Logic - Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read
page 76 of 478 (15%)
page 76 of 478 (15%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
The words _Many_, _Most_, _Few_ are generally interpreted to mean
_Some_; but as _Most_ signifies that exceptions are known, and _Few_ that the exceptions are the more numerous, propositions thus predesignate are in fact exponibles, mounting to _Some are_ and _Some are not_. If to work with both forms be too cumbrous, so that we must choose one, apparently _Few are_ should be treated as _Some are not_. The scientific course to adopt with propositions predesignate by _Most_ or _Few_, is to collect statistics and determine the percentage; thus, _Few men are wise_--say 2 per cent. The Quantity of a proposition, then, is usually determined entirely by the quantity of the subject, whether _all_ or _some_. Still, the quantity of the predicate is often an important consideration; and though in ordinary usage the predicate is seldom predesignate, Logicians agree that in every Negative Proposition (see § 2) the predicate is 'distributed,' that is to say, is denied altogether of the subject, and that this is involved in the form of denial. To say _Some men are not brave_, is to declare that the quality for which men may be called brave is not found in any of the _Some men_ referred to: and to say _No men are proof against flattery_, cuts off the being 'proof against flattery' entirely from the list of human attributes. On the other hand, every Affirmative Proposition is regarded as having an undistributed predicate; that is to say, its predicate is not affirmed exclusively of the subject. _Some men are wise_ does not mean that 'wise' cannot be predicated of any other beings; it is equivalent to _Some men are wise_ (_whoever else may be_). And _All elephants are sagacious_ does not limit sagacity to elephants: regarding 'sagacious' as possibly denoting many animals of many species that exhibit the quality, this proposition is equivalent to '_All elephants are_ some _sagacious animals_.' The affirmative predication of a quality does not imply exclusive possession |
|