Humanitext Reader

Aristotle · Prior Analytics §1.2.27#1

Definition of Enthymeme and Inferences from Signs in Three Figures

Passage 77 of 123 · Greek

Summary

This section defines the enthymeme as a syllogism consisting of probabilities or signs, explaining the distinction between the two. It then illustrates the three ways signs are taken corresponding to the three syllogistic figures, analyzing their respective validity and refutability.

§1.2.27#1Ἐνθύμημα δὲ ἐστὶ συλλογισμὸς ἐξ εἰκότων ἢ σημείων, εἰκὸς δὲ καὶ σημεῖον οὐ ταὐτόν ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν εἰκός ἐστι πρότασις ἔνδοξος·
An enthymeme is a syllogism from probabilities or signs. But a probability and a sign are not the same; rather, a probability is a reputable premise.
ὃ γὰρ ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ ἴσασιν οὕτω γινόμενον ἢ μὴ γινόμενον ἢ ὂν ἢ μὴ ὄν, τοῦτʼ ἐστὶν εἰκός, οἷον τὸ μισεῖν τοὺς φθονοῦντας ἢ τὸ φιλεῖν τοὺς ἐρωμένους.
For that which people know to happen or not to happen, or to be or not to be, for the most part, this is a probability, as for instance, hating those who envy, or loving those who are loved.
σημεῖον δὲ βούλεται εἶναι πρότασις ἀποδεικτικὴ ἢ ἀναγκαία ἢ ἔνδοξος· οὗ γὰρ ὄντος ἔστιν ἢ οὗ γενομένου πρότερον ἢ ὕστερον γέγονε τὸ πρᾶγμα, τοῦτο σημεῖόν ἐστι τοῦ γεγονέναι ἢ εἶναι.
On the other hand, a sign claims to be a demonstrative premise, either necessary or reputable; for that which, when it exists, the thing exists, or when it has happened before or after, the thing has happened, this is a sign of the thing having happened or being.
λαμβάνεται δὲ τὸ σημεῖον τριχῶς, ὁσαχῶς καὶ τὸ μέσον ἐν τοῖς σχήμασιν· ἢ γὰρ ὡς ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ ἢ ὡς ἐν τῷ μέσῳ ἢ ὡς ἐν τῷ τρίτῳ, οἷον τὸ μὲν δεῖξαι κύουσαν διὰ τὸ γάλα ἔχειν ἐκ τοῦ πρώτου σχήματος· μέσον γὰρ τὸ γάλα ἔχειν.
And a sign is taken in three ways, in as many ways as there is also the middle term in the figures; for it is either as in the first figure, or as in the middle, or as in the third. For example, to show that a woman is pregnant because she has milk is from the first figure; for having milk is the middle term.
ἐφʼ ᾦ τὸ Α κύειν, τὸ Β γάλα ἔχειν, γυνὴ ἐφʼ ᾧ Γ. τὸ δʼ ὅτι οἱ σοφοὶ σπουδαῖοι, Πιττακὸς γὰρ σπουδαῖος, διὰ τοῦ ἐσχάτου.
Let A be "being pregnant", B "having milk", and Γ "woman". On the other hand, "wise men are good, for Pittacus is good" is through the last figure.
ἐφʼ ᾧ Α τὸ σπουδαῖον, ἐφʼ ᾧ Β οἱ σοφοί, ἐφʼ Γ Πιττακός.
Let A be "good", B "wise men", and Γ "Pittacus".
ἀληθὲς δὴ καὶ τὸ Α καὶ τὸ Β τοῦ Γ κατηγορῆσαι· πλὴν τὸ μὲν οὐ λέγουσι διὰ τὸ εἰδέναι, τὸ δὲ λαμβάνουσιν.
It is true, then, to predicate both A and B of Γ; except that they do not state the one because it is known, but they assume the other.
τὸ δὲ κύειν, ὅτι ὠχρά, διὰ τοῦ μέσου σχήματος βούλεται εἶναι· ἐπεὶ γὰρ ἕπεται ταῖς κυούσαις τὸ ὠχρόν, ἀκολουθεῖ δὲ καὶ ταύτῃ, δεδεῖχθαι οἴονται ὅτι κύει.
And "being pregnant because she is pale" claims to be through the middle figure; for since paleness follows pregnant women, and it also accompanies this woman, they think it has been shown that she is pregnant.
τὸ ὠχρὸν ἐφʼ οὗ τὸ Α, τὸ κύειν ἐφʼ οὗ Β, γυνὴ ἐφʼ οὗ Γ. Ἐὰν μὲν οὖν ἡ μία λεχθῇ πρότασις, σημεῖον γίνεx ται μόνον, ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἡ ἑτέρα προσληφθῇ, συλλογισμός, οἷον ὅτι Πιττακὸς ἐλευθέριος· οἱ γὰρ φιλότιμοι ἐλευθέριοι, Πιττακὸς δὲ φιλότιμος. ἢ πάλιν ὅτι οἱ σοφοὶ ἀγαθοί Πιττακὸς γὰρ ἀγαθός, ἀλλὰ καὶ σοφός. οὕτω μὲν οὖν γίνονται συλλογισμοί, πλὴν ὁ μὲν διὰ τοῦ πρώτου σχήματος ἄλυτος, ἂν ἀληθὴς ᾖ (καθόλου γάρ ἐστιν), ὁ δὲ διὰ τοῦ ἐσχάτου λύσιμος, κἂν ἀληθὲς ᾖ τὸ συμπέρασμα, διὰ τὂ μὴ εἶναι καθόλου μηδὲ πρὸς τὸ πρᾶγμα τὸν συλλογισμόν· οὐ γὰρ εἰ Πιττακὸς σπουδαῖος, διὰ τοῦτο καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἀνάγκη σοφούς.
Let A be "pale", B "being pregnant", and Γ "woman". If, then, only one premise is stated, it becomes merely a sign, but if the other is also assumed, it becomes a syllogism, as for instance, "Pittacus is liberal; for those who love honor are liberal, and Pittacus loves honor." Or again, "wise men are good; for Pittacus is good, but also wise." In this way, then, syllogisms are formed, except that the one through the first figure is irrefutable if it is true (for it is universal), whereas the one through the last figure is refutable, even if the conclusion is true, because the syllogism is not universal nor directed to the thing; for it is not the case that if Pittacus is good, for this reason the others must also be wise.
ὁ δὲ διὰ τοῦ μέσου σχήματος ἀεὶ καὶ πάντως λύσιμος· οὐδέποτε γὰρ γίνεται συλλογισμός οὕτως ἐχόντων τῶν ὅρων· οὐ γὰρ εἰ ἡ κύουσα ὠχρά, ὠχρὰ δὲ καὶ ἥδε, κύειν ἀνάγκη ταύτην.
And the one through the middle figure is always and in every case refutable; for a syllogism never arises when the terms are so related; for it is not the case that if a pregnant woman is pale, and this woman is also pale, she must be pregnant.
ἀληθὲς μὲν οὖν ἐν ἅπασιν ὑπάρξει τοῖς σημείοις, διαφορὰς δʼ ἔχουσι τὰς εἰρημένας.
Thus, being true will belong to all signs, but they have the differences that have been mentioned.

Notes

  1. 3ὃ γὰρ ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ ἴσασιν οὕτω γινόμενον ἢ μὴ γινόμενον ἢ ὂν ἢ μὴ ὄν, τοῦτʼ ἐστὶν εἰκός — The relative pronoun ὅ introduces a relative clause with the following demonstrative τοῦτο as its antecedent, functioning practically as a subject noun clause. The adverbial phrase ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολὺ (for the most part) modifies the participles γινόμενον (happening) and ὄν (being), which serve as predicative participles denoting the object of knowledge for the main verb ἴσασιν (they know), rather than modifying the main verb itself.
  2. 15ἀληθὲς δὴ καὶ τὸ Α καὶ τὸ Β τοῦ Γ κατηγορῆσαι· πλὴν τὸ μὲν οὐ λέγουσι διὰ τὸ εἰδέναι, τὸ δὲ λαμβάνουσιν. — Identifying the referents of τὸ μὲν ... τὸ δὲ is crucial. Following the previous κατηγορῆσαι (to predicate), it is interpreted as: "they do not state the one (the premise that Γ is B, i.e., that Pittacus is wise) because it is already known, but they assume the other (the premise that Γ is A, i.e., that Pittacus is good)." The infinitive κατηγορῆσαι functions as the subject of the impersonal expression ἀληθές [ἐστι].
  3. p.112διὰ τὂ μὴ εἶναι καθόλου μηδὲ πρὸς τὸ πρᾶγμα τὸν συλλογισμόν — An accusative-with-infinitive construction governed by the preposition διά. The subject of the infinitive εἶναι is the accusative τὸν συλλογισμόν (the syllogism). The multiple negations with μή and μηδέ negate the entire infinitive phrase. The phrase πρὸς τὸ πρᾶγμα means "directed to the thing itself" or "relevant to the matter at hand," indicating that the deduction lacks universal necessity and merely touches upon a specific instance.
  4. 35οὐδέποτε γὰρ γίνεται συλλογισμός οὕτως ἐχόντων τῶν ὅρων — The phrase οὕτως ἐχόντων τῶν ὅρων is a genitive absolute construction expressing a condition ("when/if the terms are so related"). The intransitive use of ἔχω with an adverb (οὕτως) means "to be in a certain state." It explains the logical background that in the second figure (middle figure), with two affirmative premises (e.g., "pregnant women are pale" and "this woman is pale"), a valid syllogism can never be formed, since the second figure requires at least one negative premise to yield a conclusion.

Cite this passage

Aristotle, Prior Analytics §1.2.27#1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0086.tlg001.humanitext-grc2:1.2.27%231

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.