Abstract of Logic, Book 2 · Chapter 26
CHAP. XXVI. Of Sophiſms, or Fallacies in Word.
Ax. 1. SOphiſms, or Fallacies are either in Words or Things.
Ax. 2. Of thoſe which are conſiſting in Words, there are ſix Places, viz. Homonymy, Amphiboly, Compoſition, Diviſion, Proſody or Accent, with Figure of Speech.
Ax. 3. A Sophiſm of Homonymy is that which ariſes from the Ambiguity of one Word.
Ax. 4. This Sophiſm is ſolved by the Diſtinction of that doubtful Word.
1. §. Now in Syllogiſm there are three Terms: Wherefore a Fallacy of Homonymy may three ways happen; And firſt, when the Medium's ambiguous; As, the End of a Thing is its Good; Death is the End of Life: And therefore Death is the Good of it. This Fallacy's ſolv'd by a Diſtinction of the Word End. For End in the Major is taken for the Cauſe End; in the Minor, the Extremity of a Thing. Secondly, when the Subject is doubtful; As, Quantity is not a Subſtance; A Body a Quantity: And therefore a Body is not a Subſtance. This Fallacy is ſolv'd by the Diſtinction of Body: For in the Minor's underſtood a Body Mathematical; in the Concluſion, Phyſical. In the third Place we lay a Sophiſm of Homonymy, when the Predicate is ambiguous; As, That which is round has no Beginning nor End; The World is round; and therefore has no Beginning nor End: This Sophiſm is ſolved by diſtinguiſhing Beginning and End: For in the Major are underſtood Beginning and End of Magnitude; in the Concluſion, of Time, &c.
2. Hither may be referr'd thoſe captious Queſtions, Have you left off to commit Adultery? Have you found that you never loſt? &c. For whether you affirm or deny, you'll be catch'd by Homonymy. For if you ſay you have left off to commit Adultery, you confeſs that ſometimes you have committed it: becauſe we have ſometime done that which we ceaſe to do. But if you ſay you have not, the Sophiſter will reply then, you ſtill continue in it. In like manner, if you affirm you have that which you have not loſt, the Sophiſter'll reply that then you have Horns; becauſe you have not loſt them: And if the Contrary, you have not Eyes; becauſe you have not loſt them. Wherefore you are to ſay, that the Word not to leave off is Ambiguous: For when one is ſaid to leave off who has done any thing, and does it no longer, the Word not to leave off may be taken either for not to have done it; or for perſiſting ſtill to do it: And therefore he may be ſaid not to have left off both, who never did it, and who ſtill continues in it. Likewiſe any one may be ſaid not to have loſt, both that which he never had, as Horns; and that which he yet has as his Eyes: For he is ſaid to have loſt, who once had a thing, and now has it not, &c. See A. Gel. Lib. 16. Noct. At. C. 2.
Ax. 5. Sophiſm of Amphiboly's that which ariſes from the Ambiguous Senſe of a Speech whoſe particular Words have no Homonymy by themſelves.
Ax. 6. And this Sophiſm is ſolv'd by the Diſtinction of the Ambiguous Speech.
1. §. The Fallacy of Amphiboly is laid two Ways; Firſt, when the very Syntax of the Speech is Ambiguous; as, Quod quiſquam vidit, id ipſum vidit, that is, What any one ſees, that he would have it ſelf ſees. Some one ſees a Tree; and therefore the Tree it ſelf ſees. This Fallacy's ſolv'd by the Diſtinction of the Ambiguous Speech, viz. id ipſum vidit; For that it ſelf may be either of the Nominative Caſe, and then the Major'll be falſe; or the Accuſative, and then, indeed, the Major'll be true: But yet thence this Concluſion will not follow, viz. And therefore the Tree it ſelf ſees; Becauſe the Syllogiſm then would have four Terms. Of the ſame kind likewiſe is this Catch; Thoſe qui ſunt ſui Magiſtri; that is, are their own Maſters, are at their own Diſpoſe: Servants ſunt Magiſtri ſui; that is, are their own Maſters: And therefore Servants are at their own Dipoſe: For the Ambiguity in the Latin, is in the Words Magiſtri ſui, their Maſters; which in the Major, are of the Plural, and Minor of the Singular Number. The like Ambiguity's in theſe Enunciations, viz. Socrus oderunt Nurus; Aio te Aeacida Romanos vincere poſſe, &c.
2. A Fallacy of Amphiboly's then made when the very kind or Phraſe of the Speech begets Ambiguity or Uncertainty of Opinion: As, He that ſends a Book into the Light, would have it read of all Men: He that throws it into the Fire, ſends it into the Light; And therefore he that throws it into the Fire, would have it read of all Men. This Fallacy's ſolv'd by the Diſtinction of the Phraſe, ſending into the Light, which in the Major Propoſition ſignifies to Publiſh, in the Minor to burn. Such is the Caption of thoſe who would infer from hence the Invocation of the Dead; becauſe the Patriarch Jacob in bleſſing his Poſterity when ſpeaking of Joſeph's Children, amongſt the reſt, ſays thus, Gen. 48.16. And my Name ſhall be call'd upon theſe Children, and the Name of my Fathers, Abraham and Iſaac. For the calling of Jacob's Name upon the Children of Joſeph by an Hebrew Idiotiſm, is no more than the calling them Iſraelites from the Name of Jacob, &c.
Ax, 7. A Sophiſm of Compoſition is that which ariſes from a Compoſition of thoſe things which are to be divided.
Ax. 8. Of Diviſion, on the Contrary, from the Diviſion of thoſe things which are to be conjoyned.
Ax. 9. To be ſolved by a Diſtinction of the divers Senſes which a Speech has according to the different Compoſition or Diviſion of its Parts.
1. §. Many things when divided, are true, which joyn'd, are falſe; As, that One ſitting may ſtand; Many, on the other hand, true conjoyn'd, which are falſe divided; As, All Penitent Sinners ſhall be ſav'd. When the Argument runs from divided to conjoyn'd, there follows a Fallacy of the Compoſition; when from conjoyn'd to divided, of the Diviſion. Each of theſe Fallacies may be committed Eight Ways. Firſt, in Enunciations Modal; As, 'Tis poſſible for one ſitting, to ſtand. For if the Participle Sitting be joyn'd with the Verb Stand, the Enunciation is falſe, if joyn'd with the Mode Poſſible, true. For one ſitting, even while he ſits, has the Power or Faculty of ſtanding; but not of ſtanding as long as he ſits.
2. Secondly, In Enumerations, whoſe Parts are conjoyn'd or ſeparated by ſome Grammatical Conjunction; As, Every Animal either is Rational or Irrational: But not every Animal is Rational: And therefore every Animal Irrational. Here the Diviſion of the Major cauſes the Fallacy. For the Major's true, if taken conjoyntly, and as a ſimple Enunciation whoſe Attribute Rational or Irrational is taken, as, unum quid, or one ſomething. But if taken dividedly, and as an Enunciation Compoſed, in this Manner: Every Animal is Rational, or every Animal is Irrational; apparently falſe.
3. Thirdly, When in the Major the Note of Quantities taken Collectively or Diſtributively into the Genus's of the Singulars: It is ſo uſed as if it were taken Diſtributively into the Singulars of thoſe Genus's; As, All the Planets are Seven: The Sun and Moon are Planets; And therefore the Sun and Moon are Seven. This Fallacy conſiſts in the Word All, which if Collectively taken, the Major indeed will be true, but the Minor falſe. For this ought to have been the Minor; The Sun and Moon are all the Planets. If the Word All is taken Diſtributively, the Major will be falſe. Another; Every Animal was in Noah's Ark; Many Animals periſh'd in the Flood: Therefore many Animal, periſh'd in the Flood, were in Noah's Ark. This Fallacy alſo lies in the Word Every, which, if taken of the Singulars of the Genus's the Major will be falſe; if of the Genus's of the Singulars, the Minor. For none of the Genus's of thoſe Animals periſh'd which are ſaid to have been in Noah's Ark.
4. Fourthly, when any Word may be conjoyn'd either to the Antecedents or Conſequents; As, that of Menander, Te Servum feci liberum; that is, I made thee a Servant a Freeman; which may ſignifie, I brought thee into Servitude, who wer't free; or, I made thee, being a Servant, a Freeman; that is, Maumiſed thee, or ſet the free from Slavery.
5. Fifthly, When a Place is quoted out of any Author, and ſome Part of it concealed. With this Fallacy the Devil, Matth. 4. attempted to perſuade Chriſt, that he ſhould throw himſelf down from the Pinacles of the Temple, bringing in a Teſtimony from David, after this manner; It is written, ſays he, He ſhall give his Angels Charge concerning thee; and they ſhall bear thee in their Hands, leſt at any time thou daſh thy Foot againſt a Stones But it it is written, he ſhall give his Angels Charge concerning thee, to keep thee walking in all thy Ways: that is, following the Buſineſs of thy Calling, with both Hands ſhall they bear thee up that thou daſh not thy Foot againſt a Stone, Pſalm 92.
6. Sixthly, When a Word is now taken in a Divided; Now Conjoyned Senſe: As, Every Incuria or Neglect, is worthy to be blamed; The Senate is in Curiâ; that is, in Court: And therefore the Senate is worthy to be blamed. This Fallacy rather has Place in Speech than Writing.
7. Seventhly, When what's ſaid of the Parts is concluded of the Whole; or what of the Whole of the Parts; as Two and Three, are Even and Odd. Five are Two and Three: Five thertfore are even and odd. This is a Fallacy of Compoſition. Five are One Number; Two and Three are Five: Therefore Two and Three are One Number. This is of Diviſion.
8. Eightly, When thoſe things are conjoyned which are ſeverally predicated, or divided, which are joyntly: As, This Dog is a Father: This Dog is thine: And therefore this Dog is thy Father. This is a Fallacy of the Compoſition. Again, Mycillus is a good Shooemaker; And therefore Mycillus is a good Man. This is of Diviſion. This Fallacy alſo may be reduc'd to that of, from a Word ſimply to one ſecundum quid, or according to ſomething or its Contrary. For nothing hinders, but that ſeveral Cauſes of Fallacy may concur to the ſame Catch.
Ax. 10. The Sophiſm of Accident or Proſody, is that which riſes from the Way of Writing or Pronouncing any thing: Either differently writing thoſe things which are Pronounced after the ſame Manner, or differently pronouncing thoſe which are alike written.
Ax. 11. And this Sophiſm is ſolv'd either by ſhewing that thoſe things which are the ſame Manner pronounc'd are differently written or differently pronounc'd, which are in the ſame Manner written.
1. §. The Word Proſody or Accent, here is generally taken for every Variation of the Voice. The Captions of this Place are of two kinds, as appears from the Definitions propoſed. Of the Firſt, thoſe in which the Difference of Writings, diſſembled by a Similitude of Pronunciation. And that's done three manner of Ways. For either thoſe Words are pronounced after the ſame manner, which differ in Letters, or Aſpiration, or Notes of the Accents. For Example; Omnis Equus, every Equus, that is, Horſe, is a Beaſt: Every juſt Man is Aequus, that is, Righteous; Therefore every juſt Man is Beaſt. This Catch is in the Letter. Moreover, Every Ara, that is, Altar, is in the Temple; A Stable of Hogs is named Hara, that is, Sty; And therefore a Stable of Hogs is in the Temple. This conſiſts in the Aſpiration; for in the Greek the Words are written otherwiſe, both alike. Laſtly, If one confound the Verb amare, to love, with the Adverb of that Name, which ſignifies bitterly, the Caption ſhall be from the Note of the Accent. Theſe Captions were uſual after Aſpirations and Notes of Accents began to be written over their Words, But before theſe Captions belonged to the ſecond Genus.
2. Which are committed two manner of Ways: And firſt, when we take that in earneſt which is Ironically written: Or on the Contrary; As, If a Servant ſhould think himſelf commended by his angry Maſter, writing to him after this manner: Ha, Good Sir, You have taken Care very fairly. Or the like. Secondly, when Words which have their Antepenultima or laſt Syllable but one, long, ſhould be taken as if ſhort; As, if any one ſhould confound the Word Leporem, a Hare, with the Word Lepôrem, Facetiouſneſs, &c.
Ax. 12. Sophiſm from the Figure of Speech, is then, when from the Likeneſs of Words it is concluded, that they have the ſame Accidents or Signification.
Ax. 13. This is ſolved by ſhewing the Diverſity of Accidents or Signification in the Words alike.
1. §. As, If any one ſhould collect Poeta, a Poet, to be of the Feminine Gender; becauſe Nota is ſo; or Glycerium Neuter, becauſe Delirium: Or that Urere to burn, Verberare, to beat; Movere, to move, are Actions; And therefore Ardere, Vapulare muſt be ſo. Or that Ingratitnde ſignifies a Quality: And therefore ſo muſt Longitude, &c.
2. Hitherto belong the Sophiſms in which the Words are ill joyned with the Nouns, Pronouns or, Adverbs of Relation; What an one, How great, Who, What, When, Where, How many, How often, &c. As, What is bought in the Shambles that is ſet before you for Supper: Raw Meat is bought in the Shambles: And therefore raw Meat is ſet before you for Supper. Here the Fallacy lies in that, in the Minor. The Quality is taken with the Subſtance; Whereas the Word What does only relate to the Subſtance of the Thing, and not the Quality. See how many many Fingers again, an Infant has; ſo many has an Old Man. An Infant has ten little or ſmall Fingers: And therefore an Gld Man has ten little or ſmall Fingers. This Fallacy conſiſts in that in the Minor, the Continued Quantity's taken with the Diſcrete. Whereas the Word How many is referred only to the Diſcrete. Here alſo What I am, you are not: I am a Man: And therefore you are not. Here the Fallacy is in aſſuming the Species in the Minor; whereas What in the Major denotes no more than an Individual, &c.
And ſo we come to the ſecond ſort of Sophiſms, which we ſaid were in Things.