Edward Ockham: Created page with "==Chapter 26== {| border=1 cellpadding=10 !valign = top width=33.33%|Greek !valign = top width=33.33%|Latin !valign = top width=33.33%|English |- valign = top | |(PL 64 0668C..."

2021-04-17T15:45:04Z

Created page with "==Chapter 26== {| border=1 cellpadding=10 !valign = top width=33.33%|Greek !valign = top width=33.33%|Latin !valign = top width=33.33%|English |- valign = top | |(PL 64 0668C..."

New page

==Chapter 26==
{| border=1 cellpadding=10
!valign = top width=33.33%|Greek
!valign = top width=33.33%|Latin
!valign = top width=33.33%|English
|- valign = top
|

|(PL 64 0668C) CAPUT XXVII. De problematis, hoc est propositis in unaquaque figura facile et difficile construendis et destruendis.

|26

|- valign = top
|{{a|bk42b27|42b27}} Ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ἔχομεν περὶ ὧν οἱ συλλογισμοί, καὶ ποῖον ἐν ἑκάστωι σχήματι καὶ ποσαχῶς δείκνυται, φανερὸν ἡμῖν ἐστὶ καὶ ποῖον πρόβλημα χαλεπὸν καὶ ποῖον εὐεπιχείρητον· τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἐν πλείοσι σχήμασι καὶ διὰ πλειόνων πτώσεων περαινόμενον ῥᾶιον, τὸ δ᾽ ἐν ἐλάττοσι καὶ δι᾽ ἐλαττόνων δυσεπιχειρητότερον.

|(0668D) Quoniam autem habemus ex quibus syllogismi, et quale in unaquaque figura, et quot modis monstratur, manifestum nobis est, et quae propositio facile, et quae difficile argumentabilis est. Nam quae in pluribus figuris et per plures casus concluditur, facilis; quae autem in paucis et per pauciores, difficilius argumentabilis.

|Since we understand the subjects with which syllogisms are concerned, what sort of conclusion is established in each figure, and in how many moods this is done, it is evident to us both what sort of problem is difficult and what sort is easy to prove. For that which is concluded in many figures and through many moods is easier; that which is concluded in few figures and through few moods is more difficult to attempt.

|- valign = top
|τὸ μὲν οὖν καταφατικὸν τὸ καθόλου διὰ τοῦ πρώτου σχήματος δείκνυται μόνου, καὶ διὰ τούτου μοναχῶς· τὸ δὲ στερητικὸν διά τε τοῦ πρώτου καὶ διὰ τοῦ μέσου, καὶ διὰ μὲν τοῦ πρώτου μοναχῶς, διὰ δὲ τοῦ μέσου διχῶς· τὸ δ᾽ ἐν μέρει καταφατικὸν διὰ τοῦ πρώτου καὶ διὰ τοῦ ἐσχάτου, μοναχῶς μὲν διὰ τοῦ πρώτου, τριχῶς δὲ διὰ τοῦ ἐσχάτου. τὸ δὲ στερητικὸν τὸ κατὰ μέρος ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς σχήμασι δείκνυται, πλὴν ἐν μὲν τῶι πρώτωι μοναχῶς, ἐν δὲ τῶι μέσωι καὶ τῶι ἐσχάτωι ἐν τῶι μὲν διχῶς ἐν τῶι δὲ τριχῶς.

|Ergo affirmativa quidem universalis per primam tantum figuram monstratur, et per hanc simpliciter. Privativa vero et per primam, et per mediam. Per primam quidem simpliciter, per mediam autem dupliciter. Particularis autem affirmativa per primam et per postremam, simpliciter quidem per primam, tripliciter autem per postremam. Privativa vero particularis in omnibus figuris monstratur, verum in prima quidem semel, in media autem et postrema, in illa quidem dupliciter, in hac vero tripliciter.

|The universal affirmative is proved by means of the first figure only and by this in only one mood; the universal negative is proved both through the first figure and through the second, through the first in one mood, through the second in two. The particular affirmative is proved through the first and through the last figure, in one mood through the first, in three moods through the last. The particular negative is proved in all the figures, but once in the first, in two moods in the second, in three moods in the third.

|- valign = top
|φανε{{ln|bk43a1}}ρὸν οὖν ὅτι τὸ καθόλου κατηγορικὸν κατασκευάσαι μὲν χαλεπώτατον, ἀνασκευάσαι δὲ ῥᾶιστον. ὅλως δ᾽ ἐστὶν ἀναιροῦντι μὲν τὰ καθόλου τῶν ἐν μέρει ῥάιω· καὶ γὰρ ἢν μηδενὶ καὶ ἢν τινὶ μὴ ὑπάρχηι, ἀνήιρηται· τούτων δὲ τὸ μὲν τινὶ μὴ ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς σχήμασι δείκνυται, τὸ δὲ μηδενὶ ἐν τοῖς δυσίν. τὸν αὐτὸν δὲ τρόπον κἀπὶ τῶν στερητικῶν· καὶ γὰρ εἰ παντὶ καὶ εἰ τινί, ἀνήιρηται τὸ ἐξ ἀρχῆς· τοῦτο δ᾽ ἦν ἐν δύο σχήμασιν. ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν ἐν μέρει μοναχῶς, ἢ παντὶ ἢ μηδενὶ δείξαντα ὑπάρχειν. κατασκευάζοντι δὲ ῥάιω τὰ ἐν μέρει· καὶ γὰρ ἐν πλείοσι σχήμασι καὶ διὰ πλειόνων τρόπων.

| (0669A) Manifestum ergo quoniam universalem affirmativam construere quidem difficillimum, destruere autem facillimum, omnino autem est interimenti quidem, universalia quam particularia facilius. Etenim si nulli, et si alicui non insit interemptum est, horum autem alicui quidem non in omnibus figuris monstratur, nulli autem in duabus. Eodem autem modo et in privativis, etenim si omni, et si alicui, interemptum est quod ex principio. Hoc autem fuit in duabus figuris. In particularibus autem simpliciter, aut omni, aut nulli ostendentem inesse. Construenti autem, facilius est particularia, nam in pluribus figuris, et per plures modos.

|It is clear then that the universal affirmative is most difficult to establish, most easy to overthrow. In general, universals are easier game for the destroyer than particulars: for whether the predicate belongs to none or not to some, they are destroyed: and the particular negative is proved in all the figures, the universal negative in two. Similarly with universal negatives: the original statement is destroyed, whether the predicate belongs to all or to some: and this we found possible in two figures. But particular statements can be refuted in one way only-by proving that the predicate belongs either to all or to none. But particular statements are easier to establish: for proof is possible in more figures and through more moods.

|- valign = top
|ὅλως τε οὐ δεῖ λανθάνειν ὅτι ἀνασκευάσαι μὲν δι᾽ ἀλλήλων ἔστι καὶ τὰ καθόλου διὰ τῶν ἐν μέρει καὶ ταῦτα διὰ τῶν καθόλου, κατασκευάσαι δ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι διὰ τῶν κατὰ μέρος τὰ καθόλου, δι᾽ ἐκείνων δὲ ταῦτ᾽ ἔστιν. ἅμα δὲ δῆλον ὅτι καὶ τὸ ἀνα σκευάζειν ἐστὶ τοῦ κατασκευάζειν ῥᾶιον.

|(0669B) Omnino autem non oportet latere quoniam destruere quidem per se invicem est, et universalia per particularia, et haec per universalia; construere autem non est per particularia universalia, per illa vero haec est. Nam si omni, et alicui. Simul autem manifestum quoniam destruere quam construere facilius.

|And in general we must not forget that it is possible to refute statements by means of one another, I mean, universal statements by means of particular, and particular statements by means of universal: but it is not possible to establish universal statements by means of particular, though it is possible to establish particular statements by means of universal. At the same time it is evident that it is easier to refute than to establish.

|- valign = top
|Πῶς μὲν οὖν γίνεται πᾶς συλλογισμὸς καὶ διὰ πόσων ὅρων καὶ προτάσεων, καὶ πῶς ἐχουσῶν πρὸς ἀλλήλας, ἔτι δὲ ποῖον πρόβλημα ἐν ἑκάστωι σχήματι καὶ ποῖον ἐν πλείοσι καὶ ποῖον ἐν ἐλάττοσι δείκνυται, δῆλον ἐκ τῶν εἰρημένων.

|Quomodo ergo fit omnis syllogismus, et per quot terminos et propositiones, et quomodo habentes se ad invicem, amplius autem quae propositio in unaquaque figura, et quae in pluribus, et quae in paucioribus monstratur, palam ex his quae dicta sunt.

|The manner in which every syllogism is produced, the number of the terms and premisses through which it proceeds, the relation of the premisses to one another, the character of the problem proved in each figure, and the number of the figures appropriate to each problem, all these matters are clear from what has been said.

|}
<noinclude>
==Notes==
{{reflist}}</noinclude>

Authors/Aristotle/priora/Liber 1/C26 - Revision history

Edward Ockham: Created page with "==Chapter 26== {| border=1 cellpadding=10 !valign = top width=33.33%|Greek !valign = top width=33.33%|Latin !valign = top width=33.33%|English |- valign = top | |(PL 64 0668C..."