贝壳电子书 > 英文原著电子书 > posterior analytics >

第3章

posterior analytics-第3章

小说: posterior analytics 字数: 每页4000字

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!






demonstrations; it is clearly frivolous and impossible to say that



demonstration is reciprocal and that therefore everything can be



demonstrated。







                                 4







  Since the object of pure scientific knowledge cannot be other than



it is; the truth obtained by demonstrative knowledge will be



necessary。 And since demonstrative knowledge is only present when we



have a demonstration; it follows that demonstration is an inference



from necessary premisses。 So we must consider what are the premisses



of demonstration…i。e。 what is their character: and as a preliminary;



let us define what we mean by an attribute 'true in every instance



of its subject'; an 'essential' attribute; and a 'commensurate and



universal' attribute。 I call 'true in every instance' what is truly



predicable of all instances…not of one to the exclusion of



others…and at all times; not at this or that time only; e。g。 if animal



is truly predicable of every instance of man; then if it be true to



say 'this is a man'; 'this is an animal' is also true; and if the



one be true now the other is true now。 A corresponding account holds



if point is in every instance predicable as contained in line。 There



is evidence for this in the fact that the objection we raise against a



proposition put to us as true in every instance is either an



instance in which; or an occasion on which; it is not true。



Essential attributes are (1) such as belong to their subject as



elements in its essential nature (e。g。 line thus belongs to



triangle; point to line; for the very being or 'substance' of triangle



and line is composed of these elements; which are contained in the



formulae defining triangle and line): (2) such that; while they belong



to certain subjects; the subjects to which they belong are contained



in the attribute's own defining formula。 Thus straight and curved



belong to line; odd and even; prime and compound; square and oblong;



to number; and also the formula defining any one of these attributes



contains its subject…e。g。 line or number as the case may be。



  Extending this classification to all other attributes; I distinguish



those that answer the above description as belonging essentially to



their respective subjects; whereas attributes related in neither of



these two ways to their subjects I call accidents or 'coincidents';



e。g。 musical or white is a 'coincident' of animal。



  Further (a) that is essential which is not predicated of a subject



other than itself: e。g。 'the walking 'thing'' walks and is white in



virtue of being something else besides; whereas substance; in the



sense of whatever signifies a 'this somewhat'; is not what it is in



virtue of being something else besides。 Things; then; not predicated



of a subject I call essential; things predicated of a subject I call



accidental or 'coincidental'。



  In another sense again (b) a thing consequentially connected with



anything is essential; one not so connected is 'coincidental'。 An



example of the latter is 'While he was walking it lightened': the



lightning was not due to his walking; it was; we should say; a



coincidence。 If; on the other hand; there is a consequential



connexion; the predication is essential; e。g。 if a beast dies when its



throat is being cut; then its death is also essentially connected with



the cutting; because the cutting was the cause of death; not death a



'coincident' of the cutting。



  So far then as concerns the sphere of connexions scientifically



known in the unqualified sense of that term; all attributes which



(within that sphere) are essential either in the sense that their



subjects are contained in them; or in the sense that they are



contained in their subjects; are necessary as well as



consequentially connected with their subjects。 For it is impossible



for them not to inhere in their subjects either simply or in the



qualified sense that one or other of a pair of opposites must inhere



in the subject; e。g。 in line must be either straightness or curvature;



in number either oddness or evenness。 For within a single identical



genus the contrary of a given attribute is either its privative or its



contradictory; e。g。 within number what is not odd is even; inasmuch as



within this sphere even is a necessary consequent of not…odd。 So;



since any given predicate must be either affirmed or denied of any



subject; essential attributes must inhere in their subjects of



necessity。



  Thus; then; we have established the distinction between the



attribute which is 'true in every instance' and the 'essential'



attribute。



  I term 'commensurately universal' an attribute which belongs to



every instance of its subject; and to every instance essentially and



as such; from which it clearly follows that all commensurate



universals inhere necessarily in their subjects。 The essential



attribute; and the attribute that belongs to its subject as such;



are identical。 E。g。 point and straight belong to line essentially; for



they belong to line as such; and triangle as such has two right



angles; for it is essentially equal to two right angles。



  An attribute belongs commensurately and universally to a subject



when it can be shown to belong to any random instance of that



subject and when the subject is the first thing to which it can be



shown to belong。 Thus; e。g。 (1) the equality of its angles to two



right angles is not a commensurately universal attribute of figure。



For though it is possible to show that a figure has its angles equal



to two right angles; this attribute cannot be demonstrated of any



figure selected at haphazard; nor in demonstrating does one take a



figure at random…a square is a figure but its angles are not equal



to two right angles。 On the other hand; any isosceles triangle has its



angles equal to two right angles; yet isosceles triangle is not the



primary subject of this attribute but triangle is prior。 So whatever



can be shown to have its angles equal to two right angles; or to



possess any other attribute; in any random instance of itself and



primarily…that is the first subject to which the predicate in question



belongs commensurately and universally; and the demonstration; in



the essential sense; of any predicate is the proof of it as



belonging to this first subject commensurately and universally:



while the proof of it as belonging to the other subjects to which it



attaches is demonstration only in a secondary and unessential sense。



Nor again (2) is equality to two right angles a commensurately



universal attribute of isosceles; it is of wider application。







                                 5







  We must not fail to observe that we often fall into error because



our conclusion is not in fact primary and commensurately universal



in the sense in which we think we prove it so。 We make this mistake



(1) when the subject is an individual or individuals above which there



is no universal to be found: (2) when the subjects belong to different



species and there is a higher universal; but it has no name: (3)



when the subject which the demonstrator takes as a whole is really



only a part of a larger whole; for then the demonstration will be true



of the individual instances within the part and will hold in every



instance of it; yet the demonstration will not be true of this subject



primarily and commensurately and universally。 When a demonstration



is true of a subject primarily and commensurately and universally;



that is to be taken to mean that it is true of a given subject



primarily and as such。 Cas

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 2 2

你可能喜欢的