suum primum sine omni determinatione.

|

|- valign = top
|Quando enim utraque praemissarum potest esse evidenter nota ante conclusionem, et ipsis notis potest accipi evidens notitia conclusionis, tunc potest talis conclusio per illas praemissas demonstrari, quod de tali conclusione potest accidere.

|

|- valign = top
|Potest enim evidenter sciri quod omne corpus est alterarabile, quamvis nesciatur quod omnis leo est alterabilis; et similiter potest evidenter sciri quod omnis leo est corpus, non obstante quod nesciatur quod omnis leo est alterabilis.

|

|- valign = top
|Et tamen istis praemissis notis potest fieri nota ista conclusio ‘omnis leo est alterabilis’, quamvis prius fuerit ignota, et ideo ista conclusio per istas praemissas est demonstrabilis. Et in tali demonstratione non erit medium neque definitio subiecti neque definitio passionis, sed primum subiectum talis passionis erit medium demonstrandi passionem de qualibet specie inferiori.

|

|- valign = top
|Et per talem modum possunt multae passiones de Deo demonstrari. Unde haec potest esse demonstratio ‘omne ens est unum; Deus est ens; ergo Deus est unus’.

|

|- valign = top
|Et sic de consimilibus; quamvis talis passio quae importat illud idem quod subiectum in recto et rem inhaerentem sibi in obliquo non possit Deo competere, eo quod nulla res Deo inhaeret, quamvis multae aliae passiones sint Deo attribuendae.

|

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