The Logic Newly Translated, To the reader
THE EPISTLE TO THE READER CONTAINING the occaſion of the ſetting forthe of this booke, the vtilitie and profitte of the ſame, the vſe and facilitie, vvith the declaration of thre golden documents or rules appartaining to the matter of eueryevery arte, and laſt a brief declaration of the methode and forme to be obſerued in all artes and ſciences.
SEING it is the dewtye of all Chriſtians (beloued Reader) to labour by all meanes, that they maye profytte and ayde their bretherne, and to hyde or kepe ſecrete nothing, whiche they knowe maye bring greate vtilitie to the cōmō wealthe: I thought it my dewtie (hauing perceyued the greate commoditie whiche this booke bryngethe to the Reader of what ſtate and qualitie ſoeuer he be) to make thee and all others to whoſe knowledge it ſhall come per takers thereof. But leaſt thou thynke that thy labour and payne ſhoulde be loſt in reading of the ſame, ſeyng ſo many bookes goyng abrode vnderunder glorious names, hauing in deade lytle or no vtilitie, but wrapped al together with innumerable difficulties: I ſhall in fewe wordes ſhewe the, the matter contayned in this booke, the methode and forme of the ſame, howe eaſye it is aboue all others to be apprehended, howe thou ſhalt applye it to all artes and ſciences, and ſhortlie that no arte or ſcience maye eyther be taught or learned perfectlie without the knowledge of the ſame. As fore the matter whiche it containethe, thou ſhalt vnderſtand that there is nothing appartayning to dialectike eyther in Ariſtotles xvij. booke of logike, in his eight bookes of Phiſike, or in his xiiij. bookes of Philoſophie, in Cicero his bookes of Oratorie, or in Quintilian (in the which there is almoſt nothing that dothe not eyther appartayne to the inuention of argumentes a diſpoſition of the ſame, but thou ſhalt fynde it ſhortlie and after a perfecte methode in this booke declared. For thou ſhalt fynde no argument which is not eyther referred to one of the nyne argumentes artificial, or to the vnartificiall: no ſort of diſpoſition whiche dothe not appartayne eyther to the iudgement of the propoſition, ſylogiſme or methode. But thou wylt ſaye howe is it poſſible that this lytle booke is able to containe all that, whiche the forenamed bookes (beyng ſo manie) dothe entreate? In deede thou haſt no lytle occaſion to maruell, but (hauing more deapely conſidered the matter) I beleue thou ſhall not maruell ſo muche. For in this booke there is thre documents or rules kept, whiche in deede ought to be obſerued in all artes and ſciences. The firſt is, that in ſetting forthe of an arte we gather only togeather that which dothe appartayne to the Arte whiche we intreate of, leauing to all other Artes that which is proper to them, this rule (which maye be called the rule of Iuſtice) thou ſhalt ſee here well obſerued. For here is all which dothe appartayne to logike, and nothing neither of Grammer, Rethorike, Phiſicke, nor any other arte. This is that documente which Apelles many yeares agoe dyd ſignifie to vsus, for when as the Shoomaker reprehended the ſhoo of Apelles image, Apelles tooke it in good parte, becauſe it dyd appertayne to the Shoomakers arte: but when paſſing his boundes he began to fynde faulte whith the clothes alſo, Apelles ſayde to hym, Nihil Sutor vltra crepidam, which ſignifie the that the Shoomaker ſhoulde kepe hym with in the boundes of his arte. And therfore (beloued Reader) all thoſe which eyther write or teache either diuinitie, Phiſicke, the lawe or any other thing do violate and breake this documente, when they degreſſe from their purpoſe and do rayle vponupon other thinges nothing partayning therto. For howſoeuer they write or teache (ſo it be from their purpoſe) it is to be had of no eſtimation. Is he not worthie to be mocked of all men, that purpoſe the to wryte of Grammer, and in eueryevery other chapiter mynglethe ſomthing of Logicke, and ſome thing of Rethoricke: and contrarie when he purpoſe the to write of Logicke dothe ſpeake of Grammer and of Rethoricke? that takethe a text to preache of faſting and diſputethe the moſt parte of his howre of images or ſwearing? that promyſethe to ſhewe me the cauſes and ſignes of the ſtone, and tellethe me many tales pertainning to the gowte? that when he is aſked of contractes or obligations, aunſwerethe of libertie or bondage? Or if the Aſtrologian being asked of the eclips of the ſonne, ſhoulde aunſwere me ſome thing concerning the motion of the ſtarres? And yet we ſee the moſt parte of our learned mē bothe in their teaching and writing (to the greate hurte and domage of youthe) moſt vnſhamfullie do vſe the ſame which I would to god were amended. The ſeconde document (which diligently is obſerued in this booke) is that all the rules and preceptes of thine arte be of neceſſitie tru, whiche Ariſtotle requirethe in the ſeconde booke of his Analitikes and in diuerſe chapiters in his former booke. Thou ſhalt violate this document, whenſoeuer amongeſt thy precepts in writing or teaching, thou ſhalt myngle any falſe, ambiguous, or vncerteine thing: as if in theaching me my logicke, which conſiſtethe in rules to inuente argumentes, and to diſpone and iudge the ſame, thou ſhouldeſt begyn to tell me ſome trickes of poyſonable ſophiſtrie: and when thou ſhouldeſt teache me the worde of God truly, thou goeſt aboute to deceaue me by tellyng me mans inuentions: and if thou ſhouldeſt (being deſtitute of good arguments to proue thy matter) be lie ſome aunciant writer to beguyle the rude and ignorant people, or forge ſome Authors to colour thy knauerie which neuer was, or wrote at any time. I doubte not (gentle Reader) but thou haſt read of ſuche felowes: alwayes call thou vponupon god that it wyll pleaſe his heauenlie Maieſtie to plante this our rule of veritie in the hartes of all men, but moſt chieflie in the breaſtes of the Paſtors of the Churche, who hauehave the charge and diſpenſation of his holye worde. The third documente which thou ſhalt note herein obſerued, is, that thou intreate of thy rules which be generall generallye, and thoſe whiche be ſpeciall ſpeciallie, and at one tyme, without any vaine repetitions, which dothe nothing but fyll vp the paper. For it is not ſufficient that thou kepe the rule of veritie and iuſtice, without thou obſerue alſo this documente of wiſedome, to diſpute of eueryevery thing according to his nature. Doe not entreate therfore generall matters particulerly, nor particuler matters generally, for in ſo doing thou playeſt the Sophiſtes parte, as Ariſtotle teachethe in the firſt booke of his poſteriors, and ſhalt be compelled to vſe tautalogies and vaine repetitions whiche thow knoweſt to be moſt pernicious to all artes and ſciences. For if I aske thee what is Logicke? and thou aunſwereſt, that which teachethe to inuente argumentes, thou aunſwereſt trulye but not wyſelie, becauſe thou intreareſt a generall thing particulerlie: I aske the for the definition of the whole arte, and thow geueſt me the definition of inuention, which is but a parte of the arte. And cōtrarie, if I aske the what is inuention, and thou aunſwereſt an arte whiche teachethe to diſpute well, ſurely thou aunſwereſt not wyſelie, for thou intreateſt a particuler thing generallie: I aske of thee, the definition of a parte of the arte, and thou geueſt me the definition of the whole arte. Note well theſe thre rules in reading of thyne Authors: ſee, if they …ntangle them ſelues, with thinges nothing appar…eining to their purpoſe: yf they trouble thee with …mbiguous or deceiptfull ſpeakings, and do not handle eueryevery thing after his nature. Take the forena…ed bookes, and with thy rule of iuſtice geue to …uery arte his owne, and ſurely if my iudgement done not farre deceaue me, thou muſt geue ſome …hing to the arte of Grammer, ſome thing to Re…oricke, ſome thing to the fower mathematicall …rtes, Arithemeticke, Geometrie, Aſtrologie and …uſicke, ſome thing alſo (althoughe but litle) to Phi…cke, naturall Philoſophie, and diuinitie. And yet all …at is in theſe bookes (only the fore ſaid digreſſions …cepted) dothe appartaine eyther to the inuention …f Logicke, or els to the iudgemente. Now gather …geather that wich remainethe, after eueryevery arte … the receiued his owne, and ſee if there be any falſe, …mbiguous or vncertein thing amongeſt it, and yf …here be (as in dede there is ſome) take thy docu…ente of veritie, and put out all ſuche ſophiſticall …eakinges. And laſt perceiue if all thinges be hand…d according to their nature, the generall gene…lye, and the particuler particulerlie, if not, take thy rule of wyſdome, and do according as the third documente teachethe thee: abolyſhe all tautalogies and vayne repetitions, and ſo thus muche being done, thou ſhalt cōprehende the reſt into a litle rome. And this muche concerning the matter intreated in this booke. The forme and methode which is kept in this arte, comaundethe that the thing which is abſolutely moſt cleare, be firſt placed: and ſecondly that which is next cleare, & ſo forthe whith the reſt. And therfore it continually procedethe from the generall to the ſpeciall and ſinguler. The definition as moſt generall is firſt placed, next folowethe the diuiſion, firſt into the partes, and next into the formes and kyndes. EueryEvery parte and forme is defined in his owne place, and made manifeſt by examples of auncient Authors, and laſt the members are limited and ioined togeather with ſhort tranſitions for the recreation of the Reader. This is that only perfecte methode which Plato and Ariſtotle dyd knowe obſerued by many noble wryters, bothe Hiſtoriographers, Orators, and Poetes, and now laſt (beyng ſuppreſſed by ignoraunce many yeres) rayſed as it were from deathe, by the moſt learned and Martyr to God, Petrus Ramus, who hathe not only proued with ſtronge argumentes, but in very deede ſet before our eyes that this perfecte methode maye be accommodate to all artes & ſciences. What ſhall we ſaye then of thoſe, that in teaching and writing (to the greate hurte of the memorie) dothe put as it were the tayle formeſt, hauing no regard how euerie thinge is placed, but euen as it chaunſethe to come into their Mouthes, ſo lettethe it go. Dyd euer Plato or Ariſtotle ſo? no in deede. But that thou mayeſt a lytle the better perceyue the vtilitie of this arte, and howe farre the vſe of it dothe extende, I wyll ſhortly ſhewe thee howe thou ſhalt accommodate the ſame to all artes and ſciences, ſetting before thyne eyes one or two for an example. And firſt what arte ſo euer thou purpoſeſt to intreate of, thou muſt come garnyſhed with thieſe thre, Iuſtice, Veritie, & Wyſdome, as before is ſayde: and then if thou be a deuine this methode willethe thee that in place of the definition, thou ſett forthe ſhortly the ſōme of the text, whiche thou haſt taken in hand to interprete: next to parte thy text into a fewe heads that the auditor may the better retaine thy ſayinges: Thirdly to intreate of eueryevery heade in his owne place with the ten places of inuention, ſhewing them the cauſesi, theffectes, the adioints and circunſtances: to bring in thy compariſons with the reſt of artificiall places: and laſt to make thy matter playne and manifeſt with familiar exā ples & aucthorities out of the worde of God: to ſett before the auditor (as eueryevery heade ſhall geue the occaſion) the horrible and ſharpe punyſhing of diſobedience, and the ioyfull promiſes appartayning to the obedient and godlie. Yf thou be a Phiſition and willing to teache (as for exāple) of a feuer, this methode willethe thee to ſhewe firſt the definition, that is, what a feuer is, next the deuiſiō, declaring what ſorte of feuer it is, whether the quartane, quotidian, hecticke, or what other: thirdly to come to the places of inuention, and ſhewe fyrſt the cauſes of the feuer eueryevery one in order, the efficient, as maye be hotte meates, the matter as melancolie, choler, or ſome rotten humor, and ſo forthe with the formale cauſes and finall. The ſeconde place is theffecte, ſhewe then what the feuer is able to bring forthe, whether deathe or no. The third place wiſhethe thee to tell the ſubiecte of the feuer, whether it be in the vaines, artiers, or els where. The fowrthe to ſhewe the ſignes and tokens which appeare to pretende lyfe or deathe: and to be ſhorte, thou ſhalt paſſe thoroughe the reſt of the artificiall places, and do that which is requyred in eueryevery of them: And laſt come to the confirmyng of thy ſayinges by examples, aucthorities, and (as Hippocrates & Galen hauehave done) by hiſtories and long experience. After this methode Heraclitus the Philoſopher examyned the phiſitions whiche came to heale hym, and becauſe they were ignorant and could not aunſwere to his interrogations he ſent them away, and woulde receyue none of their Medicens: for (ſayd he) yf ye can not ſhewe me the cauſes of my ſicknes, much leſſe are ye able to take the cauſe awaye. So the lawyer ſhall pleade his cauſe, in prouyng or diſprouyng after as his matter ſhall requier, with theſe ten places of Inuention, & diſpone eueryevery thing orderlie into his propoſitions, ſyllogiſmes, and methode. So ſhall the Orator declayme: the Mathematician ſette forthe his demonſtrations: and to be ſhorte bothe in wrytyng, teaching, & in learnyng, thou mayeſt alwayes kepe theſe thre golden documentes in intreatyng thy matter, and this moſt ingenious and artificiall methode for the exacte forme and diſpoſition of the ſame. After the exacte obſeruation of the forſaid materiall documents and naturall methode thou haſt this lytle booke ſett furthe to the, whiche beyng well peruſed is able to bring more profytt to the (I ſpeake after experience) then all thy fower yeares ſtudie in Plato or Ariſtotle as they are now extant. And beſides the greate vtilitie wiche thou ſhalt apprehēde of this booke, the facilitie and eaſynes of the ſame is not a litle to be commended. For heare thou haſt nothing to learne (and yet thou ſhalt learne all) but onlye ten places of inuention, with the diſpoſition of the propoſition, ſyllogiſme, and methode. EueryEvery place of inuention and eueryevery ſort of diſpoſition is made ſo clere and manyfeſt with examples choſen out of the moſt auncyent Authors, that almoſt by thy ſelf (yf thou hauehave any quicknes of ſpirite) thou mayeſt attayne in the ſpace of two monthes the perfecte knowledge of the ſame. Heare I will ſpeake nothing of the enuious, that thinkethe it not decent to wryte any liberall arte in the vulgar tongue, but woulde hauehave all thinges kept cloſe eyther in the Hebrewe, Greke, or Latyn tongues. I knowe what greate hurte hathe come to the Churche of God by the defence of this miſcheuous opiniō: yet I woulde aske them one thing that thou mayeſt knowe their deceiptfull policie, and that their ſaying hathe no grounde of veritie. Whether wrote Moyſes (the Hebrewe and deuyne) and after hym Eſdras in the Hebrewe and vulgar tongue or in ſome other ſtraunge tongue? Did Ariſtotle and Plato Greke Philoſophers, Hipocrates and Galen Greke Phiſitiōs, leaue the Greke tongue, becauſe it was their natiue language, to ſeke ſome Hebrewe or Latin? Did Cicero who was a Latiniſt borne write his Philoſophie and Rethoricke in the Greke tongue, or was he content with his mother tongue? and ſuerly as he teſtifiethe hym ſelf he had the perfecte knowledge of the Greke tongue, yet he wrothe nothing therin wich we hauehave extant at this daye. Shall we then thinke the Scottyſhe or Engliſhe tongue, it not fitt to wrote any arte into? no in dede. But peraduenture thou wylt ſaye that there is not Scottyſhe wordes for to declare and expreſſe all thinges contayned into liberall artes, truthe it is: neither was there Latin wordes to expreſſe all thinges writen in the Hebrewe and Greke tongues: But did Cicero for this cauſe write no philoſophie in Latin? thou will not ſaye ſo, leſt I take the with a manifeſtlye. What then did Cicero? he laborethe in the Latin tongue, as Ariſtotle before hym did in the Greke, and thou enuious felowe ought to do in thy mother tongue what ſo euer it be, to witte he amplified his natiue tongue, thinking no ſhame to borrowe from the Hebrucians and Grecians ſuche wordes as his mother tongue was indigent of. What, ſhall we thinke ſhame to borrowe eyther of the Latin or Greke, more then the learned Cicero did? or finde ſome fitt wordes in our owne tongue able to expreſſe our meaning as Ariſtotle did? ſhall we I ſaye be more vnkynde to our natiue tongue and countrey then was thieſe men to theirs? But thou wilt ſaye, our tongue is barbarous, and theirs is eloquent? I aunſwere thee as Anacharſis did to the Athenienſes, who called his Scithian tongue barbarous, yea ſayethe he, Anacharſis is barbarous amongeſt the Athenienſes, and ſo are the Athenienſes amongeſt the Scythyans, by the which aunſwere he ſignified that eueryevery mans tongue is eloquent ynoughe for hym ſelf, and that others in reſpecte of it is had as barbarous.
Thou ſeeſt (good Reader) what a grounde they hauehave to defende their opiniō, and howe they labour only to roote out all good knowledge & vertue, and plāte mere ignoraunce amongeſt the common people. Now for to conclude, it ſhalbe thy dutie to receiue this my litle paynes in a good parte, and to call vponupon God that the vſe therof, maye tende to the glorie of his holy name, and profitte of our bretherne.