Early English Books Online

Previous Section Next Section

The arte of logick Plainely taught in the English tongue, according to the best approued authors. Very necessary for all students in any profession, how to defend any argument against all subtill sophisters, and cauelling schismatikes, and how to confute their false syllogismes, and captious arguments. By M. Blundevile.

About this Item

Title
The arte of logick Plainely taught in the English tongue, according to the best approued authors. Very necessary for all students in any profession, how to defend any argument against all subtill sophisters, and cauelling schismatikes, and how to confute their false syllogismes, and captious arguments. By M. Blundevile.
Author
Blundeville, Thomas, fl. 1561.
Publication
London :: Printed by William Stansby, and are to be sold by Matthew Lownes,
1617.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Logic -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A16218.0001.001
Cite this Item
"The arte of logick Plainely taught in the English tongue, according to the best approued authors. Very necessary for all students in any profession, how to defend any argument against all subtill sophisters, and cauelling schismatikes, and how to confute their false syllogismes, and captious arguments. By M. Blundevile." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A16218.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 7, 2024.

Pages

From Disproportion changed or transposed.
HOw may we reason from this place?

Negatiuely thus: 12. is not to 6. as 4. to 3. for be∣twixt the two first is a double proportion, and betwixt the two last Sesquitertia: Ergo, 12. is not to 4. as 6. to 3. for the

Page 116

one is a tripla, and the other double.

What be the Maximes of this place?

If the first bee not to the second, as the third to the fourth, then the first shall not be to the third, as the second is to the fourth.

To whom are these places most familiar?

To those that are exercised in the Mathematicall Sciences.

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.