Logick, or, The key of sciences, and the Moral science, or, The way to be happy the former directing our understanding how to reason well of all things, and the latter guiding our will to an honest and vertuous life : both very useful to learn French and English / by Peter Berault.

Examples upon the five imperfect Modes of the first Figure.

Baralipton.

• Whosoever is without vice, is free.
• Every Philosopher is without vice,
• Therefore some Man free is a Philosopher.

Celanres

• No Slave to his Pleasures is free,
• Every Covetous man is Slave to his Pleasures,
• Therefore no Man free is cove∣tous.

Debitis

• Whosoever is Couragious dis∣dains Fortune,
• Some Philosopher is Couragious,
• Therefore some disdaining For∣tune is a Philosopher.

Fapesmo.

• Every Element is a simple Body,
• No Skie is Element,
• Therefore some simple Body is not a Skie.

Frisesomorum.

• Some Thief receives pardon from his King,
• No Man that receives pardon from his King shall be punished,
• Therefore some Thief shall not be punished.

Q. Why do you call these Five Modes imperfect?

A. Because they do not conclude so clearly as the others; but they may be made perfect in reducing them to the four perfect Modes of the first Figure.

Note that Fapesmo and Frisesomorum ought to be reduced in Ferio.

Q. How many Rules are there to be observed in these three Figures?

A. Seven. First, Every Syllogism ought to have but three Terms; from whence it appears that this Argument, wherein two Mediums are found, is not good.

All Number is an Accident,

Six Men are a Number,

Therefore six Men are an Accident.

This double Medium is in this word Number, which is taken in the Major for a numbering Number, and in the Minor for Number numbered.

2. The Medium is never to be found in the Conclusion.

3. The Conclusion follows always the worst of the Propositions; that is, if one of the Propositions of a Syllo∣gism is Negative, the Conclusion ought to be so also. Likewise if one of the Pro∣positions is Particular, its Conclusion ought to be so also.

4. The Conclusion ought to have no more than the Antecedent. By this Rule it appears that this Argument is not good.

What you have bought you did eat it,

You bought some meat,

Therefore you did eat raw meat.

5. Of two Negative Propositions, we can conclude nothing true; as

No Tree is Animal,

No Man is Tree,

Therefore no Man is Animal.

6. Of two particular Propositions we cannot also conclude any thing true, as

Some Angel is good,

Lucifer is an Angel.

Therefore Lucifer is good.

7. The Conclusion of the third Figure is always particular; so that this Argu∣ment is not good.

Every Vertue is good,

Every Vertue is an Habitude,

Therefore every Habitude is good.