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 15, 2024.

Pages

WHat is a Syllogisme?

A Syllogisme is a kind of argument contai∣ning three Propositions, whereof the two first, commonly called the premisses, being disposed according to moode, and figure, and granted, the third Propositiō, otherwise called the conclusion, differing from the other two, followeth of necessitie, by vertue of the premisses: how these three Propositions are called, and what moode and figure is, shall be declared hereafter; In the meane time marke wel the two other points touching this Definition: first, that the Conclusion must not be all one, but differing from the premisses: secondly, that the said Conclusion bee necessa∣rily inferred of the premisses, as in this example: euery sensible body is a substance: euery man is a sensible bodie: Ergo, eue∣ry man is a substance: for if the Conclusion were thus: Ergo, euery sensible body is a substance, or euery man is a sensible bodie, the argument should not be good, because the Con∣clusion should be all one with one of the premisses: the reason why the Conclusion must needes be inferred of the premisses, and so consequently follow of the same, shalbe declared vnto you hereafter.