Skip to main content

Full text of "The Science of Logic"

See other formats

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http : //books . google . com/ 

[t^^-d. V ?u^i 




1>arvar^ College Xibrari? 



ANDREW Preston Peabody 



Caroline Eustis Peabody 








by Google 

/J ^r, -^2^:^.100 


(hj^^d. V ?fA^i 




1>arvart> (ToUege Xibrari? 



ANDREW Preston Peabody 


Caroline Eustis Peabody 




Digitized ^ 

-V ^^ft 

JU. ? #• ^^ «- ' V t!^: 


< -♦— > 


by Google 


by Google 




Jit he tvdsie Sarltdr ne indm diyd. 

REV. T. J. SCOTT, M. A., D.D. 


Second Editio^i 

All rights reserved* 



BiY, T. CsAYEK, Suj^erinkndenU 


Digitized by VjOOQIC 


'b7.:S"I» t>0 


by Google 


^ , Digitized by Google 





Sphere of Logic 
Certain mental states, 
1. — Attention, 
2. — Comparing, 
3. — Abstraction, 
4* — Generalization, 

Section 1. 

Simple Apprehension, ... 

Section 2. 

The Term, 
Simple or complex. 
Proper, singular, common, collective, 
Abstract and concrete. 
Absolute and relative, 
Univocal, equivocal, synonymous, 
Compatible and opposite, 











by Google 







A!ga'z kf chakd ba'tb^, 

1.— Dhyan, 
2. — Muqabala kama, 
3.— Quwat i tafriqi, 
4. — Qdwat i jiDsi, 
5. — Quwat i natiqa, 




Pahlf fasl. 

TaSAUWUR KE BATil^N MEN, ... ••• 

Ism EEBATi^NMBK, ... ••« 

1. — Mufrad ya Morakkab, ... ••• 

2.— Joziy^KuUi, 

3. — Bin-nisbatya bil^-nisbat,... 

4. — Muflhtaraky ([air-musbtarak, mutar^dif, 

5. — MotaDl^qiza, 

6. — Mutazadda, •.. •.. 





by Google 



Section 3. 

Genus and species. 
Extension and intention, 
Property and accident. 

Section 4. 

Eules for, 





Section 1. 

Formation and Division op Propositions, 
1. — Simple and compound propositions, ... 
2.— Affirmative and negative, 
3.— Universal and particular,... 
4.— Categorical and hypothetical, 

Matter op Propositions, ... 


Section 2. 
Distribution op Terms. 

Section 3. 
Conversion, .„ »., 

Section 4« 
Opposition, .., »., 


••• ... 

»M ... 90 

Digitized by LjOOQ IC 



BaTA'K AJNi^S AUR ANWA', WG., ..' 

Umfim o Khuafis, 



Chauthp fasl. 


Qaw^jd i Muarrif, 



Pahlf fasl. 

Bata'n qazpon ka*, 

... -67 

AQSA'M 1 QAZITA, ... ... ' 

... 59 

1. — Muf rad y& murakkab, ... 


2.— Mfijibayasaliba, 


3.— KuUiya y£ juziya, 


4.— Hamliya y|[ shartiya. 


Bata'n ma'ddb ka', ... 








• Chatjthf Fasl. 




J by Google 



Section 1. 


The Syllogism, ... ... ... ... 104 

Skction 2. 

Figure, ... ... ... ... 138 

Section 3. 

Mood, ... ... ... ... 158 

Reduction, ... ... ... ... 164 

Section 4. 

The Hypothetical Syllogism,... ... ... 174 

1.— Conjanctive, ... ... ... ... „ 

2.— Disjunctive, ... ... ... ... 182 

3.— The Dilemma,... ... ... ... 184 

Section 5. 

Other FORMS op argument :—... ... ... 192 

1. — The Enthymeme, ... ... ... „ 

2.— The Sorites, ... ... ... ... 196 


Section 1. 

Fallacies. ... ... ... ... 210 

First, Logical Fallacies. ... ... ... 212 

1. — Undistributed middle, ... ... .. 214 

2. — Illicit process of the major and minor term, ... 216 

3.— Negative premisses, ... ... ... 218 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 




Pahli' fasl. 

Dalfl tjl hujjat ke baya'n men, 


Zarb ee bata'n men, 
Khulf, ... 



Chauthf fasl. 


1. — Qiy& i ittisali, 
2. — Qijas i infisalf, 
3.— Qiyas murakkab shartiya, 

Panchwfn pasl. 

QiYA's I Bb-tartpb o Murakkab, 
1. — Qiy^ i mukhaflFaf, 
2. — Qiyas i musalsal, 









Pahlp fasl. 

Baya'n muga'lton ka', 

qism auwal, muga'lta i su'rf, .,. 

1. — Hadd i ausat juzf, 

2. — N^jaiz kulliyat akbar y^ asgar kf, 

3. — Muqaddamat i s^libe, 



by Google 


4.r-'AfiBrmatiTe conclasion from negative premisses 


aua vice versOy ... ••• 
5.^More than three terms in the argomenty 

• •* 

• •• 


Second, Non-Logical Fallacies. 

• •* 

• •* 


Fallacy in the premisses, 

1.— Petitio Principii, 

• •> 



2.— Arguing in a circle, 


• •• 


3.— NoD-causa pro causa, 




Fallacy in the conclusion^ 

1.— Argumentum ad hominem, 

• •• 



2.— Fallacy of shifting ground, 

• •• 

• •• 


S.—Fallacy of objections, 

• ••' 

• .* 


4.— Fallacy of proving only a part. 

• •* 

• •• 


Bales for the examination of arguments, 



Section 2. 

Of Certain Methods op Applying Logic,... 



1.— Induction, 

• •* 


2.— Deduction, 



3.— Reasoning by example. 



4.— Reasoning by analogy, . 

• •• 


5.— Reasoning a priori. 

• •• 


6.— Reasoning a posteriori, 

• •• 


7.— Reasoning a fortiori 

• •• 



• *• 



by Google 


4.— Natija i miijiba, muqaddam^t i salibos 

se aur bar^ksiske, 
5.— Ek qiyfe meg tin juzog se zij^da hon^, 


MvgfiUa muqaddamdt men. 

1.— Muqaddama aur natija ek hi hona, . . . 

2.— Daur i Tasalsul, 

3.— Wajh gair muwajjih, 
JUvg/Uta natije mm. 

1. — Mug^ta tamalluq-toez, 

2. — Mugalta tagaiy ur i mazmun, , . . 

3.— Mugfflta i^tir^Q k£, 

4.— Mngaltasubfiti juzi, 

Mugdlton ko zahir karne ke qawfijd, 


1.— Bay&i iatiqrS k, 

2.— Isti^iij k£, ... "] 

3.— Tamail k^; 

4. — Qarine k£, 

6 — JUat se m^lul sabit karn|[, 

6 — M^fil se illat slibit karn^, ..] 

7 — AdnS se $1^ ko siibit karna, .],' 











by Google 


by Google 


The study of Logic is most uaefal in tbe cnltivatioii 
and development of the mind; but the means of prose- 
cuting this study in the vernacular languages of India 
are very limited. Until recently, no works on logic could 
be found in the vernacular. A small tract recently pub- 
lished in Urdu called '' Ilm i Mantiq/' while good, is 
still too brief to give any clear knowledge of the subject. 
In Persian some small books on logic as the " Sugird" 
and '' Eulrd" are found, while a chapter or section of 
some other books as the ^^Daryde Latdfat^^ the '* Makh" 
zan-vl'Ulum^ treats on the subject of logic, but these 
are only accessible to good Persian scholars. Still 
farther beyond the reach of ordinary readers are the 
Arabic works on logic from which the Persian are taken, 
such as '' Bisdla Shamsiya" and the commentaries in 
Arabic on it, as the '' QutbiJ' Moreover the subject as 
treated is often not very comprehensible to the best 
of Arabic scholars. The few works found in Sanskrit of 
course are only available to scholars in that difficult 
language. Such being the state of this useful science in 
India, I have attempted to obviate the difficulties in 
the way of its study by preparing a work in Urdu in 
which the science of logic is treated at such length and 
so fully illustrated by figures and practical illustrations 
that any ordinary student, with proper effort, may master 
it and make it available in every-day life. 

The book is accompanied by the English, as some 
native friends acquainted with English requested that 
the work be issued in both languages. It was thought 
that this would greatly aid students of English in under- 


by Google 


by Google 


Ilm I Mantiq ka parhna zihn ki arastagi aur sanwame 
ke waste bahut mufid hai. Lekin is ilm ki kitdben Hin- 
dustani zubanon men bahut kam hain. Ek mukbtasar 
risala musamma ba " Ilm i Mantiq" hal men ba zuban 
i Urdu cbhapa hai. Agarchi wuh risdla achchha hai, 
magar phir bhi aise mukhtasar risdla se ihn i Mantiq ka 
hdl saf nahin khulta hai. Farsi men bhi do ek chhote 
chhote risale, maslan "Sugra/' "Kubra," hain. Chandbaten 
Mantiq ke bayan men "Darya i Latafat" aur " Makhzan- 
ul-Uliim" men likhi hain, magar in kitabon se sirf unhin 
loffon ko faida hai, jo Farsi jante hain, aur jab ki Farsi 
zuban men is ihn ka slkhnd mushkil hud, to Arabi zuban 
men ( jis se Farsi men tarjuma hua hai,) jaise risala i 
"Shamsiya" jis ki sharh " Qutbi" hai, sikhna, ^wam-un-nas 
ke waste bahut mushkil hai. Siwa is ke im kitabon se is 
ilm ka hal aksar Arabi taUb ul ilmon ke bhi samajh men 
achehhi tarah nahin dtd. Zuban i Sanskrit men chand 
kitaben is ilm ki pai jdti hain, magar wuh sirf unhin logon 
ke kam ki hain, jo us mushkil zuban men dakhl rakhte 
hain. Pas yih kaifiyat is ilm ki mulk i Btind men dekh- 
kar mere dil men ayd, ki un mushkilat ko jo is ihn ke hasil 
kamemen akar parti hain, dsan karun. Chundnchi isi lihaz 
se yih kitab ba zuban i Urdu jis men ilm i Mantiq kd bayan 

khub tawdlat ke sath Hkha hai, aur ja ba j& shaklon se 

subtit diya hai, aur misalen aisi sahl sahl hain, ki agar koi 

mubtadi taKb ul ilm bhi dil lagdke parhe, to is ilm ko hasil 

kar le, aur roz-marra ke wdste naf a uthdwe, tdlif ki. 

Koman-Urdu nuskhe ke sath Angrezi bhi hai. Baze 

Hindustani doston ne, jo Angrezi se waqif hain, yih kaha, 

ki Agar yih kitab donon zubanon men ho, to kya kahnd, 

Main ne bhi yih socha ki Angrezi talib ilmon ko Mantiq 


by Google 


standing the subject in this language also^ so that the 
book would thus answer a double purpose. 

Of the Urdu translation it may be remarked that it 
is not always strictly literal. Where the meaning could 
be better preserved the translation is free^ and some 
little change in arrangement has been made to suit the 
ierminology of logic in Urdu. 

Stilly as a rule^ the Urdu will be found to correspond 
closely with the English^ so that a good end may be 
subserved by retaining both in one volume. With the 
hope that this book may assist the student of logic to a 
better understanding of this useful science^ it is sent forth. 

Babbillt: ) T. J. SCOTT. 

December, 1870. ) 


by Google 

ke slkline me^ is zubaii se bari madad pahunchegi, aur do 
matlab basil bonge. 

Wazib bo, ki yib tarjuma bilkulllafzi nabin bai, jabdn 
jabSn acbcbbi tarab m^e nikalte bain, waban waise bi 
rabne diya bai, aur kabin kabin tartib ibarat ki is garaz se, 
ki istildbat Mantiq ki Urdu men be-mabdwara aur nd-zeba 
na malum bon, badal di bain. Magar pbir bbi yib qajda 
rakha bai, ki Urdu tarjuma bilkull Angrezi se mutabaqat 
rakhta bai, yaban tak ki donon fe) ek jfld men rakbne se 
faida nikalta bai. Garaz is ummed par, ki tulabd i ilm i 
Mantiq ko kbub mcidad pabuncbe, aur acbcbbi tarab is 
mufid ilm ko samjben, yib kitab jari ki jati bai. 

Shahr I BARELf : •^ T. J. SCOTT. 

Mdh i December, 1870. J 


by Google 


The first edition of this book was soon exhausted, 
and a second edition was called for, which has been long 
delayed for want of time to make some needed correc- 
tions and additions. The book could easily be made 
larger, by a more lengthy discussion of subjects, and 
fuller, by the introduction of many petty distinctions 
and divisions that perplex the memory without adding 
much to a knowledge of the real subject. ~But I have 
thought the book would be more generally useful not 
encumbered with unimportant matter. Ordinarily the 
mind works with more pleasure and power, the more 
simple and direct its machinery or the lines of thought 
over which it moves. 

As far as possible, I have conformed the terminology 
and mode of treatment to that in use among Arabic and 
Persian authors, but have not departed from what seem- 
ed a better method than theirs. Native scholars must 
not infer that this implies error, for the mode of treating 
the subject of logic even, is open to improvement like 
many other things. 

Bareilly, N.-W. p., ) T, J. SCOTT. 

May, 1879. j 


by Google 


Tab^l I AUWAL ki sab jilden bahut jald kharch ho gain 
aur do-bara chhapne ki zururat pari. Magar baz zururi 
islahat aur izaf dt ke liye qiUat i waqt ke mdni hone se 
chhapne men bahut waqfa hua. Mazamin ki bahs i tawil 
aur bahut si chhoti chhoti baton ke dakhil kame se hajm 
ifi kitab ka barh saktd thd. Lekin is se bUa husul kisi naf a 
muatadd-bih ke zihn ko zabt i mazamin men diqqat wdq^ 
hoti hai. Is waste gair zururi bayan ke dakhil kame se 
muhtariz hoke nafa e ^mTn ke laiq banana, mimasib jand. 
Kyunki saf wazih bayan par tabiat khub jamti hai. Hatt- 
al-imkdn main ne istildhdt aur tarz i bayan Arabi o Farsi 
musainnifin ke muwafiq ikhtiy^* kiyd hai. Lekin un ke 
tarz i bayan se jo tarz mujhe bihtar malum hua, use nahiii 
chhora. Hindustani Mantiqin is se yih na samjhen ki is 
men kuchh galati hai, kyunki is fann ke tarz i bayan men 
bhi bahuteri aur bdton ki tarah, taraqqi o tabdil ki gimjaish 


Mdh i May, 1879. J 


by Google 



1. — Logic is the Science and also*the Art of reason- 
ing. As a Science it has reference to the necessary laws 
of thought^ in accordance with which the mind acts 
in the production of thought^ and in conducting a 
correct argumentation in the search for truth. As an 
Art it has special reference to the practical rules laid 
down for conducting an argumentation ; for guarding 
against erroneous processes of reasoning and the drawing 
of false conclusions^ and^ in shorty for making the best 
practical use of a system of logic. 

2.— By some, logic is thought to be one method of 
reasoning. It is thought that there are other modes of 
reasoning besides logical reasoning. Logic is supposed 
to contain rules by which we can so reason as to con- 
found an opponent by forcing him into traps^nd snares, 
and secure victory even for error. Hence it is supposed 
to be chiefly useful in gaining victory in a dispute 
whether on the side of truth or error, and for making a 
display of smartness and learning through pride or for 
sport. This is a common mistake in India. All this is a 
misapprehension of the real nature and object of logic, 
which is not merely a method of reasoning, but is the 
only method of reasoning; that is, in the correct search 
for truth the mind acts in but one way or only by 
certain laws. A departure from these laws involves 


by Google 



1. — ^Mantiq ek aisd ilm aur fann hai, ki jis se aql 
danrdne aur dalil kame ka qdnun malum hotd hai. Istila- 
han, mantiq ko ilm us halat men kahenge, jab aql daurdne 
ya dalil kame ke klidss qanun ka bayan ho. Aur fann us 
halat men bolenge, jab tariqa e hujjat k& bayan ho, aur 
galati aur khata se mahfuz rahne ke tariqe muaiyan hon ; 
— ^yane hdsit kalam yih hai, ki fann qawaid i mantiq ke 
istiamal men lane ko kahte hain. 

2. — Baz admi guman karte hain, ki ^ql daurdne ke 
kal ek qawdnln hain, jin men se mantiq ek hai. We 
samajhte hain, ki mantiq ek aisa zarla hai, jis se mukhdtib 
ko pecMda baton men ddlkar jhuth ko bhi sach kar sakte 
hain. Chundnohi we khiydl karte hain, ki mubdhasa men 
khwdh sach par ya jhuth par g^b rahne, aur apne ibn aur 
zihdnat ke zahir kame ke liye khwah gurur ke taur par 
ho, ya tamaskhur ke taur par yih kar-dmad hai. Yih un 
ki galat f ahmi hai, aur aise logon ko mantiq ki asliyat aur 
garaz malum nahin. Aisa na samajhnd, ch^ye, ki man- 
tiq kai ek tariqon men se aql daurdne k& ek tariqa hai 
balki dar haqiqat sirf yihi ek tariqa hai, yane kisi mu^male 
ki asliyat o haqiqat ke kdmil daiyaft kame men zihn sirf 
ek hi taur par un qawaid i muqarrara ke bamtijib jo 


by Google 


error. It is the object of logic to elucidate these laws 
and furnish rules bj which a departure from them may 
be guarded against or detected in an argumentation. 

Thus arithmetic is a science, the processes of which 
are carried on by certain laws or rules. These must be 
substantially the same in every age and country and 
language. For instance, the rules for addition, sub- 
traction, multiplication, division, &c., must always be 
the same. Thus, logic is the science of reasoning, and 
if we reason correctly at all, we must reason by logic. 
We may reason correctly without having a knowledge 
of the rules of logic just as hundreds of persons doubt- 
less do. So one brought up in the society of those who 
speak correctly will perhaps speak and write correctly 
without knowing the rules of grammar. Yet it is well 
to have the modes of correct speaking and writing given 
in rules for the instruction of the ignorant and the cor- 
rection of those who do not speak and write correctly. 
In like manner the rules of logic are useful for guard- 
ing against mistakes. They teach ns how to detect bad 

3. — Some have mistaken the true nature and object 
.of logic and have imagined that it has a tendency to 
destroy belief in the existence of God and the truths of 
religion. They have supposed it to be a kind of art or 
trick by which any thing can be made true or false at 
the will of the logician, causing him in the end to lose 
all confidence in truth. All this is a great mistake ; for 
logic has a tendency to improve the mind and guard it 
against error and confirm it in truth. This will be made 
plainer in this book. 

4. — Logic is a very ancient science, and in ancient 
times is found only among two nations, the Greeks and 
Hindus. All other nations seem to have received the 


by Google 


Khudd ke bande hain, lartd hai; pas agar in qdnunon 
ke bamujib zibn na daure, to galati men par jatd hai. 

Asl garaz mantiq Id yih hai, ki wnh qawanin i mu- 
qarrara bakhubi zahir ho jawen, aur wuh qaide hasil hon, 
ki jin par agar lihaz rakha jae, to un qawanin mazkura ke 
bamujib aql danre, anr agar koi un qawdnin se alahidagi 
ikhtiyar kare, to un ki ru se us ki galati malum ho jae. 
Masfe,n, hisab ek jlm hai, jis ka istiamal chand muqarrar 
qaidon ke bamujib kiya jata hai. Aur zurur hai, la yih 
qaide hamesha har mulk aur har zuban men ek hi hon. 
Masai to maslan zurtir hai, ki qaide jama, tafriq, zarb, 
taqslm ke hamesha ek hi rahen. Ala hdzal qiyas mantiq aql 
daurane kd ilm hai, aur agar ham thik thik aql daurand yd 
Bochna chahen, to mantiq hi ke bamujib kamd hogd. Aisd 
bhi hai, ki aksar log durusti se sochte, mubdhisa karte, aur 
aql daurate hain, bd wujtid is amr ke, ki zard bhi ilm i 
mantiq ke qawdid se wdqif nahin bote, jaisd ki aksar hud 
kartd hai, ki baze ddmi durust likhnewdlon ki suhbat pdne 
se tMk likhte aur bolte hain, agarchi sarf o nahw se mutlaq 
bhi wdqif nahin bote. Magar bahar hdl yih bihtar hai, ki 
qawdid durust likhne aur bolne ke nd-wdqifon ki talim ke 
waste, aur un logon ke sudhdme ke wdste, jo ki sahih 
nahin likhte aur bolte hain, muaiyan hon. Isi tarah par 
qawdid i mantiq, khatd aur galati se mahfuz rakhne ke 
Uye, aur auron ki khardb o ndqis dalilon kd nuqs malum 
kame ke liye kdr-dmad hain. 

3. — Baze ddmi mantiq ke matlab o haqiqat se wdqif 
nahin hain, pas isi jihat se jdnte hain, ki mantiq ke sikhne 
se iatiqdd din par, aur Khudd ke wujud par qdim nahin 
rahtd. We khiydl karte hain, ki mantiq ek tarah kd 
hunar j& hikmat hai, jis ke zaria se mantiqi apni marzi 
ke muwdfiq har ek bdt ko jhuth j& saoh kar saktd hai, 
yahdn tak ki dkhir anjdm yih hotd hai, ki mantiqi kd 
iatiqdd sachchi bdt par qdim nahin rahtd ; yih galat f ahmi 
hai, kyunki mantiq se qtiwat i zihni barhti, aur aql sachdi 
par qdim ho jdti hai, aur khatd o galati se mahftiz rahti 

4. — ^Mantiq bahut purdnd ilm hai, aur qadim zamdnon 
men sirf do qaumon yane Tundnion aur Hinduon ke dar- 
miydn pdya jdtd thd, aux sab qaumon ne inhin se yih jlm 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


science from tbem. It is not certainly known whether 
the Greeks received it from the Hindus, or the Hindus 
from the Greeks. Some learned men have thought that 
the Greeks received their knowledge of logic from the 
Hindus, while others have thought not. Most probably 
each nation formed the science for itself and cultivated 
it to the degree in which it has been found. The Bom- 
ans received their knowledge of logic from the Greeks. 
European nations learned directly from the Greek of 
Aristotle and from Arabic translations of, and comment- 
aries on, Greek works. The Arabs also received their 
knowledge of logic from the Greeks, while the Jews 
learned from the Arabs. 

The first writer or teacher of logic among the 
Greeks, of whom we have any knowledge, was Zeno, 
who lived about 488, B. C. There were some good things 
in his logic with some things obscure and worthless. 
After Zeno, came Socrates, Euclid of Magera, Antis- 
thenes, Archytas, Plato, and Aristotle. Zeno and some 
of these writers cultivated a system of sophistical wrang- 
ling. Among them and their pupils logic seemed to be 
flimply a kind of recreation and diversion in which they 
occupied themselves for hours in trials of each other's 
acuteness. Socrates who lived 469, B. C, made a more 
worthy use of logic. He desired to see logic employed 
more for the investigation of truth and the cultivation of 
the intellect. He used in reasoning a system of questions 
and answers leading to a conclusion. Plato, the pupil 
of Socrates, improved the science of logic still further; 
but it remained for Aristotle, born 384, B. C, to bring 
the science to something like perfection, so that from 
his day to the present, logic, as taught in Europe, is 
substantially that of Aristotle. The works of Aristotle 
were translated into Arabic in the second century after 
Mahomed ; and thus logic as studied among the Musal- 


by Google 


liy4, Leldn yih tWk nahin malum hai, ki &y& Tundnion 
ne Hinduon se pay6, j& Hinduon ko Tundnion se mil6. 
B^ze yih gumdn karte hain, ki Tuninion ko jlm i mantiq 
Hinduon se mila, aur b^e is ke bar^ks kahte hain. Aglab 
hai, ki in donon qaumon ne alahida is ilm ko ijad My&. 
Tun&iion se Eumion ne sikhd. Ttirapwdlon ne yih ihn 
Arast&t£lis kl mantiq se aur niz us kf Arabi tanumon se 
pdyd. Yuninion se ahl i Arab ne bhi pdyd, phir un se 
Tah6dion ne h&^ kiyd. 

M^lum hota hai, ki Yun&nf on men sab se pahld musan- 
nif o muallim is Um ka Zino tha, jo Masih se 488 baras 
peshtar Yun£n men tha. Us ki kit&b men ohand bdten 
achchhi pdi jdti hain, aur muglaq aur naqis baten bhi hain. 
XJs ke bad Suqrat, aur Uqlaidas Magerdwdla, aur Antis- 
thenis, aur AAytds, aur Afldtun, aur Arastdtdlis jis ko 
Arastu bhi kahte hain, mashhur hue. Zino aur baz auron 
ne in men se ek tarah ki jhuthi aur pechddr taqrir ki rasm 
nik&ll. Malum hotd hai, ki un ke aur im ke sh&girdon ke 
darmiydn men yih kaifiyat rahl, ki mantiq sirf ek tarah 
kd khel aur tafrfli i taba samjhd ]&\& thd, jis men ghanton 

tak auqdt sarf karte the, is amr ke wfiste, ki dekhen kaun 
tez hai ; magar Suqrdt jo 469 baras peshtar San i fswi ke 
maujud tha, achchhi tarah mantiq ko istiamdl men Idyd, 
aur chdhta thd, ki har ek bat ki asliyat o haqiqat ke 
daryaft kame aur taraqqi i gnhn aur tahzlb i akhldq ke 
k&m awe. Us kd ek tariqa yih thd, ki mubdhasa men 
sawdl o jawab is taur se karta thd, ki jo natija wuh 
chdhtd thd, wuhi nikle. Afidtun shdgird i Suqrdt ne is 
ihn ko aur bhi darja i taraqqi par pahunchayd. Bad 
Afldtun ke Arastdtdlis ne jo San 384 peshtar Masih ke 
paida hua, is qadr mantiq ko takmll di, ki us waqt se dj 
tak koi kuchh bahut barhd na sakd. Pas wuh mantiq jo 
Yurap men parhdi jati hai, dar haqiqat ArastatdHs hi kf 
hai. Arastat&lis ki yih tasnff dt dusri sadi i Muhammadiya 
men Arabi men tarjuma ki gain; chunanchi mantiq jo 
Musahn&non ke dars men hai; wuh bhi Arastdtdlis ki hai. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


mans also is that of Aristotle. The logical works of the 
Musalmans are chiefly in Arabic, with some. translations 
in Persian ; hence they are not available to the great 
mass of readers. 

The fault of these books is that they are not 
sufficiently plain and comprehensible for the student. 
The subject is left vague and impracticable. It is hoped 
that this book may make it plainer and more available 
in every-day life to the student of this useful science. 


by Google 


Magar chunki yih kitaben aksar Arabi aur kuchh kuchli 
Farsi men bM bain, is sabab se awamm logon ke kar-amad 
nahin bain. 

In kitabon men bara nuqs yib hai, ki wub aisi saf 
nahin bain, ki bar koi samajb le, aur aisa parda bai, ki 
bawujud parbne ke ilm i mantiq acbcbbi tarab kam men 
nahin ata. Magar mujb ko nmmed bai, ki nazirin ko is 
kitab ke dekbne se bai i mantiq kbulega, aur sikbnewale 
acbcbbi tarab is se faida ntbawenge. 


by Google 



* The Sphere of Logic — Some Definitions of 
Psycological Terms^ 

l.-»Logic deals with the laws of mind in thinking 
and reasoning. The mind is that spiritual non-material 
existence within us which feels, perceives, and reasons. 
The body is merely its tenement. The mind gains 
knowledge of the material world in a mysterious way by 
means of the five senses, viz,, of sight, hearing, feeling, 
taste, and smell. 

The mind, like a mirror, receives images or impres- 
sions through these senses. This figure illustrates the 
receptive phase of mind. Besides these ideas or notions 
obtained through the five senses, other ideas, as of God 
and of the soul itself, of moral quality, &c., may be 
awakened in the soul. Intuition, consciousness, original 
suggestion may be mentioned as sources of ideas. The 
discussion of this subject belongs to the science of 
psycology rather than to the science of logic. The 
mind is possessed of various powers, some of which 
will be briefly discussed in this book. 


by Google 



Mantiq hi murdd aur chand istildhdt dar-hdh i zihn. 

1. — Ilm I Mantiq zilm se ildqa raMitd hai, al-alkhusus 
halat Boclme, aur mubahsisa kame men. Zihn wnh ruhani 
gair-mdddi shai hamare jism men hai, jo Boohtd hai, aur 
jis se har ek chlz aiir Mt m^urn hoti hai. Badan jo hai, 
sirf us kl ja e snkunat hai. Zihn, mahsusdt yane, ^am 
i jismdni ko aise taur par, jo ba(d-ul-aql hai, ba zaria 
hawdss i khamsake, malum kartd hai; aur haw^ikhamsa 
yih hain, bdsira, (yane dekhnew^ quwat,) sdmiq, (yane, 
Bimnewali quwat,) Idmisa, (yane, chhunewdH quwat,) zdiqay 
(yane, chakhnewaK quwat,) ahdmmay (yane sunghnewali 

Zdhn misl dine ke hai, jis par ^ ban j&td hai. Agar 
wuh aks ba zarfa hawass i khamsa ke ban j^we, to us ko 
rnahausy aur agar ^Mwa in hawasson ke kisi aur tarah par, 
zihn men tasauwur ban jdwe, to us ko mqqul bolenge, 
maslan !^uda k&, j& riih k&, yd neki wg. kd tasauwur 
sdhn men paida ho. Ta^qqul aur Idrdk aise tasauwurat k& 
mamba hai. Yih bahs Hm i Zihn ke muta^q hai. {hn 
i Mantiq se use chanddn ta^lluqilahin hai. Jdnnd chdhiye, • 
ki zihn men kai tarah ki quwaten pdf jdti hain, ehundnohi 
baz k& zikr is kitdb men dwega. 


by Google 


2.— Logic is concerned with three acts or states of 
the mind, m : (1) simple apprehension; (2) judgment; 
(3) reasoning or argument. 

3. — Simple apprehension, or cognition as it is some- 
times called, is that act or state of mind by which we 
are made aware of the existence of an object of thought. 
For example, through perception by the sense of sight, 
we are made aware of the existence of a tree or stone. 
The state of the mind by which it receives the impres- 
sion of these objects is called '^simple apprehension." 
Such also is the act of mind by which we grasp the idea 
of justice, love, Sfc, The result of an act of apprehen- 
sion is expressed by such words as idea, notion, concept, 
percept, &c. 

4. — Judgment is the mental act in which we compare 
two or more notions or ideas gained by simple apprehen- 
sion and pronounce that they agree or disagree. Thus, 
by the sense of sight we get an idea of the existence of 
a tree, and by the same sense we get the idea of color. 
Now, the act of mind by which these two ideas are com- 
pared, so that we may say ^^ the tree is green,'^ or '' the 
tree is not green,'^ is an act of judgment. 

Again, by the sense of sight we get the notion of 
the existence of a stone, and by the sense of touch we 
get the notion of coldness or warmth in it, and, having 
these two notions or ideas, the judgment is that act of 
mind by which we pronounce that '^the stone is coW 
or "the stone is warm,^' or 'Hhe stone is not cold" or 
"the stone is not warm." These conclusions, when 
expressed in words, are c?i\\edi propositions . 

5. — Reasoning is that act or process of the mind 
by which, from two or more judgments formed, we 
pass to another or others founded upon or drawn from 
them. For instance. 


by Google 


2. — Ilm i Mantiq tin amron se taalluq klidss rakhta 
hai, yane, tasautmr^ axq: tasdtq, aur dalil, jise burhdn aur 
kujjat bhi kalite hain. 

3. — Jabkisl shai ke wujud yamaliiyat ka khiyal pahli 
pahl zihn men ba zaxia hawasfe i khamsa ke, ya kisi aur 
tarah se guzre, ais ko tasauwur kahte hain.* Maslan, koi 
darakbt ya patthar ho, jis ke wujud ka kbiyal ba zarla 
hawass i bdsira, yane, dekhne se zihii men ata hai, pas us hi 
patthar, ya darakht ke khiyal ko tasauwur kahte hain. Isi 
tarah imdf^ muhahhat wg. ke khiyal ko tasauwur kahenge. 

4. — Ilm i Mantiq men dtisra amr ta^dxq hai. Agar 
zihn men aise do tasauwur hon, jin ke bieh men nisbat-i- 
isbat ya nafi ki dl jawe, ilm i mantiq men us hukm ko 
tasdiq kahte hain. Maslan ba zaria hawdss i basira ke, ek 
to yih tasauwur zihn men aya, ki yih darakht maujud hai, 
diisre ba zaria usi hawass ke, us ke rang ka tasauwur aya ; 
pas do tasauwur hue. Ab wuh hukm, jo un do tasauwuron 
ke bieh men hai, tasdiq kahlata hai, khwah wuh isbat ke 
sath ho, ya nafi ke sath ho ; jaisa ki yih " darakht sabz 
hai" ya " yih sabz nahin hai." 

Dusri misal yih hai, ba zaria hawass i basira ke ek 
patthar ka tasauwur aya, aur ba zaria hawass i lamisa ke, 
yane, chhune se, sardi ya garmi ka tasauwur zihn men 
guzra. Ab un donon tasauwuron ke darmiyan men, hukm 
jo hai, us ko tasdiq kahte hain, khwah wuh isbat ho ya 
nafi ho. Tasdiq bil-isbat ki misdl, jaisa ki " yih patthar 
thandha hai ya garm hai." Tasdiq bil-nafi ki misal, jaisa 
ki " yih patthar thandha naMn hai, ya garm nahin hai." 

Jab tasdiq likhi jae ya boli jae, tab use qaziya kahte 
hain. Pas tasdiq aur qaziya men sirf itna farq hai, ki tas- 
diq sirf zihn men thi, aur qaziya jab zuban par aya. 

5. — Tisrd amr ilm i mantiq men dalU hai, jis ko 
^^kujjaf^ aur ^'hurhdn^^ bhi kahte hain. Dalll us ko 
kahte hain, ki do ya kai tasdiqat i maluma se majhiil 
ko nikdlen. Pas dalil tasdiqat se banti hai. 

Maslan do tasdiqat hain, 

* Lafz "mafhum" bhi istiamdl men Hi hai. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


'* All iron is heavy " — ^is 2^ judgment, 

" This staff is iron"-— is a BmxnH judgment 

From these two we may draw a third judgment 
or coBcIusion, viz., " therefore this staflf is heavy." The 
act of the mind by which these two judgments are 
compared, and the third deduced from them, is called 

Another example of this operation is-— 

All men are mortal ; 

Zaid Amar and Bakr are men ; 

Therefore Zaid Amar and Bakr are mortal. 

Here also we have in this process the third state of 
the mind with which logic is concerned, viz.^ reasoning. 

6. — This book is divided into three parts, in which 
these three mental states or processes are treated in order. 
It is the law of thought concerned in them which consti- 
tutes the subject of logic. 

Meanwhile there are a few mental states that may 
be explained here. By them the materials of thought 
are collected. 

l.'-^AUention is the directing of the mind to an 
object. It may be a voluntary state of the mind. 
Thus, we may fix our attention on some object of sight, 
or sound, or on the matter of a page we may be reading. 

2. — Oomparing is the act of the mind in which it 
contemplates two or more things with reference to 
one another. Thus, when we observe that iron is 
heavier than wood, or that John is taller than James, 
or that one man is more learned than another, we per- 
form an act of comparing. The conclusion we reach 
from an act of comparing is a "judgment.'' The cor- 
rectness of every judgment and process of reasoning 
depends on the accuracy of comparison. 


by Google 


PahH.—K\x\l loh^ bhiri hot4 ha i. 
Diisri, — Yih danda lohe k^ hai. 

Ab in do malum tasdiqon se tisrd majhul nikalta hai, 

H yih danda bhdri hai. Pas ba zaria do tasdiqon m^luma 

ke, tisri tasdiq yane natlja niMla. Dalil is hi ko kahte 


Diisri misdh — ^Kull ins^n mamew^de hain ; 
Zaid, Amr, Bakr ins^n hain ; 
Pas Zaid, Amr, Bakr, marnewale hain. 

Chimdnohi is tartfb se aql yd zihn daurane ko hujjat 
kahte hain. 

6. — ^Tih kitdb tin hisson par munqasim hai, jin men 
tasauwur aur tasdiq am* dalil ka mufassal baydn hogd. 
J&sm& oh^ye, ki maqsud Um i mantiq ka ns aqli q&nun 
kd baydn hai, jo in tin b&ton men payd jata hai. 

Mundsib hai ki yahdn par chand zihni h&ldt am' qti- 
waton kd bayan kiyd jae. 

1. — Bhydn yd gaur us ko kahte hain, jab zihn khauz 
o fikr ke sdth' kiid ohfz ya bdt par lage ; masal to maslan, 
kisf chlz par, jo dekhne men dwe, ya dwaz par jo sunne 
men dwe, yd kisi kitabi mudmile par parhte waqt ham 
apnd dhydn lagdwen yd gaur karen. 

2. — Muqdbala kamd us zihni hdlat ko kahte hain, 
jis se ham do yd ziydda chlzon ko ek dusri se muqdbala 
karen. Pas jab ham dekhte hain, ki lohd lakri se bhdri 
hai, Zaid Amr se lambd hai, yd Zaid Amr se ziydda ^ilim 
hai, isi ko " muqdbala kamd'^ kahte hain. Tahdn par gaur 
kamd chdhiye, ki muqdbala kame se tasdiqdt nikalti hain. 
Har ek tasdiq aur hujjat ki sihhat o galati muqdbale par 
munhasar hai ; aur agar muqdbala kame men kisi tarah 
galati par jdwe, to tasdiq aur hujjat men bhi galati ho jdegi- 


by Google 


3. — Abstraction is that act or state of the mind in 
which it considers one or more of the properties or 
circumstances of an object to the exclusion of the rest.- 
Thus, it is by abstraction tlfcit we think of the shape of 
a piece of iron to the exclusion of its color and hardness 
and weight and odor; or when we think of its hardness 
to the exclusion of all its other properties. The impor- 
tance of this power of the mind will be seen when we 
come to treat of terms. 

4. — Oeneralization ia that process of the mind by 
which we select the common properties of different 
objects^ and on account of their agreement in these 
common properties call them by a common name. Thus, 
the process by which, notwithstanding differences and 
variations, certain flowers on account of common proper- 
ties are grouped under the name rose, is an act of general- 
ization. Again, notwithstanding great differences of 
language, color, stature, &c., by observing certain marked 
points of resemblance we are able to group the human 
race under the term man. It is by this power of mind 
in connection with the power of abstraction that we are 
enabled to form common terms which stand for classes, 
genera and species, the importance of which to logic will 
be seen hereafter. All the operations or states of the 
mind just described are more or less connected with 
the study and understanding of logic. 

5. — This may be as good a place as any for some 
remarks on language, Man is gifted by the Creator with 
the faculty of speech by which he can express in sound 
all the varied operations, notions, and thoughts of his 
mind. Man alone has the faculty of speech. Mere animals 


by Google 


3. — ^Ek aur quwat zilm men hai, jise qnwat i tafriqi 
kalma achchha hoga. Tih wuM quwat hai, ki jab ham 
chahen to kisl cMz ki anr sab khassiyaton ko chhorkar, 
us ki ek khdssiyat par lihdz karen. Maslan, jab ham 
chahen, to isi quwat se lohe'ki aur sab sifatei), yane, rang 
aur sakhti, aur wazn, aur bu wag. ko chhorkar sirf us ki ek 
fiifat, yane, shakl par lihaz rakh sakte hain. Ya aldwa aur 
sab khassiyaton ke, sirf us ki sakhti ya tcazn par lihaz 
rakhen. Is quwat i zihni ka bara fdida age malum hoga. 

4. — ^Ek aur quwat zihn men hai, jise qnwat ijins kahnS 
achchha hoga. Yih wuh quwat hai, jis ke zaria se ham ba 
lihaz ^TTiTn khassiyaton ke, jo mukhtalif chizon men pai 
jati hon, ek nam im ke waste muqarrar kar sakte hain. 
M8i8lan,bawujudekitarah tarah ke phul hain, magar chunki 
bazon men ek khassiyat pai jati hai, is sabab se un mutafar- 
riq phtilon ko gulfb kahte hain. Aur isi tarah bdwujtide 
ki ddmion men mukhtalif boli, aur rang, aur qadd o qamat 
wag. hai, magar ba lihaz Amm khassiyat ke, sab ke wdste 
ek hi ndm, yane, insdn rakhte hain. Pas yih wuhi quwat 
ijinst hai. Gaur kama chdhiye, ki quwat i jinsi se ba 
madad qt'twat i tafriqa ke, jins aur nau aur fasl band sakte 
hain. Is bat ko achchhi tarah samajhnd, ilm i mantiq men 
nihayat pur-zarur hai, jaisa age malum hogd. Hasil yih 
hai, ki in sab baton ma^ura i bala ke samajhne se is ilm 
ke sikhne aur samajh men kuchh na kuchh madad zurur 
pahunchti hai. 

6. — ^Boli yane quwat i ndtiqa ke kuchh bay&i ke wdste 
yahdn par achchha mauq^ malum hota hai. Khaliq ne 
insdn ko quwat i nutq aisi atd ki hai, jis se ba zaria dwdz, 
jis se kalam bantd hai, tarah tarah ke tasauwurdt, aur 
khiydldt, aur apni zihni hdlaten, jo guzarti rahti hain, 
zdhir kar saktd hai. Sirf insdn hi men yih quwat hai. 
Haiwdn bhi apni taklifdt, aur khauf, aur gussa, aur khushi 
wg. ek tarah ki dwdz se zdhir kar sakte nain ; magar \m 
men wuh quwat nahin, jis se alfdz bandwen aur kaldm ka- 
ren, lekin hazdron alfdz, yd dwdzen, insdn tarah tarah par 
isti^undl men Id saktd hai, tdki be-shumdr khiydldt ko, jo 
dil men guzarte rahte hain, zdhir karen. 

Alfdz^ mufrad, y& murakkab dwdzen hain, jo insdn ke 
josh aur khiydldt ke izhdr ke liye bole jdte hain. 


by Google 


are capable of uttering certain sounds indicative of fear, 
anger, pain, &c., but they have no faculty of speech by 
which they are capable of using a language. But man 
can develop and employ thousands of words or articulate 
sounds, connected in innumerable ways, to express the 
multiplied thoughts that continually pass through his 

Words are the simple or compound sounds uttered 
for the expression of feeling or thought. 


by Google 


Baldlat i alfdz do qism ki hai, wazqi aur iltizdmt. Waz^i 
wuh hai, ki jis laiz ko w&z^ ne kisi m^ne ke w&ste waza 
kiya hai, us par wuh lafz dalalat kare. Yih bM do tarah 
par hai, kjrunki jis lafz ko vr&z^ He kisi m^ne ke w&ste 
waza kiya hai, agar wuh lafz kiill m^ne mausd lalxi& par 
dalaiat karta hai, to us dal^at ko dal^at i mutdbiqi ka- 
henge. Jaise lafz ^ins&n' kd, ki dal41at kare ^haiw&ni 
natiq' par. Aur agaa* juz i m^ne matizd labia par dal&Iat 
kare, to dal^at tazammuni kabenge. Jaise lafs ins&n kfi, 
ki daldlat kare baiwan y& natiq par. Btiz&mi wob bai, 
ki dalalat lafz ki mane mauzil labi& par na bo, balki aise 
mane par, jo us lafz ko l&dm bon, jaise lafs fiber k&, ki 
daklat kare bab&dur par^ y& NaiU9berw6n kd ddil par, ya 
Sbaitan ka i^i^ par. 


by Google 



L^^-^We take up for more enlarged treatment tlie act 
or state of mind called simple apprehension. Simple appre- 
hension is the act of the mind by which some notion or 
conception of an object of thought is obtained. As of a 
man when seen, of a sound when heard^ of hardness, 
coldness, &o., when felt. Thus^ through the five senses 
we gain ideas of the external world. In a similar ele- 
mentary manner by what is called internal perception 
or apprehension, or the '^ internal sense/' we grasp ideas 
relating to the soul itself, to moral truth^ &c. By simple 
apprehension we gather the elements of knowledge and 
of thought, which are woven into trains of reflection 
and reasoning. 

2.— Apprehension may be of an object as incomplex 
or complex. The result of an act of apprehension is 
incomplex when the notion formed is simply of one ob- 
ject, or of several without any connection being perceived 
between them ; as man, tree, stone, bravery ; and com- 
plex when, the notion we form of two or more objects 
is a combination, as a man on horseback, a hook on the 
table, a brave man. 

The idea, notion 6r conception gained by apprehen- 
sion expressed in language is called, a term which will 
now be briefly discussed. 


by Google 

Tasaxjwur ke bayXn men. 

1. — Ab tasautmr ka mufassal baydn hotd hel. Kisi 
sliai ya bat ke khiy&l ko tasauwur kahte bain, jaisa 
ki kisi ddmi ka kbiyal jab dekhne men 6we, j& ki^i 
ohlz ki sakbti ya tbanddpan kd, jab chbune men &we. 
Jaise haw&s i kbamsa se mabsusdt kd tasauwur botd 
haiy isi tarah idr^ i batin, j& taaqqul, yd hiss i bdtim 
se rub aur neki wg. ka tasauwur zibn men pahuncbtd 
bai. Tasauwur kame se wub maltimat, aur kbiydldt basil 
liote bain, jo nazar o babs ke silsile se wabasta bote bain. 

2. — Tasauwur yd to mufrad bogd, yd murakkab, 
Tasauwur i mufrad use kabte bain, jab ki ek cbla yd 
kaf cbizon kd kbiydl alabida alabida bild ildqa ke dwe, 
maslan, ddmi, pattbar, babdduri. Tasauwur i murakkab use 
kahte bain, jab do yd ziydda cbizon kd kbiydl dil men 
guzre : masal to maslan, tasauwur ghore par sawdr kd. Gaur 
kamd cbdhiye, ki is tasauwur men gbore aur sawdr ke 
darmiydn ildqa bai. Dusri misdl, mezpar ki Utah aur ddwdt, 
yd hahddur ddmi. Yabdn tin cbizon kd tasauwur ildqa ke 
sdtb bai, aur isi ko tasauwur i murakkab kabte bain. Ydd 
rakbnd cbdbiye, ki jab tasauwur zubdn se sddir bo, to us 
ko laf z kabenge. 


by Google 


Of the Term. 

A term is the result of an act of apprehension ex- 
pressed in language. For instance^ if we have bj the 
sense of sight, the apprehension of a tree, the word tree 
hj which we express the conception formed is a '^ term.'* 
Again, if we have in mind the idea of sweetness^ the 
word iweetneas when u«ed to express this notion is a 
'' term/^ In logic a term has the broad signification 
of any combination of words expressing an idea and 
which stand as the subject or predicate of a proposition. 
There are several divisions of terms which we must notice. 

!.»— Terms are simple or complex, A simple term 
1^3 opposed to complex is the name of a single thing and 
is generally one word, as James, tree, sweetness. A 
complex term is a compound word or phrase expressing 
a complex notion gained by act of apprehension, as 
'^ James the fisherman,'' a '^ tall tree,'' the *' sweetness 
of an orange." ^^ James the fisherman" contains the 
complex idea of a particular man and a certain craft. 
Here we also have two ideas connected in a complex 
term, tall tree. Again, the two ideas, sweetness and 
orange give the complex term sweetness of an orange. 

Words are said to be eategoreniatic when they can be 
used alone as terms, as tree, orange, man, &c. Words that can 
not be thus used alone but are used in connection with other 
words are called syncategorematic. Such are prepositions, 
conjunctions, adverbs, the inflected cases of nouns, e. g., to, 
witn, and, tnily, man's, &c. It must be marked that this 
is a division of words merely as such, not of terms. 


by Google 

FASL n. 

i^ f 

* Iqm ke mufassal bayan men^ 

Jab ki tasauwur zuban se sadir ho, us ko lafz kalite 
hain. Masai to maslan, dekhne se kisi darakht ki hayat 
ka tasauwur Eihn men dwe, laf Jb darakht, jis se us tasauwur 
ko iahir kiya, malfuz kahte hain. DusrI misdl, farz karo, 
H agar tihn men tasauwur mithds kd dwe, to us ki nisbat 
laf« mithas bolenge. Wdzih ho, kila&kai taqsimpar 
munqasim hai jis kd baydn dge dwegd. 

1. — ^Lafz mufrad hotd hai ya murakkab. Jab kisi 
tasauwur ke zdhir kome ko ek hi lafz kifi 'ho, y gne ek hi laf ;t 
us tasauwur par dal^at kare,'to uslafz 'ko mufrad kahte 
haiQ, maslan, Zaidy darakhty mithds. Lafs murakkab^ us 
murakkab lafz ya fiqre ko kahte hain, jis ae ek tasauwur i 
murakkab zahir hotd hai, jais& Zaid machhud, linehd darakht, 
ndrangi ki mithds, wg. Yahdn par do tasauwur lafz murak- 
kab se zdhir hue, yane ek kh&ss shakhs aur us k& pesha. 
Phir, tinchd aur darakhty m donon tasauwuron ke zdhir 
kame ko lafz i murakkab 'dnchd darakht bold gftyd. Dfisri 
misdl mithas, aur ndrangi, in donon tasauwuron ke zdhir 
kame ko lafz i murakkab, y^e mithi ndrangi bold gayd. 

Jdnnd chdhiye, ki lafz tamdm aur nd-tamdm hotd hai. 
Lafz tamdm wuh hai, jo bild madad dtisre ke, apne mane 
batldwe, jaise insan, Zaid, darakht, wg. Lafz nd-tamdm 
wuh hai, jo bild madad kisi aur leSz ke, apne mane na 
batldwe. Maslan harf, kdy se, men, a0, wg. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


2. — Another division of terms is into Proper^ singular, 
and common,* The Proper term is a word or phrase 
used as the particular name of an individual^ person^ 
place, or thing, as John, Calcutta, Kanchinginga. Here 
we have Proper terms which are the name of a parti- 
cular person, of a particular city, and of a particular 
mountain — not names common to every man, city, 
and mountain. 

A singular term, strictly applies like a proper term, 
to only one object in its present use, otherwise it is a 
common term, e.g,, my dog, your horse, are singular 
terms, but dog and horse are common terms. 

A common term is a word or name that can be used 
for all the individuals of a particular class or collection 
of persons, places, or things^ as man, city, mountain. 
Here the common terms, man, city, mountain can be 
used for any and every man, city and mountain. The 
use of common terms will be seen further on in the 
study of Logic. The individuals for which a common 
term stands are called its *' Significates/^ 

A common term that expresses a group or multi- 
tude of objects, as army, people, senate, committee is also 
called a collective term. The pollective term is singular, 
and can only be applied to the group as a whole, and. 
not to the individuals. We cannot speak of each soldier 
as the army. 

2af. — Terms again are divided into abstract and 
concrete. An abstract term is a word used to express 
a quality or thing without referring toany particular object ; 
thus the words hardness, wisdom, folly, are abstract terms, 
when we speak of them without connecting them with 
any particular object, as '^ we should seek after wisdom.'' 

* The oommoQ term is aloo called general and universal, 
t Left out of the Urdu. 


by Google 


2.— Lafa ya Juzt ya kulH hogL Lafe juzi us ko kahte 
hain, jo Mffl khass sliakhs j& mufrad shai ko batl&we, jai8& 
Zaid, Kalkatta, darakht. Jab khass n^mon se murdd hai^ 
to is ko istildh i naliwion men ism i marif a^ ya alam kahte 

Lafz i kuUi us ko kahte hain, jo bahirt si chizoQ, 
ya ashkhas par bola jawe, jaisa imdn, sab ddmion ke waste 
sddiq dtd hai, j& lafz shahr, ki sab shahron par bola jat^ 
hai, ya lafz dart/d, ki sab darydon ke waste mustamal hai. 
Nahw men is ko ism i nakra j& ism i dmm bolte hain. 
Jitni shai ^j& ashkhas lafz kulli men dakhil hain, un ko us 
ke afrdd kahte hain. Eulliat ka istiamdl aurmufassal 
bayan &ge &wega. Jo kulH kisi jamdat ya guroh kd n&m 
ho, jaise fauj, log, jamaat, majlis, use ismi jins kahtb 
hain. Ism i jins wahid hotd hai, lekin us i& istismiil 
majmua i afr&d ke waste dta hai, har fard ke liye nahfn 
&t&. Maslan sipdhion ki jamaat k& ndm fauj hai, har 
sip&hl ko fauj nahin kah sakte hain. 


by Google 


Bui if iLese words become connected with some ob^ 
,5ect in which they exist, they are called concrete terms, 
asi}he hardness of this stone, the ivtsdom of John, the 
fdl!/ of James. In this connection these words become 
"concrete terms/* 

3. — Terms are also divided into absolute and rela- 
tive. An absolute term is a word denoting some object 
or quality considered without any reference to its rela- 
tion with any thing else, as tree, man, river, sweetness, 
>risdom, &c. 

A relative term is a word in which its relation to 
.something else is expressed, as, father, husband, son, 
king. Thus, a father implies a child to whom he is 
related, son implies a father, and king implies a conn« 
try and subjects to whom he is related. 

4.— -Terms are unimcal, equivocal and synonymoits. 

A univocal term is one which has invariably the same 
signification, as, mankind, wisdom, &c. 

An equivocal term is one that may be employed in 
different senses, as, head, door, shore, &c. 

Synonymous terms are different words having the 
same meaning, as, house and dwelling, remain and 
abide, &c. 

h.^'Oontradictory terms are those which are so com- 
pletely opposed to each other that the two include every 
thing, so that there is no object to which one or the 
other does not apply ; and if any object be included in 
one it is thereby necessarily excluded from the other, 
and viceversd. Thus, corporeal and incorporeal, perishable 
and imperishable, combatant and noncombatant. These 
terms differ from each other only in respectively wanting 
and having a particle of negation expressed or implied. In 
this way a twofold division may be made of every thing. 
Such a division is often important in a course of 


by Google 


3, — ^Lafz ya to bin-nishat y& bild-niabat hota liai, Lafe 
biiv-niabat wuh hai, jis ka aur kisi la£z ke 6&th il&qa p&ya 
jawe. Maslan, bap, bet^, kh&wind, bddsh^. Ghun&nolii 
bap se malum hotd. hai, ki koi beti hai, bete se bdp ka 
ilaqa paya jatd hai; badshah se nisbat mulk aur r^iyat ki 
taraf nai, al6-hdz-al-qiyds. 

Lafz Mld-nishat wuh hai, jo bagair nisbat dusre ke ek 
shakhs, yd shai, yd khdssiyat ko batldwe. Maslan, insdn^ 
da^d, ddndi, wg. 

4. — ^Phix li3z tin anr tarah par hai, y^ne mmhtarakj anx 
gjair-mmhtarakj jis ko b^ze mufrad bhi boHe hai^,* aur 
mutarddtf. Mufrad us ko kahte hain, jis se sirf ek M 
m^ne samjhe jdweQ, Inaslan^ insdn, d^dl, wg. 

Mushtarak us ko kahte hain, jo kai m^e par shamil 
ho ; maslan, bukhdr, kandra, wg. Bukhdr se do mane pae 
jdte hain, ek to bfmdrl kd ndm, aur ek wuh jo pdnf se uthtd 
hai. Ald-hdz-al-qiyds kandra do chdr mane par dtd hai. 
Yd lafz billi kd lo, ki ek jdnwar par, aur kiwdr men jo hoti 
hai, us par bhi bold jdtd hai. 

Mufarddifwa ko kahte hain, jaha^kikai alfdzekM 
mane par daldlat karte hain, maslan, ghar, khdna, maskan, 
ek hi mane par hain. Aur rahnd, basnd, sukunat kamd, 
in sab se ek hi mane zdhir bote hain. 

5. — ^Wuh alfaz mutandqiza hain, jo bilkull ek dusre se 
mukhdlifat rakhte hain, aur jitni chizen khilqat nien mau- 
jud hain, in donon me^^ se ek men sarnr hongi. Agfor ek 
men hain to dusre men nahin, aur agar dusre men haiQ, to 
pahle men nahln, yane koi chiz in donon se khdli ncJiin. 
Maslan, jismdni aur gjair-jumdni^ fdni aur gair-fdm^ 
mametodld aur na marnewdld. Gaur kamd ohdhiye, ki in 
lafzon ke darmiydn sirf nafi aur isbdt kd farq hai. Fas 
jitni chizen khHqat meQ haio is taur se do taqsim par ho 
fiakti hain. Aisl taqsim aksar kisi amr ki justoju, yd 

* Tih mufrad ba iatiblr lafz ke mane ke hai. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

54- THE TERAt. 

reasoning or investigation. For instance, this disease 
is or is not consumption. Then it is or is not another 
disease. Then it is or is not some other disease, 
and thus (by the ''abscission infinite^' as it is called) 
the field of investigation can be narrowed till some 
result is reached. 

6. — Contrary terms are opposed in a diflTerent manner 
from contradictory terms, for although both can not be 
applied to the same object, there may be objects to 
which neither will apply, and thus they do not include 
every thing as do contradictory terms. Wise and foolish 
learned and ignorant are contrary termjg, and while both 
can not be applied to the same object, there are objects 
to which neither can be applied. Thus, a stone is neither 
wise nor foolish, and some men may be neither learned 
Bor ignorant, but mediocres. Contrary terms, then, are 
those which, coming under the same class^ are the most 
widely difierent of all that belong to that class, 
6a*. — Terms may be compatible or opposite. 
Two terms which can be applied to an object at the 
same time are compatible^ as, ijuhite and cold^ hard and 
sweet. It is plain that a thing may be both white and 
cold, as snow, or both hard and sweet, as crystal candy. 
Compatible terms are also called '' consistent.^' 

When two terms can not be applied to an object at 
the same time, they are opposite, as blach and white, good 
and had. Nothing can be white and black at the same 
time, and no man can be good and bad at the same time. 
Opposite and contrary terms are the same. 

These are the divisions of terms ordinarily given and 
iare sufficient for the purposes of logic. It should be 
borne in mind that the same term may come under 
different divisions according to the view we take of it. 

* Left out of the Urdu. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


muMhise ke liye bare k&m ki hai. Madaa yih hixn&A 
tap i sill ki hai, j& aur bimarion men se koi hai. Mogar 
fulini foMni wajh se tap i sill nahfn hai, to atir jo bfm&ridn 
'lahin, un ki taraf mutawajjih bonge, aur kahenge kiin 
blm^on men se ful4ni bim&ri hai yd nahln, magar kid 
sabab se ful^i bim&ri nahin ; pas rahin b^l bimari&n. 
Qaraz ytin taqsim aur daiydft karte karte us hadd tak 
pahunoh^nge, ki asl bim&ri mil j^gl. Is ko mdbd^i-ul* 
khuln bhi bolte bain. 

6. — ^Alfdz mutazddda wuh bain, jo Spas men mukh&« 
lifat rakhte bain, lekin mutandqiza ki tarah nabin kyunki 
agarobi donon ek bi obiz men sb&mil nabin bo sakte bain 
tau bbi bazi cbizen aisi boti bain, ki in donon se kb&li 
boti bain: pas misl mutandqiza ki bar sbai men sb&mil 
nabin bote bain. Maslan qqlmand aur be-trnqii/y dlim^ aur 
kanhilniy ism i mutaz&dda bain, kytinki ek bi sbakbs par 
donon s&diq nabin & sakte bain, magar aisi obizen bon, 
ki donon se kbdli hon, maslan pattbar, na qqlmand bai 
na be-wuquf , aur baz &dmi aise bain, ki na $lim na kam- 
ilm, lekin darja e ausat men bon. 

Yibi istildbdt alf dz ke w&ste, Ibu i Mantiq men aksar 
mustamal bain. 

W&zib bo, ki ek bi lafz bil^nisbat, aur mufrad, aur 
mutan&qiza wg. botd bai, jis i^tib^ se ki us waqt kbiy&l 
bo. Yfid rakbnd cb&biye, ki dalU ji mubdbasa mei;i 

d by Google 

Digitized fc 



^kas^ the same torm my be singular^ concrete, absolate 
«nd umvocal at the same time. The term may thus 
belong to several divisions. The meaning of terms 
shMld always be understood and fixed in a process of 

'Simple, or complex. 

Proper, singular, or common. 

Abstract, or concrete. 
Tmns ftuty he ' Univoc^l, equivocal, and synonymous. 


^Compatible, or opposite. 


by Google 


auwal har ek lafz ke mane khtib samajlma aur thahrana 
chahiye, kyunki aisa kame se bahut si taqrlr aur galation 
men parne se bachenge. 

Lafz ka mujmal bayan. 

f Mufrad yl^ Murakkab. 
I Juzi ya Kulii. 

^^'^ ^ Mushtarak yU Gair-mushtarak yi Mutaridif. 
I Mutanaqixa. 
[ Mutazadda. 


by Google 

Classification as belated to genus, species, and 


Another important subject connected with terms 
and necessary to a proper understanding of logic is that 
of species, genus, and differentia. 

1.— Common te^-ms obtained by generalization afford 
the means of classification of objects with reference to 
some common and distinguishing characteristic. A col- 
lection containing objects arranged in this manner is 
called a species or genus. Genus is the more extensive 
term, often including many species, while species in- 
cludes individuals. Genus is a group of groups, or a 
class of classes. For instance the term animal is a 
genus including every thing having life and the power of 
voluntary motion. In this genus we have many species 
included as, man, beast, bird, &c. Any species may be 
divided into several classes, then it becomes a genus 
with reference to this new classification. 

Thus, above, '^east,'' according to a common use 
of this word, is a species including all warm blooded 
quadrupeds, but these may be divided into horses, sheep, 
dogs, &c. 

These then become species, and the term ''beast'' 
which in the first classification was a species, becomes a 
genus. Again, if we divide horses into different kinds, 
as Arabian horses, mountain horses, &c., horse itself 
becomes thus a genus, and so on. The more extensive 
class is the genus, the more limited one is the species. 
The genus when included in a higher classification be- 


by Google 



1. — Wazih ho, hi Jim j aur naUy aur arz ka bayan alfaz 
ke mutaaUiq hai, aur mantiq ke samajhne ke waste pur- 
zarur hai. Alfaz i Kulli se jins aur nau wg. bande jdte 
hain. Maslan jab kai ohlzon ke wdste, balihaz ek ya ziydda 
ififaton ke ek n&n muqarrar kiya j&we, us ko Jim, aur nau 
kahte hain. 

Nau ki banisbat jins ke aMd ziyMa bote hain, kyun- 
ki ek jins men kai nau bote hain. Masai to maslan, haiwdn 
ek jins hai, jis men jitni chizen jdndar o mutaharrik bil- 
irdda hain sh&mil hain. Aur is jins men kai nau sh&mil 
hain, jaise imdn a.\iT chaupde awe parand vrg. 

J&nn& ch&hiye, ki nau bhi kai faslon par taqsim ho 
sakti hai; phir is h41 men, balihdz im faslon ke wuh ek 
jins hai. Mqdan chaupaya ek nau hai, jis men char 
tangw^e janwar d&khil hain, aur inhin ko fasl fasl par 
b4nt sakte hain, maslan, ghore, bheren, kutte wg., pas 
yih sab faslen nau ho jdti hain, aur in ki banisbat wuh 
lafz chaupdya, jo ki nau thd, ab jins hua. 

Phir agar ghore ki taraf khiydl karo, yih bhi kai tarah 
par ho sakta hai, jaisa Arabi, KabuK, Turki, wg., pas, ab 
is surat men ghord bhi ba-iatibar in qismon ke jins hua 
aur ala-hfiz-al-qiyds. 


by Google 


Gun us. Specibs. 

i De{>i MaD^ro. 
Bombay Mar^ 
* Malda Mango. 

Mango, < Bombay Maogo. 

2. — (Jenus and species are thus classified with re- 
gard to each other : the classes which lie above any 
classj that is, which embrace a wider extension are 
called, with regard to it superior, while the classes below 
it, I. e., included within it are called inferior. The 
highest class is called the summum genus or highest 
genus, the lowest class is called the lowest species. All 
between the highest genus and the lowest species are 
called subaltern genera or species. The genus next 
above any species is called its proximate genus — any 
genus above that, a remote genus of that species. The 
species into which a genus is divided are called co-ordi' 
nate or cognate species, meaning that they are not sub- 
ordinate to, or included in one another. 
Thus we have, 

f Superior class. 

I iDferior class. 

I Highest geuus. 
««»«.♦ J Lowest specie.. 

I Subaltern genera or speciea. 

I Proximate genus. 
Remote genus. 
(^Co-ordinate or cognate speciea. 

The meaning of these words should be well fixed in the 
memory. An illustration may aid in understanding them. 

J Arabian. 

(Beast 12?''' (Turkish. 

\ n;.A ) Sheep. 

Ammal. < Reptile. ' ^^S' 

( Pish. 

* ** Class" is here used as a general name for genus, species, groups, &c. 

d by Google 

Digitized fc 


JiNS. Anwa'. 

Amm, I BambaL 

( Malda. 

2. — ^Wazih ho, ki jo jins kisi jins ke upar ho, us ko 
jim i did kahte hain, aur jo kisi ke niche ho, jins % 
adnd kahte hain, aur jo sah ke upar hai, us ko jim ul ajnds 
aur jo sab se niche hai, us ko nau i mfil kahte hain. Jitni 
jinsen /ww ul ajnds ietur jins i sdfil ke danniyan hain, unko 
ajnds i mutawassitd kahte hain. Jo jins ki ek jins ke ain 
upar hOy jins i qarib kahte hain, aur jo jins ki jins i qarib 
ke ain upar ho, us ko pahll jins ki banisbat/ens i laid kahte 
hain. Jitne anw$, ki mataht ek jins ke ddkhil hain, tm 
ko bar&bar ki kahte hain. 

Pas ajnas aur anw^ ki aqs&n yih hain : — 

J ul ain 
• ] Safil. 


! Adna. 


j^Tatt [ Na? i Safil. 

• ( Anw$ i mutasawiiu 

In kd matlab bakhubi zihn-nishin kamd chdhiye. Ek 
mis^ se ziy&da sdf hogd. 

( ArabLf 

( Qhore I Kibul . 

i Chaupae I Bheyeg. ( Turkf, wg, 

^«-^»- MaehhW ^^"''"'*- 

( Eire Makore. 


by Google 


Here in reference to the class horse, beast is superior 
while Arabian is inferior. Of this classification, animal 
is the highest genus, and Arabian, &c.| are the lowest 
species. Beast and horse, because between these^ are 
called Subaltern, Beast is the ]M'oximate genus of horse, 
and animal a remote genus. Again horse, cow, sheep 
and dog are co-ordinate or cognate species. The etudent 
may note that " bird,*' and the other words may in like 
manner be divided into genera or species. 

3, — Correct classification depends on another subject 
which is called differentia. The differentia of a class is 
its distinguishing charactei'istic or attribute which separates 
a from other classes of the same group or genus. One or 
more attributes or marks may be fixed upon as the 
differentia or differentiae. Thus, if animal be the genus 
including several species of animated beings, one of 
which is man, '^speAking*' might be fixed on as the 
differentia, and man as a species of animal would be a 
speaking animal. Bird is another species of animal 
having feathers and wings. Feathers and wings would thus . 
distinguish bird from other species of animal and be- 
come the differentiae. Bird is then a feathered winged 
animal. The species as may be seen is really made up of 
the genus and the differentia. 

4,'^Property and accident are terms used to denote 
something joined to a species or to individuals of it, 
but not included in its essence, or that quality or charac- 
ter which is fixed upon and constitutes the species. 

A property is something joined necessarily and uni- 
versally to the species, that is, belonging to all the 
individuals of it. The property may be peculiar as be- 
longing only to that species, or not peculiar, as belong- 
ing also to some other species. Thus breathing and the 
habit of walking erect are properties of the species man. 
They belong necessarily and universally to man, but not 


by Google 


Ab is men ghore ki banisbat chaupae jins i $la, aur 
Arabi adna hai. Aur taqsim i mazktira men baiwan jins 
111 ajnas aur Arabi Kabuli wg. nau i safil bain. Chaupae 
aur ghore, chunki jins ul ajnas aur nau i sdfil ke danniyan 
hain, jins i ausat bain. Chaupd<e, ghore ki jins qarfb hai, 
aur baiwan us ke jins i baid, aur ghore, bberen, kutte, 
barabar Id jinsen hain, waise hi chaupde, parand, machhlian, 
aur kire makore hain. 

Taqsim ajnas aur anw^ ki durusti ke sath khass karke 
ek hi bat par munhasar hai, yane/as/ par. 

3. — Fasl wuh ha%jo ekjim ko us ke mushdriknt yqne aur 
jins yd tiau se juda kar de. .Fasl men ek ya ziyada sifaten 
tamiz ke liye muqarrar bain. Maslan, baiwan agar 
jins qarar diya jde, jis men kai ek qism ke jandar shamil 

hail}, jin men ek insdn samjho, to is surat men quwat i 
ndtiqa us ki ek fasl hai, jis ke sabab se haiwanon men insau 
to " haiwan i natiq" kahte hain. AU-haza haiwanon ki, 
parand bhi ek jins hai, jis ke par aur hdzu hain, aur in 
paron aur b^zuon ki jihat se parandon ko aur haiwanon se 
tamiz htii, pas isi nazar se un ko fasl kahte hain, aur im 
janddron ko, jin men yih bat hai, parand bolte hain. Agar 
khiyal karen, to malum hota hai, ki nau, jins aur fasl se 
banti hai. Mateal to maslan haiwan ek jins hai, bakhiydl jan 
ke, aur us ke niche parand ek nau hai, is khiyal se, kiuske 
par hain : pas saf malum hai, ki nau i parand do khiyal 
jins aur fasl se bani hai, yane us nau men jan hai, aur 
par hain. 

4. — Arz ke baydn men, — Arz us ko kahte hain, jo 
jauhar yane zat se kharij ho. Maslan dam lend aur bolnd 
insan ki zat se kharij hai, yane insdniyat in par mauquf 
nabin, pas wuh arzi bua. Jab koi sifat yd kbdssiyat kisi 
nau men pai jdwe, lekin us ki zat y^ne mahiyat se kharij 
hai, pas agar ek nau ke afrad men, khwah kuU afrad men, 


by Google 


to tbat which constitutes the species man< Of these^ 
breathing is not peculiar, because other species of 
animals, as horses, dogs, &c., breathe, but walking erect 
is peculiar, because belonging only to the species man. 
An accident is something joined contingently or ac- 
cidentally to a species or only to certain individuals of 
it, as Hindus are darh-shinned, James is walking^ James 
was 6o»r» in Calcutta. Here '^ walking" and "bom in 
Calcutta'' are accident^ of James, because not necessarily 
a part of James, for he might be lying down or he 
might have been born in any other city. Hindus are 
not of necessity dark-skinned. Accidents are separable 
or inseparable, i, e., they can be separated from the in- 
dividuals or they cannot be thus separated. In the 
above example "walking'' is a separable accident, 
because it may be separated from James, so that he may 
be standing, or sitting, or lying down. But "born ia 
Calcutta," is an inseparable accident, because what thus 
happened can not now be detached from James. 

p^^^^,,, (Peculiar, 
i^ro/^^-^y. I Not peculiar. 

Accident. { f^^^p^J^^^^^^^ 

5. — The five terms we have discussed, t. e., genus, 
species, differentia, property and accident, are sometimes 
called the "five predicables" or the "five heads of 
predicables," because in a proposition they express a 
certain relation of predicate to subject. Thus when 
the predicate is a common term related to the subject 
as a larger to a smaller group, it is a genus, as " man is 
an animal." Here animal is a genus. When the predic- 
ate is a common term related to the subject as a group 
to an individual, it is a species^ as "James is a man." 
When to the common term used as a predicate some 
distinguishing or differencing attribute or characteristic 


by Google 


j& b^z men p^ jawe, to ns ko khdssa kahte hain, aur ek 
nau se ziy&da men pd,i jdwe, to ns ko arz i dmm kahte hain. 
Maslan khdss shdn se khard hoke ohalna ki sirf insin ke 
afr&d men pdjd jatd hai, khdssa hai ; lekin dam lend siwde 
ins&n ke anr anwd men bhf pdyd jdtd htd, is liye qrz i dmm 

Agar wuh sif at y& kh&ssiyat nan kl aMd se judd na 
ho sakoy ns ko qrz % Idzim, anr agar jndd ho sake, ns ko qrz 
i mufdriq kahte hain. Mis&l pahle kl, Zaid Ealkatta men 
paidd h6d. "Paidd hond Kalkatte men'' Zaid se jnd4 
ho nahln saktd. Ald-hdzil-qiyds dam lend anr khare hoke 
chalnd. Misal diisri, arz i mufdriq kl, jaisd Zaid ehaltd 
hai, yih knchh zarur nahln, ki Zaid hamesha ehaltd rahe, 
kynnkL kabhl letdho, ydbaithdho. Arz kl taqslm zail 
men hai : — 


5. — Jins anr nan aur fasl aur arz i $mm anr khdssa in 
ko pdnch kuUi kahte hain. Yih knlllen mahmdl hone kl 
haisijrat rakhtl hain, kydnki qazdyd men mahmnl kd taalluq 
maozd se zdhir kartl hain. Pas agar kisl qaziye men kol 
dmm kulll mahmnl wdqi ho aur mauzti khdss kulll ho, to 
wuh $mm kulll Jins hoti hai. Maslan " insdn haiwdn hai.'* 
Yahdn haiwdn jins hai. Aur jab kisl qaziye men kol dmm 
kulll mahmul ho aur us kd mauzil ek f ard ho, to wuh kulK 
nau hotl hai. Jaise " Zaid insdn had." Jab kisl dmm kulli 
se, ki mahmul wdqi ho, kol sif at mumalyaza yd judd kame- 
wdK khdssiyat lagdl jdwe jis se mauzti ko tamdm ajnds yd 
anwd mashmtilae miahm^ se tamlz ho jdwe, to mahm^ 


by Google 


is added whicli distingaishes or differentiates tbe subject 
from all other classes or species included in the'predicate, 
the differentiating part of the predicate is called differ" 
entia as ^' man is a moral animal/' Here the word 
'^ moral" differentiates man from other animals. When 
the predicate or some part of it^ necessarily accompanies 
the subject, but does not belong to its essence or mate- 
rial part or that character which has been fixed upon 
to mark it as a species or class^ the predicate is tiien a 
property, as '' man is omnivorous/' When the predicate 
or some part of it belongs only contingently or aedden- 
tally to the subject it is called an aeeideni, as " James is 
walking/^ *^ James was born in Calcutta/' 


by Google 


U ill* i muhhasab fasl hotd hai, jaise "inoto ^'H^ 
jAndfc" liai. YaMn "zi-^qV' kd lafz ma&a ko aur j&iddron 
86 makhsfis kartd hai. Jabmahm61 y4 us U koi juz mauzu 
ko lizim hai, lekin ub ki zdt se kMrij hai, to xnahmtil qrz 
hot4 hai, madan ins&n hama-khor hai. 

Jab mahm61 y& us k& koi juz mauzd se ittifiql ta^uq 
TakhU hai, to mahmfll khdssa hota hai, jaise " Zaid ohalta 
liai" j& " Zaid Kalkatte men paidd hua." 

6 — KulKon ki nisbat, Arabi mantiqin ki rde ch4r 
teah ki hai, "tas^wi," " tabdyrin," " ymum o khusus i mut- 
laq," " um6m o khus6smin-wa]hin." Do kullion meo iasdtvi 
ki nisbat us waqt hoti hai ki donon ke misddq donon ke 
afrddekhon. Maslan "ins&n" aur "dinishmand jfind&r." 
! Tabdpun use kahte hain ki do kullion ke misddq donon 
ke afrfid alahida alahida hon ; jaise patthar aur darakht. 
Umum o khmAs mutlaq wuh hai ki ek kulli ^ton ho, aur 
dusri khiss; jahdn khdss kulli s6diq de aur jo ohiz khto 
kulli ki f ard ho ^nun kulli bhi us par sddiq ^, aur wuh 
I cMz us imm kuUi ki bhi fard ho ; magar is kd ^ks nahin. 
Ikbulan " jdnddr " aur " insdn." UrnUm o khu^usmin-wajhin 
nse kahte hain ki ek kulli dusri kulli ki nisbat ek haisiyat 
»e khdss aur d6sri haisiyat se $mm ho, maslan jdnd&r aur 


by Google 



Another subject connected with terms and thci 
subject of classification, and hence necessary to be 
understood in a system of logic, is definition. 

1, — Definition means giving the marks or char 
racteristics of an object or class of objects so that it 
dr they may be recognized by these marks. Definitiori 
itself has been defined "laying down a boundary.^' 
When applied to terms, then, it means describing then 
in such a manner as to distinguish them from othor 
tern?^,.' Sometimes simply a word well understood is 
used for the word defined, e.g. an anthrop(^hag%ts ista. 
cannibal. In reasoning, true and settled definitions of 
terms are very important from the fact that different 
persons employ them with different meanings, thus 
causing confusion and error. 

2. — liOgicians usually divide what is called a logical 
definition into two parts which are called the genus and 
differentia. The definition is made by uniting the genus 
to the differentia. Thus we may define man to be " an 
animal gifted with speech." Here animal is the genus 
united to " gifted with speech,^' the differentia by which 
man is distinguished from other animals, as horse, bird, 
&c. Again, the Bombay mango is a mango which came 
originally from Bombay, Here mango is the genus, and 
Bombay, the differentia distinguishing this mango from 


by Google 



1. — Mmrrif ]is6 " qaul i sharih " bhi kahte hain, is 
ka bay&n, <5hunki mutaalliq alf az ke hai, anr is lihaz se 
jins nau £asl„wg. se ilaqa rakhta hai, is sabab se us ka 
janna ilm i Mantiq men bahut znrur hai. Muamf ki^i 
lafz ke hadd ban(Ume ko kahte hain. Eisala i Shamsia 
men is ki tarif yiin hai : — 

" Muaxrif shai ka wuh hai, ki jab use pahehdn len, to 
wuh ahai pahchan men a jawe, yd us shai ko uske ma siwa 
se tamlz ho jie." 

}Imimantiq men jab is ka istiamdl alf az ke waste 
kiya jawe, toyih murad hoti hai, ki baydn ya tarif bona 
un alfaz kd, is taur se ki im ko auron se tamiz ho jawe* 
(Ei&bhi aisa bhi hota hai, ki ek lafz ki tarif, kisi &s&a laiz se 
jise log khub samajhte hain, ki jdti hai ; maslan " karga- 
dan" M "gende," se, ya "ganam" ki "bakri" se, ya 
" safarjal" ki " amriid" se. Tih bahut zurur hai, ki mubd- 
hise men lafzon ke thik thik mane muqarrar kiye jawen, 
kyunki aksar aisa hota hai, ki ek lafz ke koi kuchh mane 
leta hai, aur koi kuchh, is bdis se tafriqa aur galati par 
jatl hai. 

2. — ^Aksar Mantiqln ke nazdik muarrif men do baten 
p^ jdti hain, yane jins aur fasL Jins aur fasl ke milane 
se mu^orif banta hai. Masai to maslan, insan ka muarrif 
Imwdn i ndtiq hai. Ab yahan par haiwdn jins hai, jo fasl 
i ndtiq se milkar muaxrif insdn ka hai, pas malum htia, 
Id haiwdn i ndtiq jo muarrif hai, insan ki jins aur fasl se 


by Google 

62 DEFimtlON. 

3.— Another division of definition, not generallyi 
now used, is into nominal and real^ i. e, definitions ol 
names and definitions of things. A nominal definitioil 
merely gives the meaning of the term as a name, oil 
specifies the object real or imaginary to which it ia 
applied. For instance, a telescope is an instrument 
for viewing distant objects. This is the definition usually 
found in dictionaries and is most frequently made by 
the use of synonymous words. A real definiti<m is an 
analysis or explanation of the real or imaginary thing 
itself, such as will lead to a knowledge of its constrac- 
tion and nature or its supposed character. Thus a real 
definition of a telescope would enter into an explanation 
of its construction with some necessary explanation of 
light. The definition of a centaar, is a fabulous beings 
half man and half horse, the body and head of the man 
forming the neck and head of the horse. 

There are other divisions of definition, but at 
understanding of them as divisions is not essential t» 
the subject of logic, and their discussion requires a more 


by Google 


IMsrl misdl, BamM kd dm, ek &m hai Jo ki dai asl 
Bambai ki taraf se &j& thd, pas is jagah lafe i &m jins hai, 
aar lafz Bambai ns ka fad hai, jo is ^ ko auron se tamiz 
deta hai. Eisala i Shamsia men muarrif k& bay&i 765, 
hai ki " Farz kljiye, ki imdn mugxrif hai, agar us ki t^ 
men kaha jdwe ki wuh haiwdn i ndtiq hai, to yih ns M 
haddi tdm h6i, kyiinki haiwdn, jins i qarib, anr ndtdq^ f(»l 
i garib se milkar bani ; aur agar kahd jawe ki woh ftdtia 
hai, ya jins i ndtiq hai, to yih us ki hadd i ndqia h6i7 
kyunld niri fad i qarib yane ndtiq se yd jins i bajd y^e 
"jism" anr fasl i qarib y^ne "natiq" donon se miliar 
bani hai. Agar insankitaxif men kahd jdwe, ki wuh 
haiwdn zdhik, (hansnewdla) hai, to yih ns kl rasm i tdm 
hui, kyunki haiwdn jins i qarib anr zahik kh&se se bani. 
Auragaruskitarif men nird zdhik j& Jism' i zdhik kah4 
jawe to rasm i ndqia hni kyunki nire khfese zdhik j& jins 
i baid Jism anr Vhfisse zdhik se milkar bani. Naqsha i 
sail se is ki taqsim nazir ko &jhkdra hogi, 


j^dqii Tdm. Ndqit Tdm, 

3. — Jannd chihiye, ki muarrif khasskar do tanr par 
hota hai, yd to sirf lasi haqiqi ya f arzi shai kd ndm anr 
m^ne batldtd, yd ns ki haqiqat ko mnf assalan zdhir kartd 
hfid. Maslan koi kahe, ki durbin ek $la dnr ki ohizen dekhne 
ke liye hai, to sirf ns kd ndm anr kdm mal6m hnd, anr agar 
koi kahe yih shai is tanr par fnldni fnl^ chiz se bani hai, 
to us ki haqiqat m^lnm hM. Misdl ek f arzi ohiz kf yih hai, 
ki qnqd ek jdnwar dardz gardan hai, jis kd wnjfid farzl 
kai, kytinki kisi ne nse dekha nahin hai, anr anqd use is 
labab se kahte hain, ki tawil nl fmaq y^e dardz-gardan 
ktd hai. Fdrsi men use simnrg kahte hain. 


by Google 


lengthy tt'eatment than can be undertaken in this bdbk. 
Itis^ihe office of definition in logic to guard against 
ambiguity and error in the use of terms. 

Rules for Definition. 

To aid in this important matter rules have been 
laid down, the most important of which are mentioned 

First, — The definition must be adequate, that is 
nether too extensive nor too limited. For instance 
as a definition of money if one were to say that it is 
*^ something made of metal/^ this would be too narrow, 
because shells and paper are used and these would be 
excluded by this definition. Or if it were defined as 
'^ something given in exchange for something else 
needed,^^ this would be too extensive, because including* 
things which are given in exchange which are not 
money. Grain, cloth, &c., are thus exchanged. 

Second. — The definition itself must be plainer than 
the thing defined, otherwise it would not explain its 
meaning. Hence the definition if possible should not 
contain figurative, obscure or metaphorical language. 
These two rules, well observed, will generally make 
teirms sufficiently plain to avoid error. 

We pass now to the second division of the subject 
of logic, viz., judgment which is made up as we have 
seen of notions or ideas gained by apprehension. These 
notions or ideas expressed in language are terms which 
are combined to make propositions which are judgments 
expressed in language. 


by Google 


Muarrif ke aqsam aur bhi hain, lekin un aqsam ka 
jarma ilm i Mantiq ke janne ke waste chandan zuriiri nahin. 
Ba-khauf i tawalat, im kl bahs is maqam se chhor di hai. 

Qawaid I Muarrif. 

Muarrif ke banane men cband qaide hain, cbuiianchi 
Tin men se do qaidon ka, jo nihayat zurur hain, yahan 
par bayan kiya jata hai. 

Pahld. — Tidixm chahiye ki muarrif tdm ho, jis ko baze 
mantiqin hadd i td?n bolte hain, yane apne kull afr^d ko 
jame ho, aur gair ke dakhil hone ko mana kare. Maslan 
agar koi naqd ke mane ydn batlawe ki wuh ek dhdt ki chiz 
hai, to yih tarif jame nahin hai, kyunki naqd men kauridn 
bhi dayiil hain, halanki we dhat ki nahin hain. Ya agar 
koi ydn bole, ki naqd ek chiz hai, jis se }ins kharidi j^ti 
hai, to yih gair ko dakhil hone se mana nahin karta ; 
kyunki anaj wag. se bhi aur jins kharidi jdti hai, pas ab is 
Burat men gair afrad bhi is tarif men daldiil hue jfite hain.' 
Is liye yih muarrif tdm na hoga. 

Dusrd. — Chahiye, ki muarrif us chiz se, jis ke mane 
batlatd hai saf ho, wama us chiz ki sharah bakhubi zahir 
na karega. Is waste, agar mumkin ho, muarrif majazi, , 
aur pechida na ho. Agar in donon qaidon par bakhubi 
Uhaz rahe, to har lafz ke mane aise saf rahenge, ki galati 
khatd na paregi.* 

Ab ham mutawajjih hote hain, taraf baySn tasdiqdt 
ke, jo ki tasauwurdt se bante hain. 

* Risala i Shamsia men i)iuarrif ke qijde is tarah par hain : — 

1. — ^Yih dunist naMn hai, ki muaixif nafs i mahiyat ho, kyunki 
nmarrif , nmarraf se pahfe malum hot4 hai, aur koi shai apn£ zit se pahchini 
nahin jdti hai. 

2. — ^Na muarrif aisa chahiye, jo muarraf se ^nmitar y^ khiisstar ho ; 
balki donog umiim o. ^hwus men oar^har hon. 

3. — Na kisi shai ki tarif aise lafzon: se hona chahiye jo marifat aur 
jahiUat men mas4wi hon. 

4. — Na tarif shai ki aisi shai se hona chahiye ki wuh bagair shai 
awwal ke pahchin men nahin Hi hai. 

6. — Alfaz i wahshi o garib jis se sime matlab par na pahunche> 
isti^al nahin kami chahiye. 


by Google 



FosxATiOH AND Division of the Proposition. 

1. A proposition is an act of judgment expressed 
in language. A proposition as used in logic lias also 
been defined, "a sentence indicative.'' This disting- 
uishes a proposition from a question, command, an 
entreaty, &c., which are not dealt with in logic. 

2. A proposition is formed by combining two or 
more terms, as " the tree is green.'' This proposition 
consists of two terms tree and green connected by is. 
Every proposition consist of three parts called the sub' 
ject, the predicate, and the copula. 

The subject is that of which something is predicated 
i. e., afiirmed or denied. ^'The tree is green." Hero 
tree is the subject of which something is affirmed or said, 
viz. that it is green. The predicate is that which is af- 
firmed or denied of the subject, as in this example the 
word ''green'' which is of affirmed of the subject tree. 

The copula is the uniting word which shows the 
agreement or disagreement between the subject and the 
predicate. The copula is always some part of the verb 
to be and although this verb may not always be manifest 
in the proposition, yet it is understood or the proposi- 
tion can be resolved into such a form as to bring it oat, 


by Google 



BayXn QAzfoN kI aur unke aqsXm. 

1. — Jab tasdlq zub&n se s&dir ho, to us ko gazipa kahte 
hain. B^e log qazije ki tarif yun likhte hain ki kai 
lafzon 86 murakkab hOy aur ihtimdl jhuth aur sack kd pdyd 
jdtoe. |Im i mantiq men qaziya ek jumla i haydniya hai^ 
j^e wall aisd jumla hai, ki na wdste suwdl na amr na 
iltijd ke, baUd sirf w&te baydn ke howe. 

2. — Qaziya kai lafzon se murakkab bot& bai, aur 
jhuth aursachkfi ihtim41usmen pdy& j£t& hai. Maslan, 
" yih darakht sabz hai;" yih qaziya, murakkab "darakht" 
aur " sabz" se hai, jis men laiz " Aai" kd, wdste nisbat ke 
&y& hai. Qaziye men tin juz bote htiin, y^ne mauzuy aur 
mahmuly aur nishat i hukmiya,^ 

Mauzu us ko kahte htdn jis ki nisbat kuchh kahd jawe, 
khwdh isbdt ke sdth ho, yd naj^ ke sdth. Misdl ^^ y\ii darakht 
•abzhai." Tahdn par ^^darakhf^ mauz6 hai, jis ki nisbat 
kuchh baydn hai, yane ki wuh ^^sabz" hai, aur mahm61 
wuh hai, jo mauzd Id nisbat kahd gayd ho. Qaziye mazkur 
men lafz " sate" kd jo dyd hai, mahmul hai. Nisbat i 
hukmi wuh hai, jis ke zari^ se mauz^ par mahm61 ke 
darmiydn men muwdfiqat j& nd-muwdfiqat pdi jdti hai. 

* B^ Mantiqfn **inaiiz^" o << mahmtil" ko mahktim-alaih aur 
mahidim-bUi, aur jo lafz nisbat i Hukmi par dal^at kartd hai, use rdbit- 
kahte liain. Nahviyon kf istilih men manz^ko mahkum-alaih anr mnsnada 
il flfh anr mubtada, aur mahmidl ko mahkum-bih aur musnad-bih anr ]^habar 
anr nisbat i hnkmiya ko isn&d, anr jo lafz isnid par dal41at karta hai nee 
barf i rabt kahte hain. 


by Google 


showing that this verb is implied. " The bird flies," 
here " flies ^' is equivalent to a copula "is^^ and a pre- 
dicate " flying/^ Thus " the Moguls conquered/' is 
equivalent to " the Moguls were victorious" From this 
proposition we see too that the verb is sometimes both 
copula and predicate. Thus in the above proposition, 
conqiieredis equivalent to the copula ^' were" and the 
predicate '^ victorious." Sometimes there is an inversion 
in propositions, as " I hope to see you" equivalent to 
" to see you, is the thing I hope/' These peculiarities 
of proposition must be kept in mind. 

Divisions of Pbopositions. 

There are several ^ divisions of propositions which 
must be well understood in order to comprehend success- 
iuUy the subject of logic. 

1. Propositions are divided into simple and com* 

A simple proposition is one whose subject and pre- 
dicate are composed of simple terms, i. e., there is in 
it but one subject and one predicate united by the 
copiila. ''Iron is hard," is a simple proposition, having 
but one subject ^Hron" united by the copula ^^is" to 
one predicate ^^hard." 

A compound proposition has two or more subjects 
Or two or more predicates, or both; i, e., it has more than 
one term either in the subject or predicate of the pro- 
position or in both, and it may be resolved into two or 
more simple propositions. Thus, *' beasts, birds an4 
insects have life." In the subject of this proposition 
there are three terms or subjects, beasts, 6ir(?s,and insects 
and the proposition may be resolved thus. 

Beasts have life ; 
Birds bave life ; 
Insects bave life. 


by Google 


Maslan, " darakht sabz hai," yahan par Ufz " //«**" kd 
nisbat i hukmi par dalalat kcuia hai. Wazih ho, ki jo 
alfaz nisbat i hukmiya par dalalat karte hain wub masdar 
hond se hamesha bote bain, magar yib nabin, ki sab jagab' 
zdbir bo, kytinki bazi jagab aisa bbi botd hai, ki bukman 
botlhai. Maslan, " yib parand ur jawega," is men bona 
bukman pdya jata hai, kyunki dar baqiqat is ka matlab 
ytin hai, ki " parand ka urna boga." Ganr kama obabiye, 
ki bazi jagab mabmul anr nisbat i hukmiya ek hi boti 
bain, jaisa kol kabe, ki "Zaid jdtd hai," yahan par "jata 
hai," mabmul aur nisbat i hukmiya dojion hai. Garaz ki 
qaziya men tin. juz bote bain, yane, mauzii, aur mahmul^ 
aur nisbat i hukmiya, Maslan, "Zaid dlim hai," yahdn par 
Zaid, mauzu, aur dlim, mabmul, aur hai, nisbat i hukmiya, 
Muglon ne Hindustan men bukumat ki thi. Yahan lafz 
" Muglon" ka mauzu aur " huktimat" mabmul, aur " ki 
tbi," nisbat i hukmiya. 


Qaziya kai tarah par hai, jis ka samajhnd ilm i mantiq 
men pur-zarur hai. 

1. — Qaziya yd mufrad hota hai j& murakkab ; qaziya 
mufrad wuh hai, jis kd mauzii aur mabmul mufrad ho, 
maslan "loha sakbt hai." Tahdn par hhd jo mauzu, am: 
lafz sakht kd jo mabmul hai, donon mufrad bain. 

Qaziya murakkab wuh hai. Id jis men kam se kam do 
mauzu yd do mabmfil hon, *ya mauzu aur mabmul donon 
kam se kam do do hon. Is qaziya ko judd judd karke kai 
ek qaziye band sakte bain. Maslan, " Chaupde, parand, aur 
kire makore jdnddrbain." Gaurkamd chdbiye, ki dar 
afil is qaziye men tin mauzu bain, yane " chaupde" aur 
"parand" am: "kire makore," aur tin qaziye ban sakte 

hain; maslan, 

Chaupae jandar haig. 
Parand jandar haiQ. 
Kire inakore jandar haifl. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


"Men and angels are rational and religious be- 
ings." Here both in the subject and predicate thero 
are wo terms. In the one men and angels , and in the other 
rational and rdigious. It may be resolved into four pro- 

1 Men are rational beings, 

2 Men are religious beings, 

3 Angels are rational beings, 

4 Angeb are religious beings. 

Propositions in which the subject or predicate con- 
tains more than one term^ but which can not be resolv- 
ed into simple propositions, are sometimes called complex 
propositions. Thus "joy and sorrow are opposite mental 
states, " is simply a complex proposition^ because it can 
not be resolved into single propositions. Propositions of 
this kind must not be taken for compound propositions. 

2. Propositions are divided according to their 
quaiityf into affirmative and negative. 

An affirmative proposition is one in which the sub- 
ject and predicate are said to agree, as " ice is cold, " 

A negative proposition is one in which the subject 
and predicate are said not to agree, as " fire is not cold^'^ 
" A is not B." A proposition is affirmative or negative 
according to its copula, i. e., just as the predicate is 
affirmed or denied of the subject. Thus, '^not to obey 
God is sin,^^ is really an affirmative proposition, because 
sin, the predicate, is affirmed of the subject " not to 
obey God.'' Sometimes in negative propositions, the 
negative particle is placed so tsix from the copula that 
the negative character of the proposition may be over- 
looked, as ''not all the men and angels in the universe 
can cleanse a soul from sin.'' Here the negative is the 
4rst word of the proposition, iskv from the copula eon. 
18 proposition in the ordinary form would be, '' All 


Misil ddcd. — *^ Insdn aur firishte zi-aql aur $bid hain." 
Yah&n par mauzd aur mahm^ donon do do hain. Is 
qasdya i murakkaba ko judd karke oh^ qaziya e mtifrada 
band sakte bain. MaBlan, 

lusan zi-^ql hai. 
Insan ^bid hai. 
Firishte zi aql hain, 
Firishte $bid haiQ. 

Janna db^biye, ki b^e qaziye aise bain ki sdrat men 
nraiakkab hain, lekin dar baqlqat murakkab nabin, mufrad 
hain, Maslan '^ gam aur kbushi, dpas moQ mnkh^ haii};" 
yih koi kab nabin saktd, ki "gam mukbilif hai," yd "khu- 
shf mukbdlif hai." Agar cbaben, ki is qaziye ke do qaziye 
mufrada bandwen to nabin bo saktd, kyunki dar asl wuh 

2. — Qaziya ya mujiba boga ya sdliha, Qaziya i mujiha 
VB ko kabte bain, jab mauzu aur mabmul ke darmiydn 
muw&fiqat bo, yane un ke blob men nisbat i isbat pi^i jdwe. 
Maslan "barf tbandbd hai," "A. B. hai." 

Qaziya i sdliba wuh hai," jis ke mauz^ aur mabmnl 
men na-muwdfiqat bo, yane mi ke bicb men nisbat i nafl 
pdi j6e. Maslan, "-^g ^andbi nabin hai." — "A. B. nabin 

Qaziya, bamujib apne nisbat i bukmiya ke mujiba ya 
ialiba bota hai, yane jaisa Id iqrdr yd inkdr mabmul ka 
mauzu ke w&te bo. Maslan, " JKbudd ke bukm ko na 
m&ond, gundb hai," yih qaziya dar baqiqat m6jiba hai, 
ky6nki la& gundb kd, jo mabmul hai, mauzu ke iqrdr 
men dyd hai, inkdr men nabin. 

Baze sdlibon men alamat nafi ki aise mauq?i par hoti 
hai, ki us ka sdliba bond bakbubi mglum nabin hotd 
Madan "na tamdm insdn na firishte kisi ko gundh se 
pak kar sakte hain." Aise qaaiye ko "madula" kabte hain. 

Tabdn par aJ^at nafi ki sab se pahle di, aur fi^lse d6r 
hai. Agar yih qaziya bamdjib ^boom mubdwara ke bold jdwe, 
toyfinhogd; "tamdm insdn aur fiiiflbte kisi ko gundh aepdk 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


the men and angels in the nniv^erse cannot cleanse a 
soul from sin." These irregular forms of propositions 
must be understood. It may also be noted that every 
proposition must be either aflSrmative or negative. 

3. A third division of propositions is according to 
their quantity into universal and particular . 

A universal propositions is one in which the predi- 
cate is affirmed or denied of the whole of the subject, 
t. 6., agrees or disagrees with the whole of it. In other 
words, the predicate is said of the whole of the subject, 
hence the proposition is universal. Thus, ^^all men are 
mortal'^ is a universal proposition, because the predicate 
'^ mortal" is affirmed of the whole of the subject ''men.*' 
Mortal is said not of one man, nor of some. men, but of 
all men. ''AHA. is B." is a universal proposition. 
Again " no men are trees" is a universal proposition be- 
cause " trees,^' the predicate, is wholly denied of the 
entire subject, " Men.'' So of " no A is B." 

The signs of univei^sality are all, each, every, no, 
neither, and such words as indicate the whole of the 

When the sign of universality is not used, or the 
indefinite article is placed before the subject, the univer- 
sal proposition is called indefinite. Thus, " sheep are 
quadrupeds,'' is a universal proposition, because it is 
evidently intended to be asserted that " all sheep are 
quadrupeds." Thus also, " a sheep is a quadruped" 
means any sheep is a quadruped, hence that all sheep 
are quadrupeds. " Liars are sinners,'' " beasts are not 
accountable," are universals having the sign understood. 

Where the sign of universality is omitted, the 
quantity of the proposition must be ascertained from its 
matter. We must determine how it is intended that 
the proposition be taken. 

A particular proposition is one whose subject is 


nahin kar sakte hain." Aise qazion be-tartlb aur pechida 
ke matlab k6 samajh lena chahiye ; aur yili bhi yad rakhna 
chdhiye, ki bar qaziya do bal se kbali nabin, ya to mtijiba 
hogd ya saliba boga. Qazion ke ijab o salb ko "kaif i 
qazdya" kabte bain. 

3. — Qaziya hilliija boga j&jnzhja boga. 

Qaziya i kulliya wub bai, jis ka mabmnl, mauzd ke 
tam^ afrdd ke iqrar yd inkdr men dwe ; yane mabmul 
muwdfiqat ya nd-mnwafiqat rakbe tamdm manzu se. Ta 
is tarab par us \i& bayan samjbo, ki qaziya i knlK men 
mahmtil kull manzu par bold jae. Maslan, " kull insdn 
mamewale bain." Tib qaziya i kulliya bai, is liye k^ 
lafz " mamewale" ka jo mabmul bai, kull mauzu ke waste* 
JO " insan" bai, kaba gaya bai, yane lafz mamewdle ka 
sirf ek admi ke waste nabin, balki tamdm insan ke waste 
aya bai. " Kull A. B. bai." Yib qaziya bbl kulliya bai. 
Ek aux misdl di jati bai. " Insan darakbt nabin bai," yib 
bbi qaziya i kulliya bai, kyunki yaban par lafz darakbt ka> 
tamam mauzu yane insdn ke inkar men aya. " Koi A. B- 
nabin bai." Tib bbl qaziya i kulliya bai. 8ah^ tamdm, har ek, 
koi nahtn wg. jo lafz bain, in se qaziye ki kulHyat sabit 
boti bai. 

Jis qaziya, i kuUi men alamat kulliyat kl, lafzan maujud 
na bo, usko muhmila kabte bain, maslan, " Bberen cbaupae 
bain." Ab yaban par bdwujude ki alamat kulliyat ki 
maujud nabin, pbir bbi saf malum bota bai, ki matlab sab 
bberoiivSe bai. 

Jhuth bolnewale pnnahffar hain. 
Jauwar zi-aqi uabiy liain. 

Taban par bbi kulliyat samjbl jdti bai, agarchi zdbir 
men koi lafz nabin bai. Garaz yib ki jabdn kulliyat kd koI 
lafz na payd jawe, to waban par sirf matlab se samjbenge. 

Qaziya ijnziya wub bai, jis ke mauzu ke baz afrad 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


taken in only a part of its extension, i. e.y the pred- 
icate is said to agree or disagree with only a part 
of the subject. Thus, '' some Christians ere not true 
followers of Christ/' is a particular proposition, because 
the predicate ''true followers of Christ/' is denied 
of '' some Christians," the subject, that is, does not 
belong to all who are called Christians. The pre- 
dicate then only belongs to a part of the term *' Chris- 
tians.^' Again, " many men or brave/' '' some A is B,*' 
are particular propositions, because the predicate " brave" 
does not belong to all " men,'* nor the predicate " B" to 
all *' A." Thus, we see that in particular propositions 
something is said, i. 6., affirmed or denied of only a part 
of the subject, which is then taken in only a part of its 
extension. The sign of a particular proposition is some 
such word as, some, few, several, many, &c., indicating 
that a part only of the subject is intended for the pre- 
dicate. Of that part only, the predicate is true. 

Some particular propositions are indefinite, that is, 
have not the words, some, few, &c., prefixed to them 
to show that they are limited. Thus, " men are poets,'* 
'' Hindus are idolaters/' are indefinite propositions, be- 
cause it can not be intended that '' all men are poets,'' 
or that '' all Hindus are idolaters,'' for there are some 
men who can not write poetry, and there are Hindus who 
never worship idols, of which facts all are aware. The un- 
iversal or particular character of such propositions must be 
determined {rom their intended meaning. It is not so much 
the business of logic to determine their meaning, as to 
pronounce on the character of the argument in Mdiich the 
propositions are used, after their quantity has been deter- 
mined. Every proposition, then, must be either affirma- 
iive or negative, also universal or particular. Hence, with 
the same subject and predicate four different propositions 
may be formed. Let these propositions be distinguish* 


by Google 


Kye j&en, yane mahmul mauzti ke kull aMd ke waste na 
4y4 ho, balki baz afrad ke wdste. Masai to maslan, " Baz 
I^sdi MasQi ke sacliolie paixau nahin hain." 

Ismisal men, chunki fiqra "saehche pairau" ka,jo 
mahmul hai, " baz I'saion'^ ke inkar men, jo mauzu waqi 
hua hai aya hai, is sabab se is qaziye ko juziya kahte hain. 
Garaz ki is jagah par mahmul, mauzu ke baz afrad ke 
inkar men dya hai, yane sab fsaion ke waste nahin. 

Dusri misal.— " Bahut admi bahadur hain." " Baz 
A. B. hain." Yih bhi qaziye i juziye hai, kyunki lafa 
"bahadur" kd, jo mahmul hai, kull insan ke waste s&diq 
nahin aya hai, aur isi tarah mahmul "B." kull mauz^ 
"A." par dalalat nahin karta. Garaz ham dekhte hain, ki 
qaziya i ju^ya men mauzd ke baz aMd par dal^at hoti 
hai, khw^ bil-isbat ho yd bin-nafi. Juziydt ki aldmaten 
baz, kuchh, wg. hain. 

Baz qaziya i juziya bhi muhmila bote hain, yane 
lafz juziyat ke baz, kuchh wg. un men nahin pde jatehain. 
.Maslan, "adml shdir bote hain," "Hindu butparast 
hain;" yih donon qaziya i muhmila hain, kyunki yih 
matlab nahin ho sakta hai, ki tamam insan ahdir hain; 
kyfinki bahutere ddmi aise hain, jin ko shi^r kahna nahin 
atd, aur Hinduon men bhi aise hain, ki butparast nahin hain. 

Aise qaziyon Id kulMyat ya juziyat sirf matlab se 
malum hoti hai. Qaziya i muhmild ki kulliyat aur juziyat 
ki muqarrar kama ilm i mantiq ki garaz nahin. Us ki 
garaz arf itni hai, ki jab ham qaziyon ki kulliyat aur juz- 
iyat qarar dekar bdham-digar zarb den, aur phir zarb 
dene se jo natija nikle, us ki sihhat ya adam sihhat ka 

Ismauq^i parkhiyal rakhni zarur chdhiye, ki bar 
qaziya ya mijiba hogd, yd sdliba hogd, aur bar wdhid 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


ed by the vowels A* E; I. 0., and let (c. and y. stand for 

the subject and predicate, then we may have : — 

A. Universal affirruative ; All a? is y. 

E. Universal negative ; No x is y. 

1. Particular affirmative ; Same x 18 y. 

O. Particular Negative ; Some x. la iiot y* 

4. A fourth division of propositions considered as 
sentences, is into Categorical and Hypothetical, 

The categorical proposition unconditionally asserts that 
the predicate does or does not agree with the subject. 
As, '* man is mortal/* " A is not B/^ which are simple 
unconditional declarations. 

The hypothetical proposition, which is compound, 
makes its assertion under a condition or alternative. Hy- 
potheticals are divided into conjunctive and disjunctive 

A conjunctive proposition implies that the parts of 
the proposition are so conjoined that if one part of the 
proposition be true, the other follows, as, " If James 
return, John will go," *' If Xis Y, it is ZJ' This proposi- 

* Note. — Sir William Hamilton proposed the ''quantification of th& 
predicate," by which the forms of the proposition are increased to eight,, 

Toto- total. All X is all y = (A.) 

To to- partial. All x is some y = (A.) 
Toto-total. No as is y = (E) 

Toto-partial. ]^o sc is some y = (E. ) 
Parti-total. Some x is all y = (I.) 

Parti-partial. Some x is some y =(I-) 
Parti-total. Some x is not any y = (0-)" 

Parti-partial. Some x is not some y = (0.) 
It will be observed that the words ** all" and "some," that determine 
the quantity of the subject are applied to the predicate also. This new 
scheme is followed entirely or in part by a few logicians. It is claimed 
that it makes conversion, the distribution of terms, and the forms of the 
syllogism, more simple. But most logicians, some of them as Mill, the 
ablest, reject this proposed improvement, as involving »ore trouble than 
Is avoided, and as giving some forms of propositions never really used, 
while others which seem to contradict the common rules for the distriba-^ 
tion of the predicate, can be dealt with ubder the old forms as exceptional 
or unnatural forms of judgment. This point will be noticed under the 
discussion of rules for the distribution of terms. 


by Google 


ddnon men se ya kulliya hoga j&juziya. Pas ek hi mauzd 
aur malnQul se ham char qaziye bana sakte hain* 

Miijiba kulliya. 
S^liba kulliTa. 
Miijiba jaziya. 
Saliba juziya. 

I Ab ia oharon suraton ke waste ye huruf muqarrar 
kiye jate hain, yane, — 

mL jis se murad miijiba kulliya, Maalan kull A. B. bai 

si. jia se murad saliba kulliya, „ koi A. B. nabin hai. 

mj. jis se murad mujiba juziya, „ Baz A. B. bai. 

Bj. jis se murad saliba juziya, * „ Baz A. B. nabin hai. 

4. — Qaziya yd hamliya hotd hai yd shartiya, 

Qaziya i hamliya men shart nahin hai, yane isbat ya 
nafi bila shart pdi jati hai. Maslan, " insan mamewala 
hai," aur " ruh fan! nahin hai,'' ''A. B. nahin hai." 

Qaziya i shartiya wuh hai, jis men shart ho, is ki do 
qismen hain, muttasila anr munfasila, 

Qaziya muttasila wuh hai jis men sidq dusre qaziye ka, 
awwal par mauqtif ho. Maslan, "Agar Zaid dawd khawe, 
to achehha ho jaega." "Agar A. B. hai, to wuh J. hai.'^ 
Is qaziya ki kai stiraten ho sakti hain, maslan agar A. B. hai 

* Sar William Hamilton Sahib ne qazio© kf cli& stirato© mazkura ke 
aUwa, chir aur surate© nikali bais jin me© mahmul ke hai se bahs hoti 
hai, yane ki wuh kuUi hai yi juzi. Is bayan se ath stiraten ho jati hain maslan. 

Mauzd aur mahmul donon mh =knll A. kull B. hai. 
Mauzu mk. aur mahmul m;.=kull A. Baz B. hai. 
Mauzd o mahmdl donou sk = koi A. koi B- nahiij. 
Mauz^ sk. aur mahmul mj. = koi A. baz B. nahiij. 
Mauz^ mj. aur mahmul mk. = baz A. kull B. bai. 
Mauzii o mahmul donoQ mj. == baz A. baz B. hai. 
Mauz^ mj. aur mahmul sk. = baz A. koi B. nahin. 
Mauzd mj. aur mahmul sj, = baz A. baz B. nahin bai. 

Janna chihiye ki alfaz "kulP* aur "baz" jo mauzd kikamiyat batate 
haig, mahmul ke sath bhi a sakte haig. Is nae tariqe ki taqHd baz mantiqin 
kullan ya juzan karte haiij. Is nae tariqewaloij ka yih dawa hai ki is se aks, 
aur kam o kaif, aur sdrat i qiyas, bahut asan aur sdda ho jiti hai. Lekin 
aksar mantiqin jin me© baz bare laiq hai^j, maslan Mill Sahib, wuh yih kaht© 
hai© ki is se aur ziyada pechidagi o diqqat w^qj hoti hai, aur baz aqsam i 
qaziya jo ki is taqsim ki rd se bante hain, mntlaq istiamal me© nahi^ dti hain, 
aur baz qaziye jo kulliyat i mahmul ke amm qa^doQ ke mukhdlif malum hote 
haio, wuh mustasniydt men aurbe-tartib i^umar ki j^ti hai©. Iskibah* 
qawaid i kam o kaif ke bay^ mej^ likhe^ge. 


by Google 


tion may take many forms, e. gr., If A is B, C is D ; if 
A is not B, C is D ; If A is not B, C is not D ; If A 
is B and C is D, E is P. If A is B, either C is D or E 
is P. &c. If either A is B, or C is D, E is P. 

A disjanctive proposition, implying an alternatiye, 
is formed with the disjunctives either, or, as " James is 
either a liar or a thief/' «Xis either Y or Z/' This 
proposition also may take many forms, e. g., either A 
is B. or C is D ; either A is B or C is D, or E is P ; A 
is either B or C or D ; either A or B or C, is D ; either 
A is not B. or C is not D ; either A is B or C is not D. 

This last division of propositions may be indicated 
by a table, thus : — 

The hypothetical proposition will be treated of 
more fully hereafter. For the present we will deal only 
with categorical propositions. 


This is as good a place as any to explain what is 
meant by the matter or modality, of propositions. By 
the matter is meant the nature of the connection be- 
tween the terms of a proposition, and it has reference to 
the truth or falsity of the proposition.* 

By observing the nature of the connection of the 
terms we can see that there can be only three kinds of 
matter, viz., necessary, expressed by an affirmative prop- 
osition, impossible, expressed by a negative proposition, 
and, contingent, expressed by a particular proposition. 
Thus if we have two terms ''iron^' and " heavy," reflec- 
lion shows us that the truth or the nature of these terms 

* Jiy the modality of a poposition some writers on logic mean H 
uMxbficatian by some adverb of time, place, mamier, degree, &c., or by some 
piira^ or expressioii. Some writers exclude tiie question of modality from 
the eubjat-t of logic. 


by Google 


to J. D. hai;agar A. B. nahinhaito J. D. hai; agar A. 
B. naMn hai to J. D. naWn hai; agar A. B. hai aur J. D. 
hai to K. S. hai; agar A. B. hai toya J. D. hai ya 11. S. 
hai; agar A. B. hai yd J. D. hai to E. S. hai, wg. 

Qaziya munfadh wuh hai, jis men hukm bil infisal 
p&y& jawe, yane na to donon juzon qaziya ka sachchd ho- 
ni mxuukiQ ho, na jhuthd hona donon kd. Harf infisal ka 
"yi" hai. Maslan, "Zaid j& sachchd hai yd jhuthd." "A. 
y& B. hai, yd J. hai." Is qaaiya ki kai suraten ho sakti hain, 
maslan A. B. hai yd J. D. hai; A. B. hai yd J. D. hai yd 
B. 8. hai; A. ydB.hai yd J. hai yd D. hai; A. yd B. yd 
J. D. hai; A. B. nahin hai yd J. D. nahin hai; A. ydB. 
hai jSk J. D. nahin hai, wg. 

Qaziya i shartiya kd haydn &gQ ohalkar miif assal hoga, 
yahdn par qaziya i hamUya kl misdlen di jdti hain. 

BayXn Madde ka. 

YiH mauq^ aohchhd malum hotd hai, ki qazfon ke 
mddde kd baydn kiyd jdwe.* Mddda ns nisbat ki haqlqat 
ko, jo qaziya ke juzon ke darmiydn men hai, kahte hain, 
y^ne mddde se yih murdd hai, ki dyd is qaziya men ihti* 
mdl fiidq kd hai yd kizb kd. 

Agar ham gaux karke dekhen, ki juzon ke darmiydn 
nisbat kai tarah par hai, to malum hotd hai, ki sirf tin tarah 
par hai, y^e zaruri bil ijdby jo qaziya i mujibon men hoti 
nai. Nisbat zaruri bis salhj jo qaziya i sdlibon men hoti hai. 
Nisbat % tasdwiy jo ki qaziya i juziyon men pdi jdti hai. Mas- 
lan, do lafz hon, ^^hh£^ aur " bhdri,^* Ab agar ham in 
do lafzon ki asliyat par bagaur lihdz karen, to malum hotd 
hai, ki in donon ke darmiydn nisbat i ijdb biz zarur hai, 
aur qaziya yun hogd, " lohd bhdrl hai." 

Aur agar yih do lafz hon, yane, " shakar" aur " khat- 
^" aur in ke darmiydn nisbat ijdb di jdwe, qaziye kd 

* Bai mantiain kf yih r&e hai ki miulde ki bayiin flm i mantiq ke muta- 
alliq nah^ hai, lin&ea is k£ bay^ apni kitiboi^ me^ nahio karte haiQ. 


by Google 


makes it necessary for us to connect them aflSrmatively, 
and we get the aflSrmative proposition, '^ iron is heavy." 

Again, if we have the two terms ''sugar" and 
'' sour^' and wish to connect them in a true proposition, 
it is impossible to do it affirmatively, and hence we get 
the negative proposition ''sugar is not sour." 

Again, if we have the two terms "men" and 
" learned," we see that they cannot be truthfully con- 
nected in a universal proposition either affirmatively op 
negatively but they have a contingent relation, i. c, only 
sometimes and under certain circumstances men are 
learned, hence we must connect these terras in a parti- 
cular proposition, '* some mea ire learned." 

Thus, from the matter of propositions three rules are 
formed, the correctness of which will be manifest on 

1. In necessary matter all affirmatives are true and 
all negatives false. 

2. In impossible matter all negatives are true and 
all affirmatives are false. 

3. In contingent matter all particulars are true and 
universals false. 

The importance of understanding this point in the 
consideration of propositions will be more fully seen 
when we come to treat of '* opposition of propositions.'* 

The student should fix well in mind the following :— 


f Simple or compound. 

I Affirmative or negative, 
■n '^' I Universal or particular, 

^'•"^"'""""'"•'i Categorical. ^ 

LHyp^Ihetical. ... \ Conj.inctive, 
"^ •'^ I Disjunctive. 

( Necessary. 
Matter U < Impossible. 
( Con tin gent. 


by Google 


sachcM bona gair-mumkin hogd ; pas is sabab se nxsbat 
salb kl dekar yun kabenge, ki **sbakar kbatti nabin bai." 

Aur agar yib do lafz bon, yane, " admi," aur " ffim," 
ham dekbte bain, ki in donon ke darmiydn nisbat ijab ya 
salb ki, kulliyat ke satb sadiq nabin a sakti bai, y^ne koi 
nabin kab sakta, ki " sab adnii dlim bain," ya '' koi ddmi 
^lim nabin"; balki in ke darmiyan men nisbat gair- 
muaiyana bai, yane yib mnqarrar nabin, ki nisbat bil ijab 
ho ya bis galb, jis ke sabab se yun kabna ebabiye, ki " baz 
admi dlim bain," ya " baz ddmi Siim nabin." 

Pas ba libaz madde qazion ke, tin qaide nikalte bain, 
jin kd bal ganr kame se malum bota bai, ki yunbi 
sadiq ate bain. 

1. — Nisbat zdriiri bil ijcib men qaziya i mujiba sab 
sabib, aur salibe sab galat bote bain. 

2. — Nvibat zartiri bis salb men upar ke baraks yane 
salibe sab sabib, aur mujibe galat bote bain. 

3. — Nisbat i tasdwi men qaziya i juziya sab sabib, aur 
kulliya sab galat bote bain. 

Madde ke samajbne ka faida, qazion ki naqtz ke bayan 
men cbalkar malum boga. 

Nazirin ko bayan i mujmal mundaxja i zail bakbubi 
zibn-nisbin kar lena ebabiye. 


(Yi mnfrad hoga ya mnrakkab. 
j Ya mujiba hogi, ya. saliba. 

Ya kulliya hogfi, yi juziya. 

Ya hamliya hoga, 

r ZarW biHjs[b. 
Mddda i nisbat. < Zarurf bis salb. 
, . (Tasawi. . 


by Google 



1. The distribution of terms is an important matter 
eonnected with propositions. Terms^ as has been seen^ 
are found in the subject and predicate of propositions. 
The terms of a proposition are said to be distributed^ 
when they include or relate to every thing that can be 
referred to by them. A term, then^ is ^'distributed'* 
when it is used universally^ that is, when it stands for 
or includes all its significates^ and '' non^distributed '* 
when it is particular^ that is, stands for but a part of its 

Thus, in the proposition '' All men are mortal '' the 
subject *' all men" is distributed, because the whole of it 
is taken as affected by the quality of mortality. On the 
other hand the predicate ** mortal '' of this proposition 
is undistributed because, as used in this proposition, it 
is manifest that but a part of the extension of the term is 
used, viz., that which includes or covers man, there being 
many other creatures besides man for which the term 
could be used, but here it is confined to man, t. e., it is 
not distributed. 

2. Without fully understanding the distribution of 
terms, but little use can be made of the study of logic^ 
hence we proceed to present clearly the principles on 
which it depends. We may note that a proper, singular, 
collective, or abstract term, is always taken in a general 
or universal sense, hence where one of these terms is the 


by Google 



1. — BayLn i kom, y^e kullijat aur juzijat, xnauzd 
aur mahmul k&, qazion ke s&th zarur hai. Jab qaziye ie 
mauzA o mahmiil apne tamdm ajrdd ho shdmil karte hai^^ 
to un ho kulli kahte hainj aur jab sirf bqz afrdd ho shdmil 
karte hain^ to un ko juzi kahte hain. Masai to maslaiiy qaziya 
" kull insdn i&oi hain," is men mauzd, " kull insdn" kullf 
hai zera ki apne tam&m afrdd ko fdni hone men shdmil 
kartd hai, magar "fdni," jo mahmfil hai, is qaziye 
men jnrf hai, kis wdste ki sdf zdhir hai, ki yih lafzis jagah 
apne kail afrdd par daldlat nahin kartd hai, balki b^ par, 
y^e insdn par is jihat se, ki lafz fdni men bahut anr 
makhluq shdmil hai. Insdn to makhluq kd sirf ek jna 

2. — ^Tdwaqte ki yihl ia»^ yane kulliyat aur jnziyat, 
bakhdbi samajh men na dwe, ilm i mantiq ko aohchhi tarah 
istiamdl men nahin Id sakte hain. Chtinki isti^tmdl ilm £ 
mantiq kd is hi par munhasax hai, lihdzd us amr kd, jis par 
kulliyat aur juziyat mauqtif hai, sdf o muf assal baydn kiyd 
jdtd hai. Tih amr bhi qdbil i lihdz hai ki ism i mu^iyan 
aur mufrad aur ism i jins hamesha kulliyat kd fdida detd 
hai. Is Hye jis qaziye menkisf qism i mazkfira kd kof ism 


by Google 



subject of a proposition it is to be treated as a universal 
and the subject is distributed. Thus^ '^James loves 
John," " my dog is black/' " Parliament is prorogued,'' 
" wisdom is justified of her children/' may be treated as 
universals. Where the subject of a proposition is a 
single thing. Mill calls the proposition singular. Such 
are universals in the sense of distributing the subject. 

Both the subject and predicate of a proposition must 
always be either distributed or non-distributed. 

The distribution of the subject of a proposition 
depends on its quantity^ {» 6., on its being universal or 
particular J while the distribution of the predicate de- 
pends on the quality of the proposition, i. e., on its being 
affirmative or negative. The truth of these statements 
yriXl appear firom some illustrations. 

Four kinds of categorical propositions can be form«> 
ed, viz., — 

Universal affirmative... (A) All X is Y. 
Universal negative ...(E) No X is Y. 
Particular affirmative... (I) Some X is Y. 
Particular negative ...(0) Some X is not Y. 

These may be represented by geometrical notations, 
each pair of circles representing a proposition, thus : — • 


by Google 



mauzu wdqi^ho, to us qaziye ko kulUya kali sakte hain, 
aur mauzd kuUi hota hai. Madan, " T?iqub Yfihannd se 
muliabbat rakhtd hai" ; j& " majlisbarkMst ho gai" ; yd 
^' merakuttd siyah hai." Aise qazion ko, bdwujtide ki un 
kd maxizu mufrad had, kulliya kah sakte hain. Mill Sdhib 
is qism ke qaziye ko qaziya mufrada kahte hain. 

Har qaziya kd mauzti aur mahmul do hdl se khfili na- 
hin hogi, y^e, yd to kulli hogd, yd jiui. 

Wazih ho, ki mauzd ki kulliyat aur juziyat, qaziye ki 
kulliyat aur juziyat par mauqtif hai ; magar mahmul ki 
kulliyat aur juziyat, qaziye ke ijab o salb par mauquf hai. 
Kaifiyat is ki, zail ki misalon se bakhtibi m^Jlum hcgi. 
Qaziya i hamliya ki ehir suraten hain, y^e, 

Mdjiba kullija, 
Smiba kulliya, 
Mujiba jiiziya, 
Saliba juziya. 

(m. h.) Kull A. B. hai. 

(«. k.) Koi A. B. nahCe kaL 

{m. j.) B^ A. B. hai. 

(x. J.) B^ A. B. nahis haL 

In charon qazion ko TJqlaidas ki shaklon se bhi baydn 
kar sakte hain. 

Har ddire ko ek qaziya samjho : — 

m k, Kull A. B. hai, mj. Bqz A. B. hai. 

Koi A. B. nahlg hai. 


by Google 


Inspection of these propositions^ first with regard 
to the sabject^ will show that in the universal proposition 
the sabject is distributed^ that is^ it is taken in its fullest 
extension including all its signrficates. This is indicated 
by the prefixes all and no^ and a glance at the geometrical 
figure shows the truth of this statement to the eye. 
Hence the rule— 

1.— -Ji! universal propositions distribute the subject. 

An examination further of these propositions shows 
that in the particulars the subject is not distributed, i, e., 
a part only of the term is taken, as is indicated by the 
prefix some, and is made plain to the eye by the geomet- 
rical figures, only a part of X being included in Y. 
Hence the rule— 

it-^Particular propositions do not distribute the subject. 

Thus, it is seen that the distribution of the subject 
depends on the quantity of the proposition* 

Again, if we examine- the four categorical proposi- 
tions with reference to the predicate, we will see that its 
«listribution is by no means implied in the distribution 
of the subject, and that it depends on the quality of the 
proposition, i. 0., its being affirmative or negative. If it 
t)e asserted, in a universal affirmative proposition, that 
**all men are mortal," or "all X is Y/^ it is not asserted 
that other beings besides men, are not mortal, or that 
other things besides X, are not Y. Other beings beside 
men may be mortal, and other things beddes Xmay be 
included in Y, as is seen in this figure. 

Hence it is evident that the 

whole of the predicates -"mortal 

and " Yj'^ is not considered. 


by Google 


Agar mauzu ki nisbat in qazion par lihaz kiyd jawe, to 
malum ho\A hai, ki qaziya i kulKya kd mauzdj hamesha 
kuili hota hai, yane apne kull aMd par daldlat kart& hai, 
aur wuh dal^t, lafz i " kulV^ aur " koi nahM^ se m^lfim 
hoti hai. Aur dairon ke dekhne se bhi yih bit malum hoti 
hai. Pas qantin yih hai, ki — 

1. Qazit/a i kulliya kd mauzu kulli hotd fiat. 

Agar mauzd Id nisbat, qaziya i juzion par lih4z kiya 
jawe, to malum hotd hai, ki mauzu bhi juzi hotd hai, yane 
faqat apne baz afrdd ko batldtd hai, aur yih juziyat, lafz 
"Jaaz" se malum hoti hai, aur diira i marquma e bala se 
s&ri kaifiyat is ki roshan hai, ki faqat ek hissa ddira A. kd 
B. men dakhil hai. Pas q4n6n yih thahrd, ki — 

2. Qaziya ijuziya kd mauzu hamesha juzi hotd hat\ 
Pas malum hud, kikulliyat aur juziyat mauzdkl, 

qaziye ki kulliyat aur juziyat par mauq6f hai. 

Aur agar mahmul ki iiisbat in chdr qaziya i haiiilioti 
par lihdz kiya jdwe, to m^um hotd hai, ki yih kuohh zarfir 
nahin, ki mahmul ki kulliyat o juziyat, mauzd hi ki mdnind 
ho, kyfinki mahm61 ki kulliyat o juziyat, qaziye ke ijdb atLt 
salb par mauquf hai. 

Agar koi qaziya mujiba i kulliya ho, jaisd "kull 
insan fdni hain,'' yd kull " A. B. hai," to is se yih d^wa 
nahin nikaltd, ki aur makhl6qdt siwd insdn ke fdni nahin, 
yd siwd A. ke aur koi chiz B. men nahin hai. Bahut aur 
makhluq hain siwd insdn ke jo fdni hain, aur aur ddire 
hain siwd A. ke jo B. men shdmil hain, jaisd ki shakl i zail se 
zdhir hai. Pas sdf zdhir hud, ki kuU 

mahmtil "fdni" aur "B" kdm 

men is jagah nahin dyd, y^ne 

mahmul ke kull afrdd pax dald- 

lat nahin hai. 


by Google 


Again, if wo make these propositions particular, 
thus, "some men are mortaP^ — "some Xis Y,^' it will 
still be seen that only a part of " mortal'' and " Y" is 
distributed. A part or all of other 

{ ^ 
things besides X may be included 

in Y, as is seen in the annexed 

figure. Hence whether universal 

or particular, we get the rule:— 

Z,^^ Affirmative propositions do not distribute the 

There are exceptions to this rule, where afiSrma- 
tives, both universal and particular, by an inverted, un- 
natural, or exceptional form of expression, may distribute 
the predicate. Thus, in the propositions, "all men are 
rational animals,^' "all triangles are figures bounded by 
three straight lines,'' "some men are poets,'' "some 
animals are men," the predicate is co-extensive with the 
subject, f. e., is distributed. We may treat these cases as 
exceptional and understand the general rule as given 

If we turn now to negative propositions, we see 
that whether universal or particular, the predicate is al- 
ways distributed. Thus, in the universal negatives^ 
"no men are birds,'' "no 
X is Y," it is plain that we /"^ 
must consider, i. e., distribute, the 
whole of the predicate "birds," 
before we can affirm that there are no men in it, and the 
whole of Y, before we can assert that no X is included 
in it. Hence, in the universal negative the predicate is 


by Google 

Aur agar ham in do qazion ka juziya banawen, 
maslan, "Bazinsan i&oi hain,'' yi^baz A. B." hai, to 
is surat men bhi mahmul " fdni," 
aur B. juzi rahtd hai, kyunki 
alawa insan ke, baz anr makhluq 
bhi fani hain, aur alawa A. ke 
baz aur daire hain, ki ddira i B. 
men shamil hain. 

Pas qaziya kulKya ho, ya 
juziya, q^nun yih raha, ki — 

3. Qaziya i mujibaj khwdh kulliya ho yd juziya, mah^ 
mill us kdjuzi kotd hai, 

Baz qaziye mujibe, khwah knlliye hon j6, juziye, is 
^m qdide se mnstasna hain. Maslan in qazayd men ki 
^* tamam ddmi haiwiin i natiq hain." " Baz ddmi shdir hain." 
" Baz haiw&i insan hain," mahmul mauzfi se masawi ul 
afrad yane kulli hai. Aise qazion ko mustasniyat men 
shumar kamd, aur ^tdth qdidon mazk6ra i h6X& ko sahlh 
tasauwur kamd chdhiye. 

Ab agar ham qaziya i sdliba ki taraf khiy&l karen, 
khwah wuh kulK ho j& juzi, mahmul us \& hamesha kulH 
hoga. Maslan, saliba i kulliya, " koi admi chiriyd nahin," 
y& " kol A. B. nahin." Yahdn par gaur ^— ^ ^.— v. 
kam4 oh^ye, ki kull mahmul " chiriyd'' ( A j f B j 
par jab lihdz ho, to ham kah sakte hain, ^^^ — ^ ^-— ^ 
ki koi insan ohiriyon men nahin hai. Pas is qaziya 
men mahmul " chiriya" kuUi hua. Ala-hdzal-qiyds, jab 
kull mahmul "B" par lihaz ho, to ham kah sakte 
hain, ki kuchh hissa A. B. men nahin ^^.^ ^^--v. 
hai. Pas har qaziya saliba kd mahmul kulH ( -^ ] ( ^ ] 
hoga. Isi tarah par har qaziya sdliba juziya ^— ^ v._^ 


by Google 


distributed. So also of the particular negative, for if it 

be asserted, that ^' some X is not Y/' 

it is plain that the whole of the 

predicate ''Y'' must be passed in /^T^^xN 

review or examined, that is distribu- vAc-/ 

ted, before the statement can be 

truthfully made that Y does not 

belong to the part of X under consideration. Hence for 

all negatives we get the rule : — 

4. — All negative propositions distribute the predicate. 

Thus, it is seen that the distribution of the predicate 
depends on the quality of the proposition. All these 
facts should be kept well in mind. The rules for dis- 
tribution, collected together, are as follows : — 

1 . All universal propositions, distribute the subject. 

2. Particular propositions do not distribute the subject. 

3. Affirmative propositions do not distribute the predicate. 

4. All negative propositions distribute the predicate. 

The importance of this point in propositions, will be 
more fuUj seen in part third of this book. 


by Google 


ka bhi. Madan saliba i juziya, " Baz A. B. nahin hai." 
Tallin par sdf zahir hai, ki jab tak kull B. na 
dekh lewen, ham nahln kah sakte hain, ki kuchh 
B. A. ke us hisse men nahin hai, jis k& zikr 
hai. Pas sab qaziya i sdlibon ke liye yih qantin 
nikalti hai, ki — 

4. Sar qaziya sdlibe kd mahmuly kulli hai, 

Ab m^urn hua ki kulliyat mahmul ki, qazion ke 
ijab o salb par mauquf hai. In baton ko khtib zihn-nishin 
kama ch^ye. 

Majmd^ qawdnin i kulliyat o juziyat kd, zail men 
hai: — 

1. — Qaziya i hulliya kd mauzu kulli hotd hui. 
2. — Qaziya ijtmya kd mauzu juzi hotd hai. 
3. — Qaziya i mijiba kd mahmul juzt hotd hai. 
4. — Qaziya i saliba kd mahmul kulli hotd hai. 

Is kitdb ke tlsre hisse men chalkar malum hoga ki is 
bat ka jannd kaisa zaruri hai. 


by Google 



1. The conversion of a proposition, consists in 
transposing its terms so as to place the subject for the 
predicate and the predicate for the subject. Thus, the 
proposition ''no men are angels/' may have the subject 
and predicate transposed and become, " no angels are 
men" — "Some men are good/' "some good (beings) 
are men" is likewise converted. The proposition to 
be converted is called the exposita* that into which it 
is changed is called the converse. 

Conversion is only allowable when the truth of the 
converse is implied by the truth of the exposita. Such 
is called ^^ illative'^ conversion, and is the one used in 
logic. Any thing else would be only an apparent, not a 
real conversion. It is often useful in an argument, or in 
detecting an error to thus transpose the subject and 
predicate of a proposition. 

2. There are three kinds of conversion, by one of 
which every proposition may be converted. 

Mrst, — When the subject is simply made the pre- 
dicate, and the predicate the subject without any further 
change, it is called simple conversion, as 

"No good man ia a rebel." 
Converse, — " No rebel is a good man." 

" Some bad men are learned." 
Converse. — " Some learned men are bad." 


NoYisX." (^^^ 

Called by Sir Wm. Hamilton the convertcnd. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Aks ke bayan me^. 

1. — ^Aks us ko kahte hain, ki qaziye ke mauzu ko 
mahmul kar den, aur mahmul ko mauzu. Maslan yih 
qaziya, ki ^^ koi ins&n firiahta nahln hai," agar is ke mauzil 
ko mahmul kar diya jde, to qaziya yun hoga, " koi firishta 
insan nahln hai." D6sri misdl, ** baz admi nek hain/^ is 
ka aks ^^ b^ze nek (makhltiq) Mmi hain." 

Jab kisi qaziye kfi aks kiya jawe, to us ko mqkuaa 
kahte hain, aur qabl aks ke qaziye ko gjair mqkusa kahte 
hain. Aks us waqt durust hoga, jab qaziya i maktisa, aur 
gair maktisa ki haqiqat men kisi tarah ka f arq na waqi ho, 
pas aise aks ko aks i aahlh kahte hain, aur agar kisi aur 
tarah kiyd jae, to wuh ^ka sirf ba z6hir hoga, na yih, ki 
haqiqat men. 

2. — ^Aks tin taur par hot6 hai, aur har qaziye kd aks 
in tinon men se kisi na kisi ke bamujib ho saktfi hai. 

AuwaL — Mauzu ho mahmUl kamd^ aur mahmil ko 
mauzu karndy aur kiai tarah kd tabaddul aur tagjaiyur na 


Maslan, " Koi achchha admi bagi nahfn hai." 
is ka aks, ** Koi bagi achchha admi Dahi^ hai." 

" Baz kharab ^dmi, ^lira hain." 
is ka aks, " Bqz alim, ^harab ^dmi haig." 

" Koi A. B. nahSfi hai." 

«*KolB. A.nahi5hai." ( B^( A ) 


by Google 


Universal negatives and particular affirmatives are con- 
verted in this way. 

Second, — But by an examination of the four ca^gor- 
ical propositions^ it will be seen that they cannot all be 
transposed by simple conversion. Thus, take the uni- 
versal affirmative : — 

^^ All horses are quadrupeds/^ and the simple con- 
verse, " all quadrupeds are horses/^ is not true, for there 
are many four-legged animals that are not horses. 
Thus, also '^ all X is Y," cannot be con- 
verted to '^ all Y is X." Hence, in or- 
der to preserve a true proposition in 
the converse of a universal affirmative, 
we must make it a particular, thus the 
converse of the above propositions 
should be — 

" Some quadrupeds are horses." 
" Some Y is X," 

and they become true enough. Thus the converse of a 
universal affirmative must he a particular affirmative. 
The quantity of the proposition is changed. This is 
called conversion by limitation or " per accidens.^' All 
universal affirmatives, are converted in this way. In the 
exceptional cases of universal affirmatives that distribute 
the predicate (page 78), of course simple conversion 
may be used, forming an exception to this rule. 

Third.— ^j an examination of a particular negative, 
it will be seen that its subject and predicate can bo 
transposed neither by simple conversion nor by limita- 
tion as in the last example. Here then is a peculiar 
difficulty. We can say, ''Some quadrupeds are not 
horses," but we cannot convert this simply, and say 
'' Some horses are not quadrupeds,'' for this would not 
be illative conversion, and the proposition would not 


by Google 


Is ko ah i mmtawi kahte hain. 

Boyam. — ^Agar ham qaziya i hamlija ki ch&ron sura- 
ton k& aks isi tarah par ban&nd oMhen, to naMn ho sakta 
hai ; jais& ki mujiba i kulliy^, 

*^ Sab ghore chanp^e haiQ ; " 
agar is k& aks usi tariqe par banay^ oh&hen, to sahlh na 
hoga. Maalan, agar koi kahe, ki ^^sab ohaup&e ghore 
hain/' to sahih nahln hai, kyunki 
bahut ohanp&e ghore nahin hain. 
Dusri misfil, "sab A. B. hai," is 
kd aks yun nahin ho saktd, ki " sab 
B. A. hai," kyunki A. ke siwd B. 
men bahut aur wasat hai. Pas is 
wdste ki mujiba i kulliya ke asK manon men farq na dwe 
us k& aks mujiba i juziya hogd ; maslan, — 

'' Baz chaupile ghore hain." 
"BazB. A. hai."* 

Pas imm qdida yih thahri, ki mAjiba i hulliya id aha 
mujiba juziya did kaiy yane sirf kulliyat aur juziyat men 
farq & j&t& hai 

Is ko bhf aks i mmtatd kahte hain. 

36,rm& ohdhiye ki jis mauqe par mujiba kulliya k£ 
mahmdl, $mm qdide ke khildf kullf hota hai, (Dekho 
safha 79,) qaziya k& aks kulli &wegL 

Seyum. Agar ham oh^en, ki s^ba i juziye k& aks 
in donon men se kisi ke bamujib bandwen, to sahlh na hogd. 
Tah&n par ek diqqat hai. Agar ham yfiij bolen, ki — 

** B$z chaupae ghore nabig haig," 
to is ka aks ydn nahfn ho sakt& hai, ki — 
'' B^ ghore chaupae nahfg haig," 

kyunki yih sahih nahin hai; aur agar s&liba i kulliya 
ban&wen, maslan <^ Sab ghore ohaupde nahfn hain," tau 


by Google 


be true. Nor does it make truth to convert thie parti- 
cular into a universal, and say 

" All horses are not quadrupedsi" 
Hence some writers on logic saj that the particular 
negative cannot be converted. But this particular 
negative can be converted by a peculiar processi If we 
detach the negative particle^fr^m the copula, and attach 
it to the predicate, the proposition really becomes a 
particular affirmative, and may readily be converted by 
limitation, thus,— 

" Some- quadrapeds are not-horseeJ* 
'* Some X is not- r." 

Here we have changed the quality of the proposi- 
tion and have really a particular affirmative with the 
term " not-horses ^' for its predicate which may then 
be converted by limitation, tbus-^ 

*' Some notJiorses, are quadrupeds" 
or plainly expressed, 

" Some animals not-horses, are quadrupeds^" 

winch i&irue enough. Thus also — 

" Some men are not-poets,^ 
*^ Some not'poets are men^" 

This is called, conversion by negation, or contraposition. 

3. Hus, there are three regular kinds of conver- 
sion by means of which every proposition may be con- 
verted* An. examination of the process of conversion, 
shows that a term undistributed in the eaposita, remains 
undistributed in the converse. The predicate of the 
affirmative proposition, "all horses are quadrupeds^' — 
is undistributed, because affirmatives do not distribute 
the predicate.* Hence, when we convert illatively and 
the predicate becomes the subject, it must be undistri- 
buted, and we get, " some quadrupeds are horses.'^ 

* Except in certain nntusoal cases. See p. 78 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 

ASS. 87 

bhf dumst na hog^. Is lije b^ mantiq&i kkhte hain, ki 
8^ba juziya k& aks nahin lio sakta hai. 

Tdham is k&ek tarah M aks ho saktdliai. Agar 
liam harf i naff ko, nisbat i hukmiya se alag karke, 
us ko mahmul ka ek juz kar den, to is surat men qazija i 
mujiba jnziya ho j^g4, anr is ka aks ho j^ga ; maslan, — 
" B^ ehaap^e ghore nahig haig/' 
Ab harf i nafi ko nisbat i hukmiya se alag karke, 
mahmul kd juz banan^ ch^hiye, yane — 

" £az chaup^e, nd-ghore (y^koe gair i asp) haig." 
Is k& 9ks yfin hogd, ki 

'* Baz gait i asp, chaupae hain/' 

y^e, baz jdnwar jo ghore nahin hain, chaupde hain. 
Dusrf misdl is ki : — 

*' Baz &dml, shiir nahlg,'^ 
Is kd ^ks yun na hogd, ki 

'< B^ shair, ^dmi, nahln hain." 
Lekin agar harf i nafi, mahmul k& juz ho j&e, us 
stobt men us k& ^ks ho jaegd, jaisd ki 

'^ Baz gair i shajr, ddmi hain." 

Is ko qk% i naqiz kahte hain. 

3. Garaz ki aks tin taur par hota, yane do tarah ke 
aks i mustawl, aur ek aks i naqiz hai, jin ke zaria se har 
qaziye ka ^ks ho sakta hai. Qaziye ke aks kame ke tariqe 
jo hain, im par agar gaur kiya jdwe, to malum hotd hai, 
ki mauzu o mahmul ijuzi, bad aks ke hhi juzi rahtd hai ; 
Maslan, — 

'' Sab ghore chaap^e hain." 

Iskdmahmidl ^^chaupde" jo hai, juzi hai, kis waste 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


So of every proposition^ and we get the rule for 
conyersion — 

No term must he distributed in the converse that was 
undistributed in the exposita. 

(1 Sin 

Hndt, I 2 Ooi 

(3 Co] 

Simple conversion. 
Conversion is of three kinds, ^ 2 Conversion by limitation. 

Conversion by negation or 


by Google 

AKS. S9 

ki qaziya i m^jiba kH xnahmdl kuUiya nahin hot4 hat. 
Fas agar aks kiya j&we, to yun hog&y 

** £az chaup^e ghore haiQ/' 
aur ^mm qdida yili thahrd, ki 

Jo mauzA yd mahmUl ki Juzi hai^ had ah ke hhijuti 
rahtd hai. 

A^.A^ : Ah, 51 A^s i Mastawf. 

Digitized by VjOOQ iC ■ ''■' 


1. — Opposition in propositions, is the relation be- 
tween any two, which having the same subject and pre- 
dicate, differ in quantity, or quality, or both. Thus — 

One may deny in whole or in part what the other 
affirms, e. g. 

All XiaY. opposed by {^''iKnotT. 
One may affirm, in whole, or in part, what the other 
denies, e. g. 

No X is Y, opposed by {^l^i'iJy. 

One may affirm in whole, what the other affirms 
in part, e. g. 

All X is y, opposed by some X is Y, 
One may deny in whole what the other denies 
in part, e, g. 

No X is Y, opposed by Some X is not Y. 

Now, as there are four forms of categorical proposi- 
tions, universal, pariicular, affirmative, negative, and any 
two of these may be opposed, it is plain that with the 
same subject and predicate, there are four kinds of op- 
position, as is seen in the above statement. 

If two universal propositions diflTer in quality only, 

they are called contraries, 

^„ 5 Everv X is Y. 
*^ J No X i« Y. 

If two particular propositions differ in quality only, 

they are called subcontraries, 

^^ 5 Some X is Y. 
^ ( Some X is not Y. 


by Google 


NAQfz KE BAyXn MEl^, 

I. — Naqiz m ho Jcahte ham^ U do qetmn M mauzu o 
makm^l eh hi rahe^ magar hulUyat o jvziyaty yd ijdb o aaltj 
(f/qne ham o kaif) yd domn men ikhtildfho. Maskn, 

1. Agar aiiwal qaziya mfijiba i kulliya ho, to dtisri 
us M naqiz sdliba i kmlija ho j& juzija. Jaise 8ab A. 

XT ( 5 Sftb A. B. nahfn hai. 
^*^^^' JBazA. B.nahf5 hai. 

2. Agar auwal qaziya mnjiba kul^ya yfi jimya ho, 
us ki naqiz gdliba i ktdliya ho ; xnaslao, 

f^ziilh!;!: !Naqfe.ko(A.B.naW»hai. 

3. Agar auwal qaziya mujiba i kidliya ho, to uis ki 
naqiz m^jiMi i juzija ho. Maslan, sab A^ B. hai. Naqi^, 
haz A. B. haL 

4. Agar auwal qaziya, sfiliba i kulliya ho, to us kl 
naqiz sdliba i iuziya hai. Koi A. B. nahin hai. Naqiz, 
baz A. B. nahin nai. 

Qaziya i hamliya ki ch6r suraten hain, y^ne, mtijiba 
ikullijB, aur mujiba i juziya, aur s^ba i kulliya, aur 
fiffiba i juziya ; pas chtinki in ch&ron men se koi do muqd- 
bale men ho sakte; hain, is se yih z6hir hai, ki mauzfi o 
mahmfil ki naqiz char tarah par hoti hai : — 

Pahle, — Do kulliye faqat ijeb o salb men mutan^iz 
hon, Misdl, 

Sab A« B« hai, 

NaqfE, Koi A. B. nafafn hai. 

DAsre. — Do juziye, sirf ijdb o salb men mutimdqiz hon. 

Mis^l, B^z A. B. hai. 
Naqis, B|iz A. B. nahiQ hai. 


by Google 


If two propositions agree in quality, but differ in 
quantity, they are not actually oppoHed to each other^ 
and are called sulaltems : 

„„ J Every X is Y. n,. i No X is Y. 

^ \ Some X is Y. ^^ \ Soitoe X is not Y. 

If two propositions differ both in quality and quanti- 
ty, they are called contradictories : — 

^„ ( Every X is Y. ^. ( No X is Y. 

^ ( Some X is not Y. *°^ ( Some X is Y. 

Or to state this matter in another way : — 
Universal affirmatives, opposed to universal nega- 
tives, are contraries. 

The two particulars opposed, are subcontraries. 
The two affirmatives or the two negatives opposed, 
are subalterns. 

Two propositions opposed both in quality and quan* 
tity^ are contradictories. 

The four kinds of opposition may be illustrated by 
a figure thus, 

JUl m«Q are mortal A Contiaries E JSo men are mortal. 

'o- :^^' 




Some men are mortal I Subcontraries O.Some men are not mortal. 

2. Opposition is a form of immediate inference in 
which, from the truth or folsity of one proposition, the 
truth or falsity of another proposition, having the same 
subject and predicate, may be inferred. By recollecting 
what was said on the truth or falsity of propositions 
under the head of matter, an inspection of the above 
scheme shows that,—- 


by Google 



Tisre, — ^Do qaziye, ijdb o saHb men muwdfiq hon ma- 
gar kulliyat o juziyat men mutandqiz hon. Magar aisi 
naqiz, halanki haqlql nahln hai, phir bhl ek tarah kd 
tcmaqiiz is men pajd jatd hai. 

Misal, Sab A. 6. hai, 
Naqfz^ Baz A. B. hai. 

Mis^l, Ko( A. B. nahfn hai. 
Naqiz^ Baz A. B. nahis hai. 

Chauthe. — ^Do qaziye, ij6b o salb, aurknlliyat aur 
juziyat, donon men mutan^iz hon, 

Maslan, Sab A. B. hai. 
Naqiz, B^ A. B. nahfy hai. 
Ya Koi A. B, nahig hai. 

Naqiz, Baiz A. B. haL 

Garaz ki mukhtasar baydn ytin hai ki 

mk, aur sk, mntanaqiz, 

mf. aur sj. mutanaqiz. 

mk, aur mj. mutanaqiz. 

$k, aur sj, mutanaqiz. 

In ch&ron qism ki naqiz ki shakl zail men masttir hai. 

Bab fDBka iiai haio. ^ Matan&qiza Sk.Koi iaain tioi nahig hai. 






B|i iaaAn iiid haio MJ .Mutaa&qiza ^^'.B^z ina&a t&ni nahig haio. 

n. — ^Bahs i madde men sidq o kizb qazion k& jo 
bay4n ho chuka hai, agar yad ho, aur ehakl i mazkura i 
baU par bhi lihaz rahe, to malum hoga, ki : — 


by Google 


If one contrary is true, the other must be false, but— ^ 

If one contrary is false, the other may be false also. 

If one subcontraryia false, the other must be true, but— 

If one suhcontrary is true, the other may be true also. 

If, in subalterns, the universal is true, the particular 
must be true. 

iBut in anialterns, if the partici^ar be true, l^e uni* 
versal may or may not be true. 

Jf, in 8ubaltem»,^i3ie particular is &lse, the nniyersal 
must be also. 

If one contradictory is true^ or false^ the other must 
be just the opposite. 

This may be summed up in three rules, thus — 

Contraries may both be- false, but never both true. 

Subcontraries may both be true, but never both false. 

Of contradicLories, if one be false the other must be 
true, and vice versa. 

These points in regard to opposition, should be well 
kept in mind. In logic we may thus learn how far the 
truth or falsity of one proposition, may be inferred from 
the truth or falsity of another. 


by Google 


Agar ek kulliya sddiq hai, d6sr& zar6r k&zib kai. 

Agar ek kulliya kdzib hsu, to muDikiii hai/ ki dusra 

Agar ek jimya k^b hai, to ddsr^ zarfir s&diq kai. 

A^ ek juziya s^q hai, to mmnkin hai, ki dusra 
bhl sdcfiq ho. 

Agar do mfijibon ji s^bon ke blch men kullf s^q 
hai' to juzl bhi zarfir sddiq haL 

A^ar do mtijibon yi do silibdn ke bl6h men juzi 
8&diq ho, to kuchh zar^ nahin ki kulli bhi s&diq ho. 

Agar do mtijibon yd sdlibon ke bich men juzf kdzib 
bo, to kulli bhi zartir k^b hoga. 

Agar do qaziye, kulliyat o juziyat, Ijdb o galb men 
mutan^iz hon, to agar ek sadiq j& k^b ho, to dusr& 
khil&f us ke ho^&. 

Tin q^ida i zail kull bay&n mazkura ko j^me haiQ : 

Pahle. — ^Do kulliyon k& k&zib hon& mumkin, lekin 
donon k& s&diq honIL gair-mumkin hai. 

D&sre, — ^Bo juzion kd sadiq hon& mumkin, lekin Idbib 
hon& gair-mumkm hai. 

Tisre, — ^Un do qazion men, fo mukhtalif hon, ij4b o 
salb, aur kulliyat o juziyat men, agar ek s&diq ji, kdzib 
ho, to dusrd us ke khilaf hogd. 

Naqlz kf bahs men jo qdide m^6m htie, un ko khub 
zihn-nishin kamd chdhiye, kytinki in hi ke zaiie se m^um 
hot& hai, ki ek qaziye k& s^q ya k&db hond, dusre par 
3ds tarah mauqtif hai. 


by Google 


Having thns gone over the second great division of 
logic, it may be well to collect what has been said on 
propositions, in a tabular form to be memorized. 

A proposiUon is an act of judgment expressed in words. 

A proposition consists of three parts^ the subject, 
the copula, and the predicate, 

r Simple and compound. 
TUn^^^^m /»/ Affirmative and negative, (quality) 
?^,^o J: -! ^"''«'«^ '^^ particular, (quantity) 

IcategoricalandHypothetical, { g^jS^*" 
The matter of propontion»\^^^Z7 ttr^If^ 

Bulbs fob Matter. 

1.— In necessary matter all aflSrmatives are true, 
and universals false. 

2i — In impossible matter all negatives are true and 
affirmatives fisblse. 

3. — In contingent matter all particulars are t^ue, 
and universals false. 

The terms, *. e,, the subject and predicate of propo- 
sitions, are distributed when they are taken universally, 
non-distributed when only taken in part. 

Rules fob Distribution. 

1. — All universal propositions distribute the subject. 
2.— Particular propositions do not distribute the 


by Google 


Mantiq i& dusra hissa tamam hua, ab bihtar hai, 
ki pbir qazion ka haj&a y&d-ddfiht ke waste inujmalan 
likM jae. 

1. — Jab tasdiq ba zarl^ lafz ke zdhir ho, us ko qaziya 
kahte hain. 

2. — Qazion men tin juz bote bain, yane mauzuy anr 
mahmulj anr nisbat i hukmiya, 

SMafrad ho ji murakkab. 
Mnjiba ho ya B^liba. 
Kulliya ho 7^ juriya. . Mnttasila. 

Hamhya ho yi ehartiya, | Munfasila. 

taup nap hai < Zaruri bis salb, s^libon mefi. 
v.«. ^ ' I Masawat, juzios men. 

5. Qawdid i nisbat : — 

Pahk, — ^Nisbat zarfiri bil-ijab men, qaziye i mujibe 
sab Bahih, aur sdlibe sab galat bote bain. 

Dusre, — Nisbat i zaruri bis salb men, qaziye i salibe 
sab Bahih, aur mujibe galat. 

Tisre. — ^Nisbat i tas6wi men, qaziye juziye sab sahib, 
aur kulliye galat. 

6. — Mauzd mahmul agar apne tamdm afrad par 
dalalat karen, kuUi hain; aur agar bfiz afrad par to 
juzf hain. 

7. Qawdid kulliyat o juziyat ke. 

Pahld. — Qaziya i kulliya k& mauzd kulli hot& hai. 
Dusrd, — Qaziya i juziya i& mauzd juzi hot& hai. 


by Google 


3.— AU negative propositions distribute the pre- 

4. — Affirmative propositions do not distribute the 

The conversion of a proposition consists in transpos- 
ing its terms, so that the subject becomes the predicate 
«nd the predicate the subject. 

The original proposition is called the exposita, the 
oew one formed from it, the converse. 

Only illative conversion is allowable, i. e., where the 
truth of the cam&rse is implied by the truth of the £xpoiita. 

Til ^^ . . (1 Simple conversion. 

IllaUve tonverswn uS ^ Conversion by limitation. 
of three kinds. 1 3 Conversion by negation. 

EuLE FOB Conversion. 

. N^ term mtist be dietributed m the converse that was 
undistributed in the exposita. 

Propositions are opposed, when having the same 
subject and predicate, they differ in quality or quantity^ 
or both. 

Opposition is of four kinds. 

1.—- Two universal proportions, differing only ia 
quality, are contraries. ^ 

2. — Two particular propositions, differing only ia 
quality, are subcontraries. 

8. — Two propositions agreeing in quality, but dif- 
fering in quantity, are subalterns. 

4. — Two propositions, differing both in quantity 
and quality, are contradictories. 

Rules fob Oppositiok, 

h^-^ontraries may both be false, but never both 

* Tbt ezceptioofl on page 78 must be kept in mind. 

.,...., ^oogle 


TUrd, — Qaziya i siliba ka mahmtil kulK Hotfi tai. 
Chauihd. — Qaziya i mtijiba kd mahmiil juzi hotd hai. *' 
8. — Aha US ko kahte hain^ ki qaziya ke mauzu ka 
malimul, aiir mahmiil ko mauzd kamd. 

9. — ^Aks i sahfli wuh. hai, jis men ad. qaziya ke mane^ 
se ikhtilaf na ho. 

10. Aks do tarah par hotd hai. 

11. Qaida aks k£ yun hai : — 

Jo mauzu ya mahmul, ki juzi hai, bad aks ke bhi 

12. Naqiz us ko kahte hain, ki do qazion ki mauzu 
o mahmiil ek hi rahe, magar kulliyat o juziyat y& ij&b o 
salb, ya donon men ikhtilaf ho. 

13. Naqiz ehar tarah par hota hai : 

Mk. naqiz 8k. 
Mj\ „ 8j\ 
Mk. „ Mj. 
8k. „ 8j. 

14. Naqiz ke qawajd : — 

Pahk. — ^Do kuUion ki kazib bona mumkin, lekin 
s&diq bond gair-mumkin. 

* Siwae chand mustasniyat ke. Dekho safha 79. 

Digitized by VjOOQ iC 


2. — Suheontraries may both be true, but never both 

3. — Of contradictories, if one be false, the other must 
be true, and vice versa. 

We now proceed to Part III, of this Book, where 
propositions are gathered into arguments, thus completing 
the subject of logic. 





Dusre, — Do juzion k& sfidiq bond muxnkin, lekin 
kazib hona gair-mumkin. 

Tisre, — ^Un do qazion men, jo mukhtalif hain, ijdb o 
salb anr kulliyat o juziyat men, agar ek sadiq ya 
kllzib ho, to dioBrd us ke kbilaf hoga. 

Ab Tbn i Mantiq k& tisra bissa, jis men bahs dalil kl 
bai, sburu boga. 


by Google 

PART «r. 

Beasoning OB Abgukent. 

1. — The third operation of the mind with which 
logic is concerned is reasoning. An act of reasoning 
expressed in words, is called an argument.* Every ar- 
gument consists of two parts, the point to be proven^ 
and that by which it is proven. The term argument, is 
by some writers, confined to this part alone. It is here 
used in the more popular way. 

The part to be proven is called the concltLsion, and 
that by which it is proven the premisses. In the logical 
order, the premisses are stated first, and after them the 
conclusion, connected by the illative conjunction there" 
fore. Thus, an argument:— ' 

Whatever exhibits marks of design, must have an intelli- 
gent author. 
The world in which we live, exhibits marks of design : 
Therefore, The world must have an intelligent author. 

Here the first two statements are the premisses, and 
coDsiat of judgments or propositions, in an argument 
proving that the world has an intelligent Creator. The 
statement beginning with therefore, is the conclusion. 

* Sir William Hamilton insists that argumentation, not armament, 
ihoiild be used for the complex act of reasoning, the argument being that part 
from which the conclusion is drawn. 


by Google 




I. — ^TfsRA amr jis se ilm i mantiq mutasJKq hai, dalil 
yine hujjat hai. Balfl, iis soch ko kahte hain, jo aise 
yaqinl muqaddamat se murakkab ho, jin se natlja yaqini 
nUde. MaseJl to maslan :— 

Jis oliiz men kisl tarah ki karlgar! pdl j&ti hai, ns ki bana- 

mrvrklk zar6r bai. 
^bilqat men karigarl pll jatl bai, 
Fas, Khilqat kk koi bananew^la zarfir bai. 

Dalfl men do baten hoti hain, yane ddH aur madluL 

DdHwxjis: hai, ki jis ke zaria se natija hasil hota 

haiy anr ns natije ko madl&l kahte hain. Mis&l Mazkura 

e bala men pahle do muqaddamon ko ddU kahenge, aur 

tisra, jo im donon se hdsil hud, madUl hai. 


by Google 


An argument^ then, is an expression of reasoning in 
which, from something laid down and granted as true, i. e., 
the premisses, something else beyond this, viz., the conclu- 
sion, necessarily follows, and must he admitted as true. 

The two parts of an argument then, are XDade up of 
propositions. The propositions in the first part, called 
the premisses, are as has been seen, admitted to be true, 
and &om them another proposition or other propositions 
are drawn, which is the conclusion, or second part of the 
argument. Now, logic teaches us to draw from known 
or admitted propositions, true conclusions. 

2. — An argument stated in its full, regular, logical 
form is called a syllogism. 

In the syllogism, the conclusion follows from the 
mere force of the expression or arrangement of the pro- 
positions, without considering the meaning of the terms. 
Thus :— 



Therefore ZisY. 

It is manifest that the conclusion must follow what- 
ever the terms X, Y, and Z may stand for, i. e., the con- 
clusion follows from the mere force of the expression, as 
may be seen by a geometrical figure. 

All X is contained in Y. 

Z is contained in X. 

Therefore Z is contained in Y. 

Or to express the same thing in plain propositions. 

All men are mortal. 
Zaid, Amr, Bakr are men. 
Therefore, Zaid, Amr, Bakr are mortal. 


by Google 


Bdll aur 'madUl^ jaisa ki is misdl se malum hot^ 
hai, qaziye hain. Qaziya i ddlla, yaqini hote hain, aur 
un se ek, yd ek se ziydda qaziye yaqini Msil hote hain^ 
aur wuh jo h&il hote hain, un ko madlul ya natija kahte 

Ihn i mantiq se yih malum ho ]&\A hai, ki natija i 
yaqiniya ba zaria muqaddamdt i yaqiniya ke, kis tarah par 
niMlnd ohdhiye. 

II. — Jo hujjat ba tartib i kdmil, bamujib ilm i mantiq 
ke, bay&n k! jdwe, us ko qiyds kahte hain. 

Qij&& men qaziye is tartib par hote hain, ki natija 
khud ba khud Msil hota hai, bagair samajhne mauzu aur 
mahmulke; maslan, 

A. B. hai. 

J. A. hai. 

Fas, J. B. hai. 

Yih s&f zahir hai, ki agarchi in harf on se koi matlab 
nahfn m^lum hot4 hai, ma^ tdham natija yunhi nikalta 
hai. Ohundnohi is Id kaifiyat shakl i zail se bakhubf 
zdhir hai. 

A. B. men shdmil hai. 
J. A. men shdmil hai. 
Pas J. B. men shdmil hai. 

Misdl dHari. — Sab insin fani haig. 

Zaid, Amr, Bakr ins^n hain. 
Pas, Zaid, Amr, Bakr f&ni hai||7 

Qiyds murakkab hotd hai kull tin qazion se jis men 
pahle ko kubrdy aur dusre ko 8ug.rd^ aur tiare ko natija 
kahte hain. Pahle do muqaddamdt kahldte hain. * 

* Arabf mantiqin tartib i qiy^ meg, sagr& ko auwal, aur kubri ko 
OS ke nfclie rakhte haig. Is se natija nik^hie men kuchh farq naMg dtl 

Arabi mantiqin faqat do maqaddamoQ, yane sugri o Vvisti ke is tank 
tartO) dene ko, ki natija nikal dwe, qiyds kahte haig. 


by Google 


d.'^Every simple syllogism, then, consists of three and 
only three propositions, the first two of which are callM 
the premisses, and the last which follows from then 
is called the concludon. The first proposition in the 
syllogism is called the major premiss, and the second is 
called the minor premiss. Every proposition^ as was 
seen^ contains two terms, called the sulject and predieate. 
Now, let it be kept in mind that every syllogism eon" 
tains three, and only three terms, called the major tenn, 
minor term, and the middle term. The major term is 
so called becaase fonnd in the major premiss, the minor 
term becaase fonnd in the minor premiss. The middle 
term, which is found in both premisses, is so called 
becaase it comes between the other two, and is the 
mediam of comparison between them. Having been 
thus compared with it, they are declared to agree, or 
disagree, in the conclusion which thus contains both tfao 
major and minor terms. Thus, the syllogism is the com- 
parison of two notions or terms, with a third notion or 
term, to ascertain whether they. Qgr^e or not. Suppose 
the question is whether a certain thing is poisonous or 
not. In order to ascertain the agreement of the term 
poisonous, and the thing before us, we compare it with a 
third thing, arsenic, which we know to be poisonous, and 
find that it contains arsenic, hence we may say that it ia 
poisonous. The syllogism for this would be. 

Arsenic is i>oisonoiu. 
This thing is arsenic. 
Thereforei It is poisonous. 

The minor term is always the subject of the con- 
clusion, and the major term the predicate. 

4.-— A few examples of syllogisms are subjoined and 
analyzed, for practice in the form and elements of the 


by Google 

QIYJlS kjc ba yan. 107 

m. — Bay&n hud, ki har qaziye men tin juZy yane 
mauzuj aur mahmill, aur nisbat i huhmiya hote hain. Ydd 
lakhnaoMhiye, ki har qiyds men tin juz hote hain, yane 
alshar aur aagar aur Juidd i amat. Akbar is sabab se kahte 
hain, ki wuh kubrd men hot& hai, aur asgiar is sabab se 
kahte haiiij ki sugrd men hotd hai. Hadd i amat ko, jo 
kubri aur sugrd donon men pdi jdti hai, hadd i ausat is 
sabab se kahte hain, ki goy& wuh akbar aur asgar ke dar- 
miyan men, un k! nisbat batldne ka ek wdsta hai. Fas is 
tarah par hadd i ausat se natija men dkar mal&m hota 
hai, ki akbar aur aagar ke bioh men muwdfiqat hai, yd 

Garaz ki qiyas bolte hain do tasauwuron (akbar o 
lusgar) ko tisre ke (hadd i ausat) sath milane ko, tdki ma- 
Um ho jdwe, ki in donon tasauwuron men muwafiqat hai 
y4 naMn4 

Mafllan koi sawdl ho^ ki fuldnl chiz zahr hai ki nahfnp 
Ab yahdn par iissA ohlz se, jaise sankhiyd, jis ko ham jdnte 
hain ki oihr hai us shai ko jis ka zikr hai, mildenge, tdki 
maI6m ho jdwe, ki yih shai bhi zahr hai ki nahin P Agar 
malim ho jdwe ki yih shai sankhiya se muwdfiqat rakhtf 
hai, to m^l^ hud ki zahr hai. Fas qiyds yun hoga, 

Sankhiyi zahr hai. 
Yih shai saokhiy^ hai. 
Pas, Yih shai zahr hai. 

Wdzih ho, ki natija kd mauz^, asgar, aur mahmdl, 
akbar hotd haL 

rV. — Chand misdlen qiyds ki^ bit-taM, zail midn, is 
maqsad ke wdste mundarj ki jdti hain, ki mashq barhe. 

Digitized by LjOOQIC 



Every desire to gain by another's loss, is sin. 
All gaming, is a desire to gain by another's loss. 
There! ore. All gaming is sin. 

Here are three propositions; the first is the major 
premiss^ the second the minor premiss^ and the last the 
eonclnsion.* Each proposition has its subject and pre- 
dicate connected by a copula. In the first proposition, 
or mfkjor premiss, the subject is '' every desire to gain by 
another's loss," the predicate is "sin.'' In the second 
proposition^ called the minor premiss, the subject is, " all 
gaming,^' and the predicate is, " a desire to gain by 
another's loss." In the last proposition, called the con- 
clusion, "all gaming'' is the subject, and "sm" is the 
predicate. By observing, it will be seen that the syl- 
logism really contains only three terms, i. e., "desire to 
gain by another s loss," "sin;" and "all gaming." "Desire 
to gain by another's loss," is the middle term, being tbat 
with which the other two terms are compared. " Sin '^ 
in the major premiss, is the major term, and " all gaming," 
in the minor premiss, is the minor term. As always 
must be the case, " all gaming," the minor term, is the 
subject of the conclusion, and " sin^" the major term, is 
its predicate. 


All murderers deserve death. 
"Skxik skhih was a murderer. 
Therefore, N&n& s^b deserved death. 

Here are three propositions, the two first are the 
premisses, the major and minor^ the last is the conclusion. 

* The Arabic logicians put the minor premiss first. This docs not 
affect the reeult in the reasoning process. 


by Google 


Apne Dafa ke w&te, gair k& nuqs^ takn^ gun^ hai 
Jde meQ aisa nafi^ hai, jis ki badaulat gairofi ka naqs^n tak£ 
jat^ hai. 
Pas, \ixk gun^i hai. 

Tah&n par tin qaziye hain, auwal kuhrd^ doBrd mgxd^ 
tisri natija ; aur har qaziye men mauzu, aur mahmul, anr 
nisbat i hukmiya, jo nn donon ke darmiy&n ek w&ita hai, 
hoti liai. Pahle qaziye, yane kubrd men, " apne naf^ ke 
w&ste gallon k& nuqs&n taknd," mauzd hai, anr '^ gun^,'^ 
mahm^. Dusre qaziye yane sugrd men, ^^ ju&" mauzti hai, 
anr ** apne nafa ke wdste gairon k& nuqs&n takn&," mah- 
mnl hai. Pichhle qaziye, y^e natije men, " jM " manzd, 
anr ^^ gundh, " mahmiil hai. 

Dekhne se malum hotll hai, ki is qiy&s men sirf tin 
]uz hain, pahle, ^^ apne naf^ ke w&ste gairon k& nuqs&n 
taknd," dtisrd **gun4h,'' tisra "jnd." "Apne naf a ke 
waste gairon k& nuqs&n takn&," hadd i ausat hai, jis se do 
anr juz jo hain nuMe jdte hain. Eubr& men, " gun&h" 
akbar hai, aur sugra men, "ju^" asgarhai; aur natije 
men, " ju6" jo asgar hai, maued hai, aur natije men 
^^ gunih" jo akbar hai, mahm^ hai, jais& ki natije men 
hamesha hond oh£hiye. 

Sab J^hdnf w&jib ul qatl haig. 
Fas, N&n& R&o wajib ul qatl th&. 

Dekho, yahfin tin qaziye hain, jin men pahU kubr&, 
dfisrfi sagr&9 anr tisrit yane akhir k&, natija hai. Har 

d by Google 

Digitized t 


Each proposition has its subject and predicate^ yet there 
are only three terms in the syllogism ; first, the middle 
term " murderer, " second, the major term " deserve 
death," and third, the minor term " Ndnd sahib/^ The 
minor and major terms, are the subject and predicate of 
the conclusion. 


Avarice is a sin. 
Sin leads to hell. 
Therefore, Ayaxice leads to hell. 

" Sin'' is the middle term, "avarice" is the minor 
term, " leads to hell" is the major term. 

Middle term. 

Every (doctrine tending to bring dishonoi* on God), 

Major term, 
(should be rejected.) 

Minor term. Middle term. 

The (doctrine of fate), (tends to bring dishonor on God.) 

Minor term. Major term. 

Therefore, the (doctrine of fate), (should he rejected.) 

5. Let it be remembered that every valid argu- 
ment may be reduced to a syllogism. It is not neces- 
sary that every argument be stated in this form in full, 
but if an argument is correct, it may be put into this 
form. Thus if one should deny that the world has an 
intelligent Creator, one claiming that it has, would bring 
forth a number of facts to prove that the world is full 
of design, and the proof would be considered valid and 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


qaziye ka mauzu aur mahmul judii hai, magar taham 
haqlqatan qiyas men faqat tin juz hote hain, jaisd ki is 
misal se zahir hai, — ^ki paMa hadd i amat "khuni," dusra 
akbar " wajib ul qatl," anr tisra asgar^ " Ndna Eao" hai. 
Natija ka mauzu asgxir hai, aur mahmul akhar hai. 

Misdl tisri, 

Tama gunah hai. 
Gun^h ka anjam dozakh hai. 
Pas, Tamai ka anj^m dozakh hai. 

Is misal men " gundh" hadd i ausat, aur " tama" asgarf 
aur " anjam dozakh," akbar hai. 

Misdl chauthu 

Hadd i amat. Ahhdr, 

(Jis masle men ^^^uda ki be-tazimi pai jati hai), (Radd kam& 

Asgior. Hadd i ausat, 

(Qismat ke masle men), (E[huda ki he-tazimi pai j^ti hai.) 

Asgiar. Akbar, 

Fas, (Qismat ke masle ko), (radd kam^ chahiye.) 

V. Jannfi chdhiye, ki har dalU ya hujjat, ha surat i 
qiyas ho sakti hai, magar kuchh zarur nahln ki jo dalil 
bi ainihi isi surat par M jde, to sahih ho, wama nahin ; lekin 
yih hai ki dalil agar sahih ho, to is surat par bayan ho 
sakti hai. Maslan koi inkar kare, ki khilqat \&, Khaliq koi 
nahin hai, aur ek kahe ki hai, aur d^-wa kamewald Khud4 
ke wujtid ki chand misalen is amr ki sUihat men pesh kare, 
ki dimya men koi chiz khdli az hikmat nahin hai. Pas yih 
subut i kamil, aur dalil i sahih hai, halanki ba surat i qiyas 


by Google 


the argument good, although one point is left out, namely 
that whatever eontains design has an intelligent Creator^ 
Now this argument stated in full and reduced to a syl- 
logism would be— 

Whatsoever contains design, has an intelligent Creator. 

The world contains desis^n. 
Therefore, The world has an intelligent Creator. 

The syllogism then, is a kind of touch-stone that 
may be applied to all arguments to test their quality of 
truth or falsity. Or it may be represented as a straight- 
edge, which applied to arguments, shows them to be 
straight and truthful or crooked and eiToneous. 

6. The syllogism in the first figure, a term to bo 
explained hereafter, is founded on what is called Aris^ 
iotWs dictum. The dictum is— 

Whatever is predicated of a universal term or class 
may he predicated of any or all things contained in that 
term or class.* 

This may be stated more at length thus : If wq 
predicate, i. e., affirm or deny that something belongs to 
any term or class, and then show that something comes 
under that term or class, we may likewise predicate, i. e., 
offirm or deny of it what is affirmed or denied of the term 
or class. Thus if we show (predi- 
cate), that All X is contained in Y, 
and then show (predicate) that Z is 
contained in X, we may predicate 
that Z is contained in Y, as seen in 
the figure. 

Nothing can be more simple and plain than tWa 
law of thought. If we affirm or deny something of an 

* TWs dictum as Hamilton, Mill, and other noted logicians liave shown* 
is not the sole law of syllo^tic reasoning. Mill objects to the use of thi^ 
celebrated dictum, as savourmg of realism, i. e.y as implying that the class ha' 
a real eztstence, separate from indiyiduals. 


by Google 


nahin ; kyunki ek bat rah gaJ, j^QJia chiz men hikmatpdi 
fdti hai, us kd hakim zarur hogd, 

Ab agar yih dalil puri baydn kl jawe, aur ba tartib i 
qij^ likhi jawe, to yfin hogi: 

Jis chiz meQ kuchh hikmat pai jiti hai, us ka hakim zarur 

Khilqat men tarah tarah ki hikmat p^i j&ti hai. 
Fas duny^ k^ hakim zarur hogl. 

Malum kama chdliiye ki qiy&g, dalil ke sidq o kizb 
ke parakline kl ka.sauti bai. 

VI. Bind i qiy^s Aristatdlis ke qaul par hai, aur 
•WTih qaul yib hai, ki — 

« Jo kuchh kisikulU ki nisbat kahd jdwe, us ke sab afrdd 
par bhi sddiq dwegd. 

•Is kd mufassil bay4n y6n hai, ki agar kisi kulli yi 
jins ki nisbat kuchh kah& j^, khwdh Ij6b ke sfith j6, salb 
ke sath, aur yih dekhd jdwe, ki is kulll j& jins men fulani 
fulani f ard ddkhil hai, to is surat men jo kuchh is kulli j6. 
jins ki nisbat kaha gaya hai, wuh us chiz y& fard ki 
nisbat jo us men ddkhil hai, kahd j6we. Sfaslan agar koi 
kahe, ki — 

Sab A. B. men dakhil hai, aur 
m^ltim kare, ki 

Sab J. A. men ddkhil hai to 
wuh kah sakta hai, ki Sab J. B. 
men shdmil hai. 

Garaz yih ki jo kuchh kisl kulK kl nisbat kahd jawe, 
US ke kull afriwl ki nisbat kahd jdwe. Yih qdnun bahut 


entire class of things^ and then prove or assert that a 
certain thing comes under this class^ we may justly 
affirm or deny the same of it. The term or class here 
spoken of, is the " middle term'' of the syllogism. 
7. Logical Axioms and Evies for the Syllogism. 
Every correct syllogism agrees with certain 
rules. It was stated that every syllogism contains three 
and only three terms^ the major, the minor^ and middle 
with which the major and minor are compared. 


( I .) If two terms agree with one and the same third 
they agree with one another, 

(2.) If one term agrees with, and another disagrees 
with the same third, these two disagree with one another. 

The third term^ of these axioms^ is the middle term 
in a syllogism . 

From these two axioms, several rules are drawn for 
testing the validity of syllogisms. 

Rule.— 1 . If both premisses of a syllogism are affirm^ 
ative, the conclusion must he affirmative. 

This comes from the first axiom, because if the major 
premiss be affirmative, i. e., expresses the agreement of 
the major term with the middle, and the minor premiss 
also be affirmative, expressing the agreement of the minor 
term with the middle, it is plain that the conclusion in 
which these two terms are compared with each other 
must be affirmative, i. e., it must express their agree- 
ment with each other, because they were affirmed to 
agree each with the same third or middle term. Thus, 
if we affirm that '^AU intelligent beings were made to 
serve God," (major premiss) and also we affirm that 
" Angels are intelligent beings,'' we (minor prenuss) 
must affirm in the conclusion that '^ Angels were made 
to serve God." 


by Google 


8&E o saM hai. Agar ham kisi kulK \d nisbat kuchh bolen 
phir bad is ke sdbit karen, ki fulani chiz is kulli men 
dakhil hai, to albatta us chiz ki nisbat bhi usi tarah kahna 
wajib hog^. 

Khiyal rakhnd chahiye, ki yihi kulli, qiyas men hadd i 
ausat hoti hai. 

VII. Har qiyds i saMh, muwafiq chand qawajd i 
muqarrar ke hotd hai. Tih bayan ho chuka hai, ki har 
qiyas men tin juz hain, yane akbar^ asgjar^ aur hadd i amaty 
jis se akbar aur asgar ko milate hain. 

QlYis KE QANtJN I BADfnf.* 

1. — Agar do JUZ kisi tisre juz ke mutdbiq hon, to dpas 
men mutdbiq hain, 

2. — Agar ek juz mutdbiq^ aur dusrd juz gmr-mutdbiq 
ho kisi tisre juz ke^ to yih donon dpas men gair^mutdbiq hain. 

Tisre juz se murdd hadd i ausat hai. 
^ In do qdnun i badihi se chand aise • qawaid nikalte 
hain, jin se qiyas ki sihhat bakhtibi malum ho j&ti hai, 

PahlX qaida. — JVs qij/ds men kubrd aur sugrd mujiba 
hain J natija bhi m{ijiba hogd. 

Tih qaida pahle qanun se nikaltd hai, kyunki agar 
kubra mujiba ho, yane akbar hadd i ausat se mutabiq ho, 
aur sugra bhi mujiba ho, yane asgar mutabiq ho hadd i 
axLsat ke, to saf zdhir hai, ki natija bhi jis ke donon juz ek 
d6sre ke muq&bil hain, zarur mujiba hog^, yane donon ju2 
muwdfiq honge, zeraki yih donon mutabiq ho ohuke hain 
tisre juz, yane hadd i ausat ke. Masai to maslan, agar 
ham kahen, ki 

" Sab zt-aql, Khudi ki itaat karne ko paid^ hue hain." {Kuhrd.) 
** Firishte zi-aql haiQ." (Sugrd.) 

Pas natije men yihi kahnd parega, ki 

" Firishte, ^hud^ ki itaat karne ko paida h6e haig. {Natija) 

* BadiW wuh hai, ki bagair fikr o taammid samajh me© i jde. 

Digitized by VjOOQ iC 


Here the two terms, " serve God/' and " angels, " 
were found to agree with the same third, i. e., '^ intelli- 
gent beings,'^ hence they were declared to agree in the 

Rule. — 2. If either of the premisses be affirmative 
and the other negative, the conclusion mtist be negative. 

This comes from the second axiom. It is plain that 
if a term in one of the propositions agrees with, i. e., 
is affirmed of the middle term, and a term in another 
proposition disagrees with, i. e,, is denied of the middle 
term, the two not agreeing with the same, cannot agree 
with each other, hence a negative conclusion follows. 

Oood men are not liars. 
Those who go to heaven are good men. 
Therefore, Those who go to heaven are not liars. 

Here the major premiss is negative, t. e,, the majorr 
term '^ liars," does not agree with the middle term " good 
men.'' The minor premiss is affirmative, t. e., the minor 
term, 'Hhose who go to heaven," is affirmed of the mid- 
dle term, and hence these two terms agree and the con- 
clusion, " those who go to heaven are not liars," must be 
negative according to this rule. 

Rule. — 3 . If both premisses be negatives, we can draw 
no conclusion. Thus — 

** Zaid is not a diligent student.*' 
** Amr is not a diligent student/' 

X is not Y. 
ZisnotY. ^ ^ 

A statement like this proves nothing. 
No relation is established, as is seen in the figure. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Ab yahdn par " Khudd kiitaat kame ko,'' aur "firish- 
te," yih donon juz mutabiq tisre juz " zi-aql" ke hain, is 
sabab se natije men mutabiq hain. 

DtJSRiC QiCpA.. — Agar kubrd aur 8ug,rd men ek sdliba 
hOy to natfja zarur sdliba hogd. 

Yih qaida diisre qdnun i badihi se nikaltA hai. Yih 
zdhir hai, ki kubrd aur sugra men se kisi kd ek juz agar 
hadd i ausat se muwdfiqat rakhe, yane mansdb bil-ljab ho, 
aur dusre ka ek juz hadd i ausat ke gair-mutdbiq ho, yan© 
mansub bis-salb ho, to is surat men, yane jab ki ek mutabiq 
aur dusrd gair-mutabiq hadd i ausat ke hai, apas men bhi 
kisi taxah mutabiqat na hogi: pas natija. saliba niklega, 
jaia6, misdl se zdhir hai. 

Nek log, jhiith-boliiew^le nahln hain. 
We jo bihisht ko jkte hain, nekhote hain. 
Fas, We jo bihisht ko jite haig, jhu^he nahln hain. 

Is misdl men kubrd saliba hai, yane juz i akbar 
" jhuth-bohiewdle" mutabiqat nahln rakhtd hai "nek log" 
se, jo hadd i ausat para hai. Sugra mtijiba hai yane fiqraj 
" we jo bihisht ko jate hain," jo juz i asgar hai, mutabiq 
hai hadd i ausat ke, pas bamtijib dusre qdide ke natija 
sdliba nikaltd hai, yane "we jo bihisht ko jate, jhiithe 
nahin hain." 

TfsRA Q^iDA. — Agar kubrd aur sugrd donon sdlibe hon^ 
to kuckh natija na niklega, Maslan, 

Zaid mihnatl t^lib i ilm nahln hai. 
Amr mihnatl t^lib i ilm nahig. 

Is se kuehh natija nahln nikalta. 

Busri misdl : — 

A. B. nahln. ' 

J. B. nah'in- i - /\ B 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


It is nothing to the point to say " Zaid is not Amr/' 
for although it is true enough, this does not follow 
from the premisses, but is simply a fact, not sustained 
by these two propositions. We must keep in mind that 
the syllogism is a form of expression in which two. terms 
are compared with each other by means of a middle 
term ; now, at least one of the t^rms must agree with the 
middle term or standard of comparison, or no comparison 
can be eSected between them. We are supposed to be 
trying to find some relation between these terms, but we 
can draw no comparison between them, unless at least 
one of them agrees with the thing by which we propose 
to measure or compare them. Thus, if we have before us 
two large stones, and wish to compare them andjsay what 
their weight is with reference to each other, we can con- 
clude nothing about them by having a weight put into our 
hand by which neither of them can be weighed, i. e., with, 
which neither of them agrees. Thus, also if we say— 

Zaid is not a diligent student. 
Amr is not a diligent student. 

We have learned nothing about Zaid and Amr as 
compared with each other, or in other words, we have 
failed to establish any relation between them. But if we 
make one of the premisses affirmativeand say, — 

A good boy is a diligent student. 
Za& is not a diligent student. 

We can compare Zaid with ''good boy'' and draw tlie 
conclusion — 

Zaid is not a good boy. 

The conclusion thus states the relation between the 
major and minor term, fpund out when both or one of 
them agrees with the middle^ the term of comparison. 


by Google 


In donon ke darmiydn, yane "A'' anr "J'' ke, kuchh 
nisbat nahin malum hoti hai ki natija nikle. 

Pahli misal men yih kahne kd mauqa nahin, ki Zaid 
Amr nahin, kyiinki agarchi filwaqi yih each hai, magar 
yahan kubrd aur sugra se nahin nikalta, is sahab se, ki qiyas 
ek aisa bayan hai, jis men do juz ba zaria hadd i ausat milde 
jate hain aur kam az kam ek juz zarur hadd i ausat se 
mutabiq bona chahiye, wama kisi tarah mutabiqat in donon 
juzon ki na hogi. Hamen yih daryaft kami chdhiye, ki 
in donon, y^e akbar aur asgar ke darmiyan kya nisbat 
hai ; lekin akbar aur asgar ke darmiyan kuchh nisbat malum 
nahin ho sakti hai, ta waqte ki iu donon men se kam se kam 
ek juz mutdbiq hadd i ausat, jo un ko bdham digar milane 
ya napne ke Kye ek paimana hai, na ho. Maslan agar da 
patthar hon, aur ham daryaft kamd chahen, ki yih donon 
ba iatibdx wazn ke kya nisbat apas men rakhte hain, aur us 
waqt men koi bat ais^ maujud na ho, jis se donon ko taul 
saken, to tm donon ke darmiyan kya nisbat malum hogi. 

Pas agar ham kahen ki 

Zaid mihnati talib i ilm nahin hai. 
Amr mibnati t^b i ilm nahlu hai. 

to is surat men Zaid aur Amr ke darmiydn kuchh nisbat 
malum nahin, yane yih nahin malum hai, ki Zaid Amr se 
bara haiy^ aqlmand hai ya nahin, ya achchha hai ya burd, 
Magar ek qaziya agar mujiba ho, maslan — 

Zaid mihnati talib i ilm nahin hai. 
Achchhe larke mihnati hote haio. 

Yahan par chunki "Zaid" ki, " aohohhe larke" ke sath 
tarkfb ho sakti hai, is jihat se natija yun nikalta hai, — 

*< Zaid achchha lark^ nahin hai.'* 

Garaz ki natija us nisbat ko zahir karta hai, jo akbar 
aur asgar ke darmiyan hoti hai, aur yih nisbat hadd i 
ausat ke wasHe se m^um hoti hai. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Sui.B. — 4. The middle term must he univoeal, i. e., 
have but one meaning in the 'premisses. 

The reason is^ that in the syllogism a comparison is 
effected, as before stated and illustrated, between two 
terms by means of a third ; the syllogism then, as has been 
shown, must have only three terms. Bat if in any syllogism, 
the middle term is ambiguous, i. e., has one meaning 
in the major premiss and another meaning in the minor 
premiss, there are in reality two middle terms, or four 
terms in the syllogism. To draw a conclusion from such 
premisses, would be like comparing the length of two 
staffs, having measured one with a £Alse and one with 
a true measure, or like comparing the weight of two 
stones, having weighed one with a false and the other 
with a true weight. 

The following is an example of an ambiguons middle. 

light is contrary to darkness. 
Feathers are ligDt. 
Therefore, Feathers are contrary to darkness. 

Here the word '^light'^ is nsed in two senses. 

This plain example is given simply as an illustration 
of the ambiguous middle. No one could be misled by 
such a glaring fallacy, but in many cases of error, the am- 
biguons middle is not so manifest. For instance. Christ- 
ians and Mohammedans in arguing about the Trinity, 
attach different meanings to that word. Mohammedans 
argue that Christians teach a plurality of Gods and hence 
they are blasphemers. Their argument thrown into the 
form of a syllogism would run thus — 

The doctrine of the Trinity, implies a plurality of Gods. 
Christians hold to the docmne of liie Trinity. 
Therefore, Christians hold to a plurality of €k)d8. 

Here the middle term '' doctrine of the Trinity,^' is 
ambiguous. As urged by the Mohammedans in the major 


ChauthX QXida. — £[add i ausat zarAr mufrad hond 
thdhiyey yqne kubrd aur mgrd men, m ke sir/ ek hi mane hon. 

Is k& sabab yih hai, ki ba wasile hadd i ausat ke, akbar 
aur asgar ko mildte haiii) pas zarur hai, ki bar qiyds 
men sirf tin hi juz hon, lekin agar kisi qiy&s men baddi 
ausat mushtarak ho, yane kubrd men aur m^ne liye j&wen, 
aur sugrd men aur, to is surat men dar baqiqat do haddi 
ausat, yane cbdr juz ek qiyfa men ho jdwenge, hfildnki 
chdhiye yih thfi, ki sirf tin juz hon. 

Aise muqaddam&t se, jin men do hadd i ausat hon, 
natija nik&lna aisd hai, jaise do dandon men se ek ko pure 
gaz se, aur dusre ko aise gaz se jo pur& na ho, n&pkar 
donon ke tul ko miland, yane yih dary&ft kam&, ki yih 
donon ba iatib&r tul ke kyd nisbat dpas men rakhte hain ; 
j& jaise do pattharon men se ek ko pure bdt se, dfisre ko 
kamtax bdt se tauLid, aur phir muqdbala kam& donon k& is 
tarah par ki &y& ek dtisre se kitna bar& y& ehhot^ hai ya 

Mis41 i auwal, hadd i ausat i mushtarika. 
Til ek qism "kk an&j hai. 
Aksar §idmloQ ke munli par til hot& hai. 
Pas, Aksar Idmlog ke mugh par an&j hot& hai. 

Is misdl men lafz " til'' ka, do manon par mustaonal 

Misdl dusrl : — 

Bn^h^ ek bim^! hai. 
T^&bon se bn^^ n^hta hai. 
Pas, T^llbos se blm^i n(hti hai. 

In mission men s&f maldm hotd hai, ki hadd i ausat 
mushtarak hai. Eoi aisi sadhf galatioQ meii na pareg^ 


premiss^ it means one things and as held by the Christians 
in the minor premiss^ it means another thing. Christians 
mean by the Trinity, three divine personalities or exist- 
ences in one God-head^ constituting a Trinity in nnity, 
i. e., one God with three personalities, the mode of which 
they do not claim to understand. 

The same ambiguity sometimes occurs in the word 
faith. Christians argue that faith in God is pleasing to 
him, and insures salvation. Hindus urge that they have 
faith in God, and therefore will obtain salvation. Their 
claim put in the form of a syllogism would run thus — 

Faith in God procures salvation. 
Hindus have faith in God. 
Therefore, Hindus procure salvation. 

Here the middle term " faith in God,'' is ambigu- 
ous, for, as used by Christians, it includes more than as 
used by the Hindus. As used by one, it means a prop- 
er conception of God's character, trust in him, obe- 
dience to him ; by the other it means simply a belief 
in the existence of God. The meaning of the mid- 
dle term then, should be uniform in the premisses, i, e., 
it should have but one meaning in a syllogism. 

Rule.— 5, The middle term must he distributed at 
least once in the premisses. 

The reason of this is, if the middle term be not 
distributed at least once in the premisses, it does 
not become a reliable medium of comparison between 
the major and minor terms ; for if the middle term be 
not distributed at least once, i. e., if one of the terms be 
not compared with the whole of it, it might happen 
that the n^ajor term was compared with one part of the^ 
middle and the minor term with a totally different 

Digitized by LjOOQ IC 


lekin bahut jagah aisd hota hai, jahan sdf nahin mglunx 
hotd hai, ki hadd i ausat mushtarak hai ya nahin ? Maslan, 
Isai anr Mnsalm^n bar waqt i mubdhise tasHs ke, muVh- 
talif m^e taslis ke lete hain. Mnsalinan d^wd karte hain, 
ki Isai jaraiat i Khudd ke qail hain, is aahah se kdfir hain ; 
pas ba iatibar us mane taslis ke, jo Musalman qardr dete 
hain, agar dalil ba surat i qiyas, mnrattab ki jawe, to yun 
hogi :— 

Taslis se jamlat Khuda ki sabit hot! hai. 
Ts^l taslis ke qail haig. 
Pas, j'sai jamlat i K^huda ke qail hain. 

Tahdn par hadd i ansat, yane " taslis" mushtarak hai ; 
30 mane taslis ke kubr& men Musalmdn qarar dete hain, 
aur hain, aur jo mane taslis ke fsai sugra men qardr dete 
hmn wiJi aur hain. f sdion kd aqida ^h hai, ki taslis bd 
tauhid hai, yane Khudk ki wahdaniyat men taslis hai. 

Isi tarah lafz " iman" men kabhi kabhi shirkat manon 
ki hoti hai. Maslan fsdion ka dawa yih hai, ki jo shakhs 
Khuda par im&D. 16i& hai, Khuda us serazihotdhai, aur us 
ko najat deta hai. Hindu kahte hain, ki hamfira imdn IChuda 
par hai is sabab se hamdri najat hogi. Pas agar Hinduon 
ka dawa ba surat i qiyds bayan kiya jdwe to yun hogd : — 

Khuda par Imin l^ne se najat h^sil boti hai. 
Hindu, Khud^ par Im^n rakhte hain. 
Pas, Hinduon ko najat basil hogi. 

Tahan par hadd i ausat, "Khuda par im&i l&nd," 
mushtarak hai, kyunki f sdionke yahdn "iman" se yih murdd 
hai, ki Khudd ki zdt o sifdt ko pahchanna, aur us par bha- 
rosa rakhnd, aur us ki itaat kami ; aur Hinduon ke yahfin 
" iman lane " se murad yih hai, ki sirf Khuda ke wujud ko 
mannd, aur has. Garaz qiyds men yih zarur hai, "ki hadd 
i ausat ke ek hi mane rahen. 

Panchwan Qajda. — Kulrd aur augrd men se, ek men to 
hadd i ausat zarur kulli fiond chdhiye. 

Is ka sabab yih hai, ki agar hadd i ausat, na kubrd 
men kulli ho, aur na sugra men, to akbar aur asgar ke mu- 
qabala kame ka wastd kdfi nahin hogd, kyunki agar hadd i 
ausat ek men bhi kulli na ho, yane akbar aur asgar men 
se agar koi bhi us ke kull aMd se muqdbala na My& jde. 

Digitized by VjOOQ iC 


part of it. There would thns really be two middle 
terms^ i. e., the major and minor terms would not be 
compared with the same thing. Hence the syllogism 
would have in reality four terms. 
This will be plain from a figure. 

Somo X is Y. 

Some X is Z. 

Therefore, Some Z is Y. 

' Here X is not distributed as is seen from the sign 
^' some/* and from the figure it 
, is plain that the conclusion does 


not follow^ although it might 
happen that some Z is Yj as 
seen in the figure. 

The following are syllogisms violating rule 5th. 
Some animals are sheep. 
Some animals are horses. 
ThereforOi Some horses are sheep. 
White is a color. 
Black is a color. 
Therefore, Bkek is white. 

It is manifest that the middle term ''color," is 
only taken in part in both premisses, hence the error 
in the » conclusion. The middle term then, must be 
distributed at least once. 
In the syllogism : — 

Some men are hmmts. 
Some men are learned. 
Therefore, Some learned men are tyrants. 

^—we have an example of a conclusion which is 

correct though not following from this reasoning. 


by Google 


to shdyad akbax hadd i ausat ke baz ek aMd se, jo bilkull 
pahle 8e judd hain, muq&bala kiya jdwe, to is stirat men do 
hadd i ausat hue j&te hain, ygne akbar aur asgar ek hi juz 
88 muqdbala nahin kiye jate, aur ns qiy^s men ch&r jnz hue 
jate hain. Chundnchi shakl i mundarja i zaU se zdiir hai. 


Siaz A. B. hai. 

Baz A. J. hai. 

Fas, Baz J. B. hai 

Is miB^ men hadd i ausat ^^ A" kuUl nahln, ehunanohi 
lafz " b^" se zahir hai, aur shakl se zahir hai ki kuohh 
zarur nahin, ki natija yunhi nikle, agarchi ittifdqan yih 
bhi sadiq &we, y^e yih, ki 


Baz J. B. hai. 

Zail men ek misdl isl tarah ke qiyfis ki mundarij hai : 
B^z jinwar bheren haig. 
Baiz j^war ghore haig. 
Pas, B^z ghore bnereQ hai. 

Dust! misdl: 

Sufaidl ek rang hai. 
Siy^hl ek rang hai. 
Pas, Siy^hl sufaidl hai. 

Zahir hai, ki is misal men hadd i ausat ^' rang" jo hai, 
kubrd sugr& donon men juzi hai, isi jihat^ se natija galat 
nikalt^ hai. Pas zarfir hai, ki hadd i ausat kam se kam 
ek men kulli ho. Is qiyds men, ki — 
B^ idmi z&lim hain. 
B^ &dml ^lim haifi. 
Is liye, B^ alim z&lim haig*. 
mis41 aise natije ki hai jo sahih hai, magar tdrtib i qiy^s 
86 yih natija nahin nikaltd hai. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



EuLE.— 6. A term must not he distributed in tJi-e 
conclusion that was not distributed in the premisses. 

The reason is, that if a term be distributed, i. e., 
taken entire in the conclusion, which was undistrib- 
Hted or taken but in part in the premisses^ things 
would be compared in the conclusion which were not 
compared in the premisses^ and in reality a fourth term 
would be introduced into the syllogism, while three is 
the rule. We can only compare that part of a term 
with another in the conclusion that was compared 
with the middle term in the premisses, but if only 
a part of a term be compared in the premiss, and then 
the whole of it be compared in the conclusion, some- 
thing would be introduced that had not been compared 

A figure will make this error plain. 
AU X. is Y. 

No Z. is X. 

Therefore, No Z. is Y. 

Not true. 


AU X. is Y. 

AU X. is Z. 

Therefore AU Z. is Y. 

Not true. 

In the first of these examples, Y the major term, is 
not distributed in its premiss because the predicate of 
an aflSrmative proposition, i. e., a part only of Y is taken, 
as much as is included in X. But in the conclusion Y is 


by Google 


Chhathwan QXpA. — Agar Muqadd^tmdt men akbar 
ya asgjar juzi ho, to natije men hhijuzi hond chdhiye» 

Sabab is ka jih bai, ki agar akbar j& asgar natije men 
kulli ho, jab kubrd aur sugra men juzl hai, to aisa boga, 
ki baz afrad, jo kubri aur sngrd men muqabala kame ko 
i:ah gae the, natije men dkar muqabala kiye jdte bain, pas 
is siirat men obdr jxiz qiyas men ho jaenge halanki tin 
bona chahiye. Natije men ek juz ke sirf unhin afrad ka 
dusre juz se muqabala ho sakta hai, jo kubrd o sugrd men 
hadd i ausat se muqdbala kiye gae the; lekin agar kubra 
aur sugra men usi juz ke sirf baz afrad ka muqdbala kiya 
gaya ho, aur natije men akar kull afrad us ke muqabala 
kiye jaen, to baz aur afrad, jo peshtar muqdbil nahin the, 
ab a jaenge. 

Shakl i zail se yih galati saf zdhir hai : 

Sab A. B. hai. 
£ol J. A. nahin hai. 
Fas, Eoi J. B. nahin hai. 

Hfildnki haqiqat men J. B. men hai. 
Dusri misal : 

Sab A. B. hai. 

Sab A. J. hai. 

Pas, Sab J. B. hai. 

Tib bhi galat hai, kyunki sab J. B. men nahin haL 
Pahli misdl men B. jo akbar hai juzi hai, is sabab se ki 
mahmul pard hai qaziya i mujibe kd, yane jitnd hissa B. 
k& A. men dakhil hai, utnd hi le liya hai, na yih ki kull 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


distributed because it . is the predicate of a negative 
proposition, i, e., the whole of Y is taken and hence the 
mistake of saying that no part of Z corresponds with Y, 
In the second of these examples the minor term Z is 
not distributed^ i. e,, it is taken but in part, because the 
predicate of an affirmative proposition ; but in the con- 
clursion being the subject of a universal, it is distributed; 
hence the error. 

The first example is the same as saying, — 

AU qnadmpeds are animals. 
No bird is a quadruped. 
Therefore, No bird is an animal. 

The second example is, — 

All men are sinners. 
All men are animate beings. 
Therefore, AU animate beings are sinners. 

Neither of these can be true. If the major term be un- 
duly distributed, it is called *' illicit process'* of the 
major, if the minor be unduly distributed it is called 
" illicit process" of the minor. 

Bulb. — 7. Jf both premisses are particular, no 
conclusion can he drawn. 

This rule follow from rules 5th and 6th. The reason 
is plain. We are left without any medium of compari- 
son. Thus a conclusion from particular premisses, would 
be either a case of "undistributed middle," or "illicit 
process.^' For instance to say, 

Some men are wise. 
Some men are foolish. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


B. Leldn natfje men B. kulli hai, is sabab se ki mahmul 
hai qaziya i sdlibe kd, y^e kull B. Kyd ]6AA hai, pas yih 
kahnd galat thahartd hai, ki J. knll B. men nahin. 

Dusri misdl men asgar J. juzi hai, yane tamdm A. 
par nahln &ya hai, is sabab se ki mahmul pard hai qaziya 
i mujiba kd, magar natije men ba bajs manzu hone qaziya i 
knlliya ke, kiilli hai, aur yihi bajs galati kd hai. 

Pahli mis^ men aisl galati hai, goyd koi kahe, ki — 

Sab chaup^e haiw^n haig. 
Kol parand ohaupiya nahln hai. 
Fas, Koi parand haiwin nahln haiii. 

Dtisri misdl men is tarah ki galati hai, jaise koi kahe, 

Sab mska ffnnihg^r haig* 
Sab ins^n haiwin hain. 
Pas, Sab haiw44 gnnlJig^ haig. 

Jo akbar ki kubrd men j& asgar ki sugrd men jnzi 
ho, aur natije men dkar kulli ho j&e, us ko ^' kulliyat i 
fid'jdiz^* kahte hain, pas agar akbar natije men kulli ho 
jfie, jish&l men ki kubrd men juzi ih&y xis ko *^ kullij/ati 
nd'jdiz akbar Arl" kahte hain, aur jo asgar, ki sugra men 
juzi th&, aur natije men kulli ho jae, us ko ^^ kulliyat i nd* 
jdiz asgar kV^ kahte hain. 

SirwAN QipA. — Agar kuhrd aur sugrd donon juzi 
hain to natija kuchh nahin niklegd, 

Yih qaida pdijchwen aur chhathwen qdida se nikaltd 
hai. Yih zfliir hai, ki jab donon juzi hon, to koi wdsta i 
kAmila, akbar aur asgar ke muqabala kame kd na hoga. 

Do qaziye juzion se natija nikdlnd, do galation se 
khdli na hoga, yd hadd i ausat juzi hogi, yd kulliyat i 
nd-jdiz akbar yd asgar ki pdi jdegi. Maslan koi kahe, 

Baz ^dmi ^qlmand haig. 
B§kZ &dm! bewaq6f hain. 


by Google 



proves nothing, for we have an undistributed middle 
and are not justified in saying, — 

Therefore, Some foolish persons are wise. 
This is the same as to say : — 

Some X is Y» 

Some X is Z. 

Therefore, Some Z is Y. 

which is not true. 

Again, if we make one of the premisses negative 
and say, — 

Some animals are sagacious. 

Some quadrupeds are not sagacious, 

we would have an ''illicit process'' to infer that- 
Some quadrupeds are not animals. 

The same as to say — 

Some X is Y. 
Some Z is not I. 
Therefore, Some Z is not X. 

There may be exceptions to this rule about parti- 
cular premisses, in th^ case of affirmatives that distri^ 
bute the predicate, as mentioned on page 78; e. g, — 

Some animals are men. 
Some men are wise. 
Therefore, Some wise (beings) are animals. 

Here the conclusion is correct, and the middle 
term, although the predicate of an affirmative proposi- 
tion, is distributed because the '' some animals'' men- 
tioned, includes all men, so that '' men,'' in fact is 


"Rui^. — 8. If one premiss he particular^ the con- 
clmiQii mu&t he particular. 


by Google 



Is 86 kuolLh natf ja nahin nikalta hai, is sabab se ki 
hadd i ausat juzi hai, aur bilfarz agar nikdla bhi jae to 
ytin hogd, ki " Baa bewaqtif ddml ^qlmand hain," aur yih 
kahnd sahfh nahin, balki aisa hai jaise koi kahe, ki 

B^z A. B. hai. 
B^z A. J. hai. 

Pas, Baz J. B. hai. 

Anr agar kubra ^ur sugrd men ek sdKba ho, to misal jun 
hogi : 

Baz haiwan hoshiyar hain. 

B^ chaup^e hoshiyar nahin haig. 

pas natija nikalnd in men se is tarah par, ki 

" B^ chaup^e haiwin nahin," 

kuUiyat na-j^iz akbar ki hai. 

Yih bhi kahna aisa hi hai, ki 

Baz A. B. hai. 
Baz J. B. nahin hai. 
Pas, Baz J. A. nahin hai. 

Is 8wen qdide se, hash i bayan mundarja safhae 79, 
ba7 suraten mnstasnd bhi hain. 


Baz haiw&n, ^dml hain. 
B^ ^dml ^hnand haig. 
Pas, B^ aqlmana, haiwdn hain. 

Yahan natija sahlh hai, anr hadd i ausat, halanki qazie 
mujibe k& mahmul wage hiiihai, magar kuUi hai, kyunki 
" baz haiwan" se maqsud kull afrdd i insan hain, anr fil- 
haqiqat " ^dmi" knlli para hai. 

AfHWAN oAiBA. — Agar ek muqaddama juziya ho to natija 
zarurjuziya hog&. 


by Google 


The proof of this rule may be thus stated :-— 
The premiss must be either a particular affirmative, or 
particular negative. 

First case. — Suppose it to be a particular affirma- 
tive. Now, as we cannot have two particular premisses 
in a syllogism (Rule 7), the other premiss must be a 
universal affirmative or universal negative. Suppose 
it to be a universal affirmative ; then as this distributes 
only one term, it must be the middle, otherwise this 
term will not be distributed in the premisses, since the 
particular affirmative supposed, distributes neither term, 
(Rule 5) . From this reasoning it follows that the major 
and minor terms, not having been distributed in the 
premisses, cannot be in the conclusion (Rule 6) ; and 
this requirement can only be met in a particular affirma- 

But suppose this universal to be negative, then 
with a negative premiss there must be a negative con- 
clusion (Rule 2), and as the premisses are by this 
supposition a particular affirmative, distributing neither 
term, and a universal negative distributing either the 
major or minor term, but one term remains that may 
be distributed in the conclusion (Rule 6) ; hence it can 
only be a particular negative as stated in Rule 8th. 

Second case. — Having exhausted the case of a parti- 
cular affirmative, take the other alternative — a particular 
negative. Now, the other premiss must be affirmative 
(Rule 3) and universal (Rule 7), i. e,, it must be a uni- 
versal affirmative. In this second case, then, the 
premisses must be a universal affirmative and a particular 
negative. These distribute but two of the three terms 
contained (major, minor, middle) and as one of these 
must be the middle (Rule 6), but one term is left that 
may be distributed in the conclusion, which must be 


by Google 

QA 7 AS KB QA WAJD. 133 

Subtit is kd is tarah par hai, ki wuh muqaddama juziya, 
yd mujiba hoga ya sdliba. Farz karo, ki mujiba juziya 
ho. To chunki ek qiyds men (qaida 7) donon muqaddame 
juziye nahin rakh sakte hain, is waste dusr& muqaddama 
zurur mujiba kulliya j& sdliba kulliyd hogd. Farz karo, 
ki mujiba kulKya ho, to us men faqat ek juz kuUi hogd, aur 
wuh juz zurur hadd i ausat bond chdhiye. Wama kisf 
muqaddame men hadd-i-ausat kulli na rahega, kyunki 
mujiba juziya mafrtiza kisi juz kl kulliyat nahln zdhir 
karega. (Qdjda 5.) Is bahs se jdh natija nikalta hai, ki 
akbar o asgar donon muqaddamon men kulli waqi na hone 
se natije men kulli nahin & sakenge. (Qaida 6.) Tib bat 
faqat mujibe jusiye men, yane jab ki natija mujiba juziya ho, 
pai jati hai. Lekin farz karo, ki wuh qaziya sdliba kulliya 
ho, to muqaddame salibe se natija zurur sdHba niklega. 
(Qdida 2.) Chunki surat i mazkura men do muqaddam&t 
men se ek ygne mujibe juziye men koi juz kulli na hoga, 
aur dtisre yane sdliba kulliye men ek kxdli hogd, khwah 
akbar ho ya asgar, to faqat ek juz rah gaya jo natije men 
kulli ho. (Qdida 6.) Is wdste wuh qaziya faqat sdliba 
juziya hi ho sakta hai, jaisa ki qajde 8 men mazkur htid. 

Dusri surat — ^Yane agar muqaddama mtijiba juziya 
nahin hai, to sdliba juziya fajrz karo. Aur jab eksdliba juziya 
hai to dusra muqaddama zurur mujiba (qdida 3) aur kulliya 
(qaida 7) y^e mujiba kulliya bona ohdhiye. Donon 
muqaddamdt men ek mujiba kulliya aur dusra sdliba 
juziya zurur hoga, to donon muqaddame ke tin juzon (ysme 
akbar o asgar o hadd-i-ausat) men se faqat do ki kulliyat 
zihirhogi. Aur chunki ek in men se zurur hadd i ausat 
bona chdhiye, (qaida 6) to faqat ek juz rah gayd, jo natije 
men kulli ho, aur natija zurur sdliba hogd, kyunki ek 
muqaddama sdliba hai ; aur natijajuziyahogdis sabab seki us 


by Google 


negative because of a negative premiss, and particular, 
to secure the distribution of but one term. Hence la 
every case we get Rule 8th as above.* 

These eight Bules are for testing the validity of 
syllogisms. If they are violated by any syllogism, save 
in the exceptional cases mentioned, we may be sure 
that it involves an error. Although we cannot point 
it out clearly at the time, the syllogism may be rejected 
as faulty. We may not always be able to demonstrate 
the truth of each rule, just as one may forget the proof 
of a rule in arithmetic, but the rules should be well 
committed to memory for ready use in testing every 


Every syllogism contains three and only three 
propositions, called the — 

1 Major premiss, 

2 Minor premiss. 

3 Conclusion. 

Every syllogism contains three and only three 
terms, the — 

1 Major. 

2 Minor. 

3 Middle. 


1. If two terms agree with one and the same third, 
they agree with one another, 

2. If one term agrees with, and another term 
disagrees with the same third, these two will disagree 
with one another. 

"^Nole. — It may be noted that exceptions to this Rule may occur from 
affirmatives that distribute the predicate asundtr Rule 7th. See page 78. 


by Google 

^lYAS KE QA WAID. 135 

men faqat ek juz juzi hona chdhiye. Is wdste bahar surat 
athwan qaida bihasb i sadr, musaHam hai. 

Is athwen. qaide ke mustasniydt bhi un mujibdt ke 
sabab se bote hain, jo bihasb qaida-e 7, mahmiil kidliyat 
bayan karte hain. (Dekho safha. 79.) 

Yih dthon qawaid waste daryaft kame sihhat qiyas 
ke hain ; agar koi qiyas siwae baz mustasniyat raazkure 
qiyas ke, in qawaid ke bamujib na ho, to beshakk galat 
hoga ; agarehi sarihi na malum bo, ki fulani galati hai, 
magar taham galat samajhna chdhiye. Agar subiit in 
qawaid ka har waqt yad na rahe to khair ; lekin qawaid ko 
bakhubi zihn-nishin kamd ehdhiye. 


1. — Har qiyas men sirf tin hi qaziye bote hain, y^e 
huhrdj sugrd aur natija. 

2. — ^Har qiyas men eirf tin hi jnz bote hain, yane 
ukbar^ asg,ar anr hadd i ausat 

Qiyas ke QXNtJN i Badih/. 

Pahle, — ^Agar do juz kisi tlsre juz ke mutabiq hon, 
to apas men bhi mutabiq honge. 

Dust'e, — ^Agar ek juz mutabiq ho, aur dusri gair-mu- 
tabiq ho kisi tisre juz ke, to yih donon apas men gair- 
mutabiq honge. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


BuLES pos Syllogisms. 

1. If both premisses of a syllogism are affirmative^ 
the conclnsion must be affirmative. 

2. If either of the premisses be negative, the con- 
clasion mast be negative. 

3. If both premisses be negative, we can draw no 

4. The middle term must be nnivocal, i. e., have 
bat one meaning in the premisses. 

5. The middle term must be distributed at least 
once in the premisses. 

6. A term must not be distributed in the conclu- 
sion that was not distributed in its premiss. 

7. If both premisses are particular, no conclusion 
can be drawn. 

8. If one premiss be particular, the conclusion 
must be particular. 


by Google 



Pahld qdida, — Jis qiyas men kulMPa aur sugra mujiba 
hon, to natija bhi mujiba hoga. 

Dusrd, — Agar kubrd aur sugr^ men ek mujiba, aur 
ek saliba ho, to natija zurur saliba hoga. 

Tisrd, — ^Agar kubra aur sugra donon salibe hon, to 
kuchh natija na niklegd. 

Ohanthd, — ^Hadd i ausat zurur mufrad hona chahiye, 
yane kubra aur sugra men us ke sirf ek hi mane hon. 

Pdnchwdn. — ^Kubra aur sugra men se ek men hadd i 
ausat kuUi bond chahiye. 

Chhafkwdn. — ^Agar kubra j& sugrd men akbar ya asgar 
juzi hon, to natije men bhi Juzi bond chdhiye. 

Sdtwdn, — ^Agar kubrd aur sugrd donon juziye hon, to 
kuchh natija na niklega. 

Aihwdn.'-;-Agax ek muqaddama juziya ho, to natija 
zurur juziya hogd. 


by Google 



I. — Special attention has not yet been called to tLe 
fact, that the syllogism may have a variety of forms, 
according to the position of the middle term. Some- 
times it may seem best and most natural to make the 
middle term the subject of the major premiss and the 
predicate of the minor, sometimes the predicate of both 
premisses, &c. It is not required to be in any particular 
position, but may take its place in the premisses accord- 
ing to the way the argument strikes the mind of the 
reasoner. Thus, take the syllogism, — 

Good men do not go to hell. 
Liars go to hell. 
Therefore, Liars are not good men. 

This may be stated thus : — 

None that go to hell, are good men. 
Liars go to helL 
Therefore, Liars are not good men. 

In these two syllogisms, the middle term "go to 
hell, " is the predicate of both premisses in the first ex- 
ample; — in the second example it is the subject of the 
jnajor and the predicate of the minor premiss. 

Figure, is the tvord used to denote the different jpositions 
nf the middle term in syllogisms. The subject of figure 
may seem diflScult to the learner, but by a little applica- 
tion it will become plain. It is important to be familiar 
^ith it in order to deal readily with the various forma 
taken by syllogisms. 


by Google 



I. — ^Abhl tak is bat ka kuchli lUiaz na tha, ki bam u jib 
niaiiqa, aur niahal hadd i ausat ke, qiyas ki kai suraten 
hoti bain. Baz mauqa aisa bai, ki hadd i ausat ko mauzu 
gardanna kubra men, aur mahmiil sugra men sab se acbcbha 
malum hota bai, aur baz mauqa aisa akar parta bai, ki 
hadd i ausat kubra aur sugra donon men mahmul bota hai. 
Koi jagah kbass hadd i ausat ke hone ki muaiyan nahin 
hai, balki jis ja par us ka land dalll kamewale ke dil ko 
pasand awe, wahin par lawega. Maslan ek qiyas bai,. ki 

Nek log dozakh ko nahiQ jawenge. 
Jhuthe, dozakh ko jawenge. 
Pas, Jhuthe, nek log nahin hote hain. 

Aur yun bhi ho sakta hai, ki 

Jo log dozakh ko jate, nek nahin hain. 
Jhuthe, dozakh ko j^te hain. 
Pas, Jhuthe, nek log nahin hain. 

In do qiyas men, hadd i ausat "dozakh ko jana," pahli 
misal men, kubra aur sugra donon men mahmul para hai. 
Dusri misal men, kubra men mauzii,.aur sugra men mahmul 
para hai. 

Shakl se murdd maitqq^ aur maJial wdgj hone hadd i 
ausat kd hai. Agarchi auwal, mubtadi ko shakl ka bayan 
zara mushkil malum hoga magar thore hi mashq men 
bakhtibi saf ho jawega. Is kaifiyat se dgdh hond nihdyat 
pur-zurur hai, tdki mukhtalif suraten qiyds ki, ba-dsdn* 
tamdm istiamdl men dwen. 


by Google 



II. — It is plain that the middle term can have but 
four different positions in the syllogism. 

1. It may be the subject of the majar premiss and 
the predicate of the minor^ which constitutes the first 

2. It may be the predicate of both premisses, which 
constitutes the second figure. 

3. It may be the subject of both premisses^ which 
constitutes the third figure. 

4. It may be the predicate of the major premiss 
and the subject of the minor^ which is the fourth figure. 

Now^ let M represent the middle term^ and P the 
major term, (being the predicate of the conclusion) and 
S the minor term, (being the subject of the conclusion)^ 
and we may represent the four figures thus, — 

Firi% Figure, 
M isP 

Second Figure. 

Third Figure, 
M isP 

Fourth Figure 
P isM 

S isM 

S isM 

M isS 

Mis S 

S isP 

S isP 

S isP 

Sis P. 

A syllogism, illustrating each figure, may make 
this subject plainer. The middle term is enclosed in 

First Figure. 

Every (desire to gain by another's loss), is sin. 
All gaming, is a (desire to gain by another's loss.) 
Therefore, All gaming is sin. 

Second Figure. 

All intelligent men, are (friends to education.} 
Some wealthy men, are not ^friends to education.) 
Therefore, Some wealthy men, are not intelligent men. 

Third Figure. 

Some (good men), are not learned. 
All (good men), are worthy of admiration. 
Therefore, Some who are worthy of admiration, are not leame^. 


by Google 

SHAKL. 141 

n. — ^Tih zdhir hai, Id hadd i ausat char mauqa par a 
sakti hai. 

Pahle, — ^Agar hadd i ausat mauzu ho kubrd men, aur 
mahmul ho sugrd men, to shakl i auwal hogi. 

Dusre, — ^Agar hadd i ausat kubr^ aur sugra donon 
men mahmul waqi ho, to shakl i doyum hogi. 

Tisre. — ^Agar hadd i ausat donon men mauzu ho, to 
shakl i seyum kahenge. 

Chauthe. — ^Agax hadd i ausat kubra men mahmul ho, 
aur sugri men mauzu ho, to shakl i chaharum hogi. 

Ab farz karo, ki H. hadd i ausat, aur A. akbar, aur 
S. asgar ho, to char shaklen is tarah par hongi. 

1 Shakh 

2 ShaU 

3 ShahL 

4 Shakl, 

H. A. hai, 

A. H. hai, 

H. A. hai, 

A. H. hai. 

S. H. hai, 

S. H. hai, 

H. S. hai, 

H. S. hai. 

S. A. hai. 

S. A. hai, 

S, A. hai. 

S. A. hai 

Har shakl men ek mis&l di jati hai, taki kaifiyat i 
kuUi us kl khul jdwe. Hadd i ausat do lakiron ke bich 
men hai. 

Shakl i auwal, 

(Auron ke nuqs^n se apna nafa takna), gnnah hai. 
( Ju& auron ke nuqs^n se, apna nafa takna), hai. 
Pas, Ju^ gunah hai. 

Shakl i doyum. 

Sab aqlmand Sdml, (jlm ko aziz j^nte hain.) 
Baze daulatmand, (jlm ko azlz nahln j4nte bain.) 
Pas, B^ daulatmand ^dml, ^Imand nahin bain. 

Shakl i seyum, 

(Baz nek adml), $lim nahig hote haiy. 
(Kull nek admi),'^abil i tahsln hote baio. 
Pas, Baz idml jo qabil i tahsin bain, alim nabin bote hain. 


by Google 


Fourth Figure, 

Xo act of tyranny, is (beneficial to the state.) 
Some (things beneficial to the state), are unsuccessful. 
Therefore, Some unsuccessful things, are not tyranny. 

III. — These four figures must be examined in order, 
and special rules for them deduced. 
First Figubu. 

It will be seen that the First Figure is in the form 

in which Aristotle's dictum applies to it directly, t. e. 

Of a whole class, something is predicated. 
Something else is included in that whole class. 
Heuce, Of this something else, the same is predicated. 

By using the four categorical propositions according 
to their quantity and quality ^ it will be found that there 
can be but four variations of the syllogism in the first 

First Figure. 

Second Figure, 

Third Figure, 

Fourth Figure. 

All M is P. 

All M is P 

No M is P 

No MisP 

All S is M 

Some S is M 

All S is M 

Some S is M 

All S is P 

Some S is P 

No S is P 

Some S is not P. 

Now, the first figure being in the form of ** Aristot- 
Ws dictum^* we aflSrm or deny the predicate of the 
whole class which is the subject. Hence it is manifest 
that in the first figure, the major premiss is always a 
universal^ consequently any syllogism in this figure with. 
a particular major will be invalid. 

Since the minor premiss, according to Aristotle's 
dictum, always affirms that something belongs to tho 
given class, it is plain that in the first figure the minor 
premiss must always be affirmative, consequently any 
syllogism in this figure with a negative minor premiss 
will be invalid. 

Thus, two rules have been obtained for the first 
figure, i. e, — 

1 . The major premiss must always be universal. 

2. The minor premiss must always he affirmative. 


by Google 


Shakl i chahdrum, 

Koi kam zulra ka, kisi armaldari men nafa i khalaiq nahiDr 
Baz kam nafa i khalaiq ke jo haiu, nahl^ chalte haio. 
Pas, Baz k^m jo nahln chalte hain, zulm nahln hain. 

III. — ^Ab in char shaklon par ba tartib ganr kamd, 
aur un ke khass qaide nikalna chahiye. 


Zahir hai, ki pahli shakl ki aisi surat hai, ki Arastata- 
lis ke qaul se fauran parkhi jae. Maslan, pahK shakl ki 
aisi surat hai, ki us men — 

KuUi ki nisbat knchh kaha jata hai. 
Baz chizey us kulli men shamil kl j^tl hain. 
Pap, In baz chizo© ki nisbat bbl wuh b^t kahi jati hai. 

Aur yihi surat Arastatdlis ke qaul ki hai. 

Qaziya i haraliya ki charon suraton ko kulliyat o juzi- 
yat, aur ijdb o salb ke baraujib banane se raalum hota hai, 
ki shakl i auwal men qiyds ki sirf char suraten ho sakti 

]. 2. 3. 4. 

Sab n, A. hai, 
Sab S. H. hai, 
Sab S. A. hai, 

SabH. A. hai, 
Baz S. H. hai, 
Baz S. A. hai, 

KoiH. A. nahin, ] Koi[H. A. iiahii|. 
Sab S. H. haiij,' Baz S. H. hain. 
Koi S. A. nahi'n, | Baz S. A. nahin. 

Is waste ki shakl i auwal, bamujib qaul i Arastatalis 
hai, to inauzu ke kull afrad par mahmul ka dawa hoga. 
Pas zahir hai, ki shakl i auwal men kubra hamesha kulHya 
hota hai, isi sabab se agar shakl i auwal inen koi aisa qiyas 
ho, ki jis men kubrd juziya ho, to qiyas batil hoga. 

Chunki bamujib i qaul i Arastatalis, sugra men 
(lawa is bat ka hota hai, ki mauzii us ka, kulDra ke inauzii 
men shamU hai, is sabab se zahir hai, ki shakl i auwal men 
sugra mujiba bona chahiye. Pas is shakl men koi qiyas 
kyun na ho, agar us ka sugra saliba hai, to wuh galat 

Chunanchi is bayan ke bamujib pahli shakl ke wdste 
do qaide hain : (Safha. 145.) 


by Google 


Hence there can be but four forms of syllogism in 
this figure. The other figures, not being in the form to 
which Aristotle^s dictum applies, must be tested by the 
axioms and rules for syllogisms. 

Second Figure. 

Taking up the second figure, it is found that the con- 
clusion of syllogisms in it must always be negative, be- 
cause the middle term is the predicate of both premisses, 
and as it must be distributed in at least one of the 
premisses, this requires that one of the premisses be 
negative, since only negatives distribute the predicate. 
If, then, one of the premisses be negative the conclusion 
also must be negative according to rule. [p. 116, r. 2.] 
We may observe further, if the conclusion be negative 
it distributes its predicate, which in this figure is the 
subject of the major premiss ; hence the major premiss 
with a subject distributed, will be a universal. 

Three special rules are thus obtained for the second 
figure, viz. 

1. The major premiss mtist be universal. 

2. One of the 'premisses must he negative, 

3. The conclusion must he negative. 

Any syllogism in this figure, which violates these 
rules is invalid. 

Third Figure. 

This figure is of the form, M is P 

Mis S 
S is P. 

The syllogism as varied by quantity and quality j may 
have a greater variety of form in this figure than in any 


by Google 


1. — Kuhrd kd kulliya hond zarur chdhiye. 

2. — Sugjrd kd mi^jiha hond zarur chdhiye. 

Garaz ki is shakl men qiyas ki sirf char suraten hain, 
jin ki sihliat Arastdtdlis ke qaul se niglum hoti hai ; magar 
atir shaklen chunki ba surat i qaul i Areistatalis nafaln hain, 
is jihat se zarur hai, ki jo qawanin i badihi aur qawaid waste 
sihhat aqsam qij&s ke, muqarrar hain, un se un ki sihhat 
darydft Id jdwe. 

Bayan Shakl i doyum. 

M^um hotd hai, ki shakl i doyum men natija qiyason 
kd zarur sdliba hond chdhiye, is sabab se, ki sugra aur 
kubrd donon men hadd i ausat mahmul waqi hotd hai, aur 
agar kubrd o sugrd donon mujibe hon, donon men hadd i 
ausat juzl hoga, hdlanki chahiye yih thd, ki ek men kulli 
ho. Is wdste zarfir hai, ki ek qaziya saliba ho, kyunki 
salibon kd mahmul kuUi hai. Pas agar kubrd aur sugrd 
men se ek sdliba ho, to natija bhi bamujib qdida i mazkura, 
zarur sdliba hogd. {Saf. 117 ; Q. 2.] 

Aur aldwa is ke agar natija sdliba ho, to us kd mahmul 
jo is shakl men kubrd kd mauzi^i wdqi hiid thd, kulli hogd. 
Pas kubrd kulliya hogd. Lihdzd bamtijib baydn i mazkura 
e bald, dusri shakl ke liye tin qdide nikalte hain, y?aie — 

1. — Kuhrd zarur kulliya hond chdhiye, 

2. — Kuhrd sugrd men se ek zarur sdliba hond chdhiye, 

3. — Natija zarur sdliba hond chdhiye. 

Jo koi qiyds is shakl kd qawdid mazkura e bdld ke 
khildf hogd, galat hogd. 

Bayan Shakl i seyum. 

(H. A. 

kS I H. 8. 

(S. A. 

Misai is shakl ki { H. 8. hai 

Auron ki banisbat is shakl M iaf isdraten hain. Is ke 
liye tin qdjde hain. Auw^ naiijajuziyia hogd^ jaisd ki 

.,...., ^oogle 


other. Three rules arc formed for it. First, the eonclu-' 
sion must cdways be particular.^ as will be seen by trying 
the syllogism in every form. Thus if both premisses bo 
affirmative and we draw a universal conclusion, the minor 
term which is its subject, would be distributed ; but, as 
the predicate of an affirmative minor premiss, it is not 
distributed, hence we would have an *^ illicit process *' 
of the minor. The other possible cases are where 
one of the premisses is negative, as two negative pre- 
misses are not allowable according to the rule. Let 
the major premiss be negative, then the minor premiss 
being affirmative, does not distribute its predicate— 
the minor term— hence the conclusion of which it is 
the subject, cannot be universal, else we would have 
here also an illicit process of the minor. If the minor 
premiss be negative, the major must be affirmative and 
the conclusion negative, according to rule ; hence if wo 
draw a universal negative, the major term, which as pre- 
dicate of an affirmative proposition was not distributed, 
would be distributed as the predicate of a negative con- 
clusion, being an " illicit process'' of the major. Thus the 
conclusion in every case in this figure must be particular. 

Second, the minor premiss must always he affirmative, 
for it has just been proven that the conclusion in this 
figure must always be particular ; but if the minor 
premiss be negative its predicate, the minor term, 
would be distributed, and hence would require a uni- 
versal conclusion to avoid an '* iljicit process," and w© 
have just seen that the conclusion cannot be universal 
in this figure. 

Third, one of the premisses must be universai, because 
in this figure th% middle term is the subject of both 
premisses, hence ii^ order to secure its distribution 
<Rule 5, p. 122) one of the premisses must be universal. 
Hence the three rules: — (j^ge 148.) 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


is shakl ki stiraton se zahir ho jaegd. Maslan agar kubra 
aur sugra donon mtijiba hon, aur natija kuUiya nikala 
jawe, to asgar, jo us ka mauzu hai, kulK hoga ; lekin 
chtinki yilii asgar ba bajs waqi hone mahmul sugra mujiba 
ke, kulli nahin hai, is jihat se agar natija men dkar kulli 
ho jae, to yih " kulliyat na-jdiz asgar W hogi. Aur agar 
yun farz kiya jae, ki kubra aur sugrd men se ek saliba no, 

kyunki donon ka sdliba hona to hash qaida i mazkura ke, 
kisi tarah jaiz hi nahln hai, \_8af. 117. Q. 3.] to amcalj farz 
karo, ki kubra saliba ho, aur is surat men sugra chunki 
mujiba hoga, is bais se us kd, mahmul asgar, juzi hoga. 
Pas natija, jis ka mauzu wuhi asgar waqi ho, jo juzi tha 
sugra men, kyunkar kulliya ho saktd hai ? Bot/um, farz 
karo, ki sugra saliba ho, to is surat men, bamujib qaidon 
mazkura ke, kubra zarur mujiba, aur natija saliba hoga. 
Fas agar natija saliba i kulliya nikald jae, to akbar ba 
bais waqi hone mahmul qaziya i mujiba ke, juzf hoga, aur 
yihi akbar, jo juzi hogd qaziya i mujibe men, natija 
salibft kd. bhi mahmul waqi hoga. Fas agar yahan kulli 
qarar diya jae, to kaise ho sakta hai, kyunki " kulliyat 
n£-jaiz akbar ki" thaharti hai. Garaz ki bahar surat natija 
is shakl ka juziya thaharta hai. 

DoYUM, sug^rd kdmujiba hand hamesha zarur hai. ZerA 
ki abhi sdbit ho chuka hai, ki natija is shakl k6 hamesha 
juziya hota hai, lekin agar sugri sdliba ho, to mahmul us 
ka asgar i kulli wdqi hogd, aur is stirat men i&ki mahfuz 
rahen, " kulliyat na-jaiz" se, natija kulliya nikalna parega ; 
halanki abhi bayan ho ehuk& hai, ki natija is shakl ka 
kulliya kisi tarah nahin ata hai. 

TiSRE, muqaddamdt metiy ek kulliya hond ckdhij/e, kyunki 
is shakl men hadd i ausat donon muqaddamon ka mauzu 
hotd hai. Fas is liye ki us ki kulliyat qdim rahe, ek muqad- 
dama kulliya zariir hoga. Pas baydn i mazkura se tin 
qaide nikalte hain : — {Saf. 149.) 


by Google 


1.— TAe minor premiss must he affirmative. 
2, — One of the premisses must he universal. 
d.'^The conclusion must he particular. 

FouETH Figure. 

The fourth figure is of the form, 

P is M. 

M is S. 
S is P. 

This figure is an inversion of the first figure. li 
was not used by Aristotle but has been adopted by 
some logicians in later days.^^^ By some the fourth 
figure is rejected because it is supposed to be contrary 
to our natural order of thought. As, however, by some 
awkwardness of expression, an argument or syllogism may 
take this form, it is well to understand it and the rules 
accordiug to which the fourth figure might be used. 
All the categorical propositions, except a univ*ersal 
affirmative, may be drawn as conclusions in this figure. 
It is observed in this figure, that if the major premise 
he affirmative the minor must he universal. The reason 
is, that the middle term, which in this figure is the pre- 
dicate of the major premiss and the subject of the 
minor, would not be distributed at all if the premisses 
violate this rule, while it must be distributed at least 
once. [Rule 5, p. 122]. Thus, if the major premiss is 
affirmative, its predicate, which is the middle term, is 
not distributed ; hence the minor premiss of which it is 
the subject, must be universal to secure its distribution 

Again, if the minor premiss he affirmative the con- 
clusion must he particular; otherwise we would have 

* The introduction of this figure, is attributed by the Moslem autiior 
Ayerroes, to Galen. 


by Google 


1. — Sugxd zarur mujibd hand chdhiye. 

2, — Kuhrd sugrd men se ek kulliyd hond chihiye. 

3. — Natija zarur juziya hond chdhiye. 


Chauthi shakl ki siirat yih hai, 

A. H. hai. 
H, S. hai. 
S. A. hai. 

Yih shakl, pahli shakl kd \A\k hai, y?tne us shakl men 
hadd i ausat akbar ka mauzu, aur is men mahmtil hai, pahle 
men hadd i ausat asgar ka mahm^ hai^ aur is men inauzd. 
Ar^^tdlis ne is shakl ka istiamdl nahin kiyd ; lekin aur 
Mantiqin i mutaakhkhirin ne is ko ikhtiyto kiyd. Ek 
Musalman ^lim, Ab-ul-walld, sdkin i Hispdnid ne likha 
Vai, ki is shakl ka ijad, Galen se hai, jo Eshid e Kuchak 
mvin San 130 fswi men paidd huS. Baz is shakl ko nahin 
mdhte hain kyunki wuh saraajbte hain ki yih shakl khildf i 
aql kfe hai ; lekhi chunki ihtimal hai ki kahin par ba bdis 
be-tartft)i ib^at ke, kisi dalil yd qiyds men yih s6rat wdqi 
ho, is baiB se is ka aur un qdidon kd, jin ki rfi se jdh ahakl 
i chaharum istiamdl men dti hai, samajhn& bihtar hai. 

Siwd mdjilDe kulliye ke, aur sab qaziye hamliye, natija 
is shakl kd hu& karte hain. Mdjiba i kulliya sirf shakl i 
auwal kd natija wdqi hota hai. Is shakl par gaur kame 
80 m^lfim hotd hai, ki Agar kubrd mujiba ho^ to sugrd zarur 
kulliya hogd. Wajh is ki yih hai, ki agar kubrd aur eagri 
khildf is qdnun ke bote, to hadd i ausat, jo is shakl men 
mahmdl wdqi hua hai kubrd kd^ aur mauzd sugrd kd, 
mutlaq kulli na hotd, hdldnki yih chdhiye hai, ki donon 
men se ek men to kulli ho, \_Saf. 123. Q. 5.] Qaraz, agar 
kubrd mfijiba ho, to mahm61 us kd, jo hadd i ausat hai 
ju2i hogd, is liye kubrd, jis kd wuhi hadd i ausat mausnl 
pard hai, zarur kulli hond chdhiye, tdki us ki kuUiyat ek 
men to zardr ho jde. 

Agar 8tcgrd mujiba ho^ to natija zurur juziya hogd. 
Agar aisd na ho to '* kulliyat nd-jdiz aagar Id/' ^ahregi;Ie 


an *^ illicit process'^ of tho minor, as a moment's reflec- 
tion will show. 

Again, if either premiss be negative the conclusion 
also must be negative [fiule 2, p. 1 16], hence its predicate 
which is the major term, would be distributed [Rule 
4, p. 80], and this term being the subject of the major 
premiss, requires this to be universal, otherwise the 
major term would be distributed in the conclusion but 
not in the premiss, involving, as said, an " illicit pro- 
cess/' From this reasoning, we infer a third rule as 
given below Thus, there are three rules to which syllo- 
gisms in this figure must conform, viz : — 

1. — If the major premiss be affirmative ^ the mi^wr 
must be universal, 

2. — If the minor premiss be affirmative ^ the conclusion 
must be particular, 

3. — If either of the premisses be negative, the mojor 
must be universal. 

These rules of the four figures should be well stored 
in the memory for ready application. 

IV. — It is worthy of note that each figure, except- 
ing the fourth, which is merely an irregular or awkward 
form of argument into which the mind may accidentally 
stumble, has its own special use or fitness in certain 
cases or forms of argument. Thus, the first figure is 
that to which Aristotle's dictum applies directly, hence 
it is specially adapted for drawing conclusions from 
admitted universal or general principles or statements. 
For instance, if it be admitted as a general principle, 
that '^ All desire to gain by another's loss is sin," we 
may then go on to show that gaming is such a desire, 
and hence draw the just conclusion that all gaming is 

The second figure is specially adapted to disprove 
something that is maintained or believed to be true, or 
is likely to be accepted, although false and injuriooa. 1% 


kyunki agar sugra mtijiba ho, to us ka mahmiil asgar, juzi 
toga, aur wuhl asgar ba bais waqi hone mauzu natija ke 
zurur juzi hona chahiye, taki " kulKyat na-jalz" na ho. 

Agar hnbrd aur si4grd men se ek sdliba ho^ to zurur hai\ 
hi kuhrd kuUiya Jw^ wama " kulliyat na-jaiz akbar kl" thahre- 
gi. Maslan in donon men se agai* ek saliba ho, to natija 
bhl zarur saliba hoga, [&/! 117. Q. 2,] aur us ka mahmul, 
jo akbar hai kulli hoga, {_Saf, 81. Q. 4,] aur yihi mahmul 
natije ka, kubra men mauzu hai, pas zurtir hai, ki wahdn 
bhi kulli ho, wama yih akbar natije men kulli hoga, aur 
kubra men nahin, — aur yih khilaf i qaida hai. 

Pas tin qaide hain, jin ke bamujib is shakl ke qiyas 
hua karte hain : — 

1. — Agar kuhrd mujiba ho, to sugrd zarur kulUyd hoga. 

2. — Agar sugrd mujiba ho, to natija zuriir juzk/a hogd. 

3. — Agar kubrd aur sugrd men se ek sdliba ho, to zurur 
hai, ki kubrd Jculliya howe. 

In charon shaklon ke qaidon ko khub zihn-nashin kar 
lena chahiye, taki jis waqt mauqa pare, kam men awen. 

IV. — Gaur karna chdhiye, ki bajuz shakl chaharum 
ke, jo ittifaqiya dalil i be-tartib ki surat men a parti hai, baqi 
tinon shaklen apne apne mauqa par istiamal men ati hain. 

Maslan shakl i auwal bi-ainhi mutabiq qaul i Aras- 
tatalis hai, is jihat se is laiq hai, ki jahan kahin kulliyat 
i musallama, yane taslim ki hui se, ya ^mm baton se natija 
nikalna chahen, so nikalen. Maslan agarkoiis Amva bat ko 
mine ; ki " auron ke nuqsan se apna nafa takna gunah 
hai," to agar ham sabit karen, ki jua khelna aisa fial hai, 
jis men auron ke nuqsdn se nafa taknd hai, pas yihi natija 
niklega, ki jua khelna kaisa hi kyun na ho, gimah hai. 

Ddsri shakl, apnd dawa qaim kame ke liye itni kara- 
mad nahin hai, jitnd ki dusre ki bat ko katne ke liye. 
Mid shakl i auwal ki, is riiakl ka kubra, qaziya kulli j^aj^ 


is thus useful in attacking and destroying tbe positioist 
of an opponent^ rather than in building up one of our 
own. In this figure, just as in the fif st, the major pre- 
miss is a universal proposition, or contains a class to 
which the consent of an opponent has been gained. 
Then it is proved that the proposition advanced by him, 
cannot be true, because it either wants something that 
belongs to this admitted class, or ha^ something of which 
that class is destitute^ and hence can not be accepted. 
Thus, suppose it is maintained, or is likely to be believ- 
ed, that *' Jesus was an impostor, seeking to form a 
party for some selfish end/' Now, we may set about 
refuting this by laying down the proposition that : — 

No impostor seeking to form a party for selfish ends, would 

warn his followers that they would have to endure great 


We may then show that : — 

Jesus did so warn his followers. 
Hence, Jesus was not an impostor. 

Suppose that some one is disposed to believe the 

Bible to be merely a human production, because many 

things in it appear merely human, or seem to be mixed 

up with human error. Now, perhaps the consent of no 

one would be withheld from a proposition like this : — 

Any book containing a spirit and character superhuman, how- 
ever hedged in by difficulties, must be divine. 

We may incorporate this in a syllogism and com- 
plete the reasoning thus : — 

The Bible appaars to be just such a book. 
Hence, The Bible must be divine. 

The third figure is specially applicable for argu- 
ments in two cases. First where the middle term, is a 
proper name. A proper name, is not used as a predi- 
cate ; hence in this figure, as the middle term is the 
Bubject of both premisses, a proper name, may be used. 

Caesar was a tyrant. 
Caesar was a conqueror. 
Therefore, Some conquerors are tyrai^|8QQQQle 


hotd hai, jis ko fariq i sAni, jis se bahs ki jAe, tasllm kar 
lewe. Phir yih sdbit kiya jdtd hai, ki d^w4 fariq i sdni ka 
sahih nahlii ho sakta hai, is sabab se ki y4 to us ke dawe 
men ek bat nahin pdi jdti hai, jo qaziya i kulliya i musallama 
men hai, ya yih, ki us dawe men pdl jdti hai, magar qaziya i 
musallama men nahin hai ; pas us kd dawa qabU i taalim 
nahin hai. 

Maslan kol kahe, ki Khuddwand fsa Masih dagabaa 
thd, is waste ki apne liye ek guroh ko mutla kama chahta 
thi, aur un ki bihtari se kuchh sarokar na thd, to ham is 
ke radd men yih qaziya i kulliya Idwen, ki " Jo dagabaz 
apne matlab ke waste ek guroh ko mutia kartd hai, is ami 
Id ittil^ us guroh ko na detd ki tumhdre tipar mere mutia 
hone ke sabab se barf barf muslbaten awengi." Jab ham 
donon is ko tasKm karen, to sdbit kamd chahiye, ki Khuda- 
wand f sA Masih ne apne shagirdon ko is tarah ki ittild di ; 
pas natija yih niklega, ki wuh dagabaz na tha. 

Dmri misdl. — Farz karo, koi kahe ki Baibal insan ki 
bandi hui hai, kyunki bahut baten us men insdn ki malum 
hoti hain, j& yih, ki bahut bdten us men aisi hain, jin men 
insdn ki galati malum hoti hai, to is surat men shayad 
har koi is qaziya i kulliya ko tasliai karega, ki 

Koi kit&b, jis kl tallni aur kh^ssiyat aisl bo, ki insan ki 
taqat se b&har bo, go ki baz maq^m^t meg kaisi bi 
musbkil b^tei) bon, zurur ilb^mi bogi. 

Jab ham is qaziye ko qiyds men milawen, to is tarah 
pdii dalil band sakte hain : — 

Baibal dar baqiqat aisi kitab malOm boti bai. 
Pas, Baibal zurur ilb^mi bai. 


by Google 


An arguraent must thus sometimes take the form 
of the third figure. Secondly, this figure is useful when 
we wish to offer and maintain an objection to an 
opponent's premiss, when he reasons from a particular 
premiss, while that premiss should be universal, in a 
valid argument. We then show that the argument in 
its legitimate form proves too much. Suppose one 
contend, that "a certain doctrine ought not to be 
believed because it cannot be explained or comprehend- 
ed/' His argument stated in full would be, — 


Some doctrines that cannot be explained and 

comprehended, ought not to be believed. 
The doctrine in question, can not be explained 
or comprehended. 
Therefore, It is not to be believed. , 

This put in symbols is, — 

Some X is not Y. 
Z is X. 
Therefore, Z is not Y. 

which plainly contains an undistributed middle. The 
argument to be legitimate should be, — 

Every doctrine that cannot be explained and comprehended, 
ought not to be believed. 


by Google 


Shakl i seyxun, khass karke do mauqa par dalil karne 
ke wAste istiamal ki jati hai. Amcal^ jahdn hadd i ausat, 
ism i kbass, yane ism i marifa hota hai, kyiinki dar haqi- 
. qat ism i m^irifa mahmul nahin hotd hai, aur chnnki i» 
shakl men hadd i ausat mahmul nahin waqi hota hai, 
balki kubra sugra donon men roauzu w^qi hota hai, is jihat 
se agar hadd i ausat ism i marifa ho, to kuchh muzayaqa 
nahin . — ^Maslan, 

Qaisar zalim tha. 
Qaisar bara namwar tha. 
Pas, B^ namwar, z^lim bote balD. 

Pas is tarah par kabhikabhi ek dalil ya qiyfis, shakl i 
seyum kf surat men bandnd partA hai. 

Doyum^ yih shakl us mauqa par istiamdl kl jati hai, 
jahan kisi ke dawe par iatiraz pesh kamd chdhen, jab ki 
wuh, qaziye i juziye se bahs kare, jis hdlat men, ki qaziya i 
kulliya se bah? kamd chahiye. To aisi jagah par ham 
sabit karenge, ki agar yih dalil ba sihhat likhl jawe, to 
fariq i sani ke matlab se bhi barhkar sdbit hota hai, yane 
khud us ke'upar iatiraz wdrid hot4 hai. Farz karo, kol 
shakhs kahe, ki fulani bat nahin manni chahiye, kyunki 
samajh men nahin 4ti, aur kol use samjha nahin sakta hai. 
Agar yih dawa ba tartib qiyas ke likha jdwe, to yun 
hoga, ki — 

JBaz b§ten, jo samajh men nabin atin, un ko na 

m4nn^ cb&biye. 
Fulani bat, samajh meg nahin ^ti. 
Pas, Us ko na m^nn^ chahiye. 

Aur jdh misdl ba zaria huruf ke yun hogi ki— 

Baz A. B. hai. 

J. A. hai. 

Pas, J. B. hai. 

Is misil se saf zdhir hot4 hai, ki is qiyAs kd hadd f 
ausat ju2i hai, is sabab se yih dalil sahih nahin hw. Agar 
sahih taur par likhi jawe, to yfin hogi : — 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


The doctrine in question, cannot be explained or 
Therefore, It is not to be believed. 

Now, the argument founded on this universal major 
premiss, proves too much, and we may urge an objection 
to it in the third figure, thus^ — 

The connection of soul and body, cannot be explained and 

The connection of soul and body must be believed. 
Therefore, Some things that cannot be explained, must be believed. 

From this it is seen, that the premiss of the op- 
ponent involves an error. On the question of the spe- 
cial fitness of one mood over another in certain cases, 
we may note that it is a more natural order of thought, 
to predicate the more extensive of the less extensive 
term, the genus of the species ; thus we do not say '^ wise 
is James," ^' an animal is a horse," but '' James is wise," 
^^ a horse is an animal." Hence, where the middle term 
would be the more extensive term in the premisses, it 
is natural to form the syllogism in the second figure, 
because it will then be predicate. But if the middle term 
be the less extensive term, it would naturally be the 
subject, and the syllogism would fall in the third figure. 

The subject of Figure^ and its rules, being well un- 
derstood, we turn to another matter connected with syl- 
logisms, n».. Mood. 


by Google 


Har ek bat, jo samajh men nahin ^ti, us ko nahin 

mann^ chahiye. 
Fulani b&t samajh men nabin ati. 
Pas, Us ko nahiB manna ch^hije. 

Tahan par kubra kulliya se, jo dalil nikalti hai, us 
dalil se, us se bhi barhkar sabit hota hai, jitna ki fariq sdni 
ko manztir tha, yane khud us ke upar tisri shakl kl ru se, 
iatixaz warid hota hai, Maslan : — 

Ruh aur jism ke darmijan Jlaqa jo hai, samajh men nahin at^, 
Ruh aur jism ke darmijan jl^qa jo hai, ham us ko m4nte hain, 
Pas, Bfz b^ten, jo samajh men nahin ati hain, ham mante hain. 

Is qiyas se alaniya sabit hai, ki agar dawa fariq s&ji 
ka ba sihhat likha jae, to kubra galat thaharta hai. Aur 
is bab men ki khass mauq^on par ek zarb ko dusri par 
tarjih hai, yih lihaz rakhna chahiye, ki fikr yih chahtl hai, 
ki wasia lafz kam wasia ka, aur jins nau kd, mahmul 
waqi ho. Maslan ham yun nahin bolte hain ki " Haiwan 
ghord hai," balki " Ghora haiwan hai," ya " aqlmand Zaid 
hai," balki " Zaid aqlmand hai." Is! waste jahan kahin 
muqaddamat men hadd i ausat ziyada wasia ul mane ho, to 
tartib i qiyas dusri shakl men achchhi malum hoti hai, 
kyunki usi surat men mahmul parti hai. Lekin hadd i 
ausat agar kam wasia ho, to use mauzu dalna achchha ma- 
lum hota hai, aur tartib i qiyas tisri shakl men ho jati hai 

Bayan shaklon aur un ke qawdid ka ho ehuka. Ab 
ham ek aur bayan mutaalliq i qiyas, y^ne zarb ka baydn 
shuru karte hain. 


by Google 



1 By the i^iood of a syllogism is meant, the designa- 
tion by symbols, of the quantity and quality of its three 
propositions in their order. It will be remembered thattho 
four vowels A E I 0, were used to designate the quantity 
and quality of all propositions, m., universal affirmative, 
universal negative, particular affirmative, particular 
negative. For example take the syllogism, — 

Every desire to gain by another's loss, is sin. (A.) 
Gaming, is a desi 
Therefore, All gaming is sin, 

Gaming, is a desire to gain by another's loss. (A.) 

The three propositions of this syllogism, are all 
universal affirmatives, hence the mood of the syllogism as 
indicated by the appropriate symbols is A A A. 

Now, it is manifest that the four categorical proposi- 
tions A E I 0, can be arranged in 64 combinations or 
moods y by the law of permutation. There are three prop- 
ositions in the syllogism, and each of these may be vai*ied 
in four different ways, as A E I 0. Each of these sym- 
bols may be a major premiss, and each of these foar 
majors may have in turn all the four categorical proposi- 
tions as minors, giving sixteen sets, and to each of these 
sixteen sets, the four categoricals may be used as con- 
clusions, making the 64> combinations of syllogism. 


by Google 

FASL ni. 

Bayan Zarb ka. 

1. — ^Zarb se murad hai, tlnon qazion qiyds ki kulliyat o 
j-Qziyat, aur ijab o salb, yane " kam o haif^ 

Tad raldinfi chahiye, ki char alamaten, sab qazion kl 
kulliyat o juzijat, aur ijab o salb ke malum kame ke wdste 
muqarrar ki gai hain, yane Mk, waste rnujiba i kulliya 
ke; Sk, waste saliba i kulliya ke; Jfj. waste mujiba 
i juziya ke ; &], wdste sdliba i juziya ke. Har qiyds Id 
zarb, in cbdron alamaton se likbte hain. Maslan, ek qijda 
hai, ki 

Mk, Jis Hal meD ki anrog ke nuqs^n se apn^ nafa bo, gunih hai. 
Kk, Jtia aisa fial hai, jis men auronke nuqsan se apn4 n^ahot^hai, 
Mk. Pas, Jua khelnd gunah hai. 

Tlnon qaziye is qijfis ke, mujibe kulliye hain, pas 
zarb is qiyas ki, jis se murad hai batlana " kam o kaif" 
ki, ba zarla alamaton muaiyana ke yih hai, Mk, Mk, Mk. 
Wazih ho, jahan kahin aisi alamaten waqi hon, auwal 9I&- 
mat se murad huhrd; doyum se sugrd; seyimi se natt^a 
hogi. Zahir hai, ki charon qazdya e hamliya, y?aie Mk, 
Sk. Mj. 8j, ki, jwaz mudwize ke qaide se, chaunsath zarben 
ho sakti hain. Maslan, yih malum hai, ki qiyas ke tin 
qaziye bote hain, aur har qaziye ki chdr stiraten ho sakti 
hain, yane Mk. ya 8k., Mj. ya 8j. Ab gaur kamd chdhi- 
ye, ki kubrd in chdron men a sakta hai, aur har ek kubri 
ke sath sugra kl char suraten a sakti hain, y^e Mk. 8k. 
Mj. 8j. ; pas kubra aur sugra ke solah jor hue, aur phir 
har jor l<a natija bhi inhln char stiraton par & sakti nai, 
to ifl tarah chaunsath zarben niklengi : — 


by Google 













Conclusions, A E I 0. 

This operation may be gone through with for each 
of the letters, and sixty-four moods, or forms of syllogisn^ 
will be the result. 

Now many of these moods are not allowable because 
they violate the rules laid down for syllogisms, and for 
the figures. Thus all moods having affirmative pre- 
misses with a negative conclusion, as A A E, — A I O, 
are inadmissable because they violate the first axiom. 
All moods with negative premisses as E E, — O, — 
E O, &c., cannot be used because they violate a rule 
[p. 116, r. 3.] All moods with particular premisses are 
not allowable, as they violate a rule [p. 128, r. 7.] Some 
of the moods as I E O, must be rejected for an illicit 
process. Twenty-eight of the sixty-four moods, are 
rejected on account of negative and particular premisses 
alone. It will be found that out of the entire sixty-four 
moods, only eleven are allowable as not violating the 
rules for syllogism, viz. 

Four affirmatives. 

Seven neaaHves, 





A A I. 


I A I. 

A 0. 


E I 0. 


2. As there are four figures, it might seem tlAt 
by applying these eleven moods to all the figures, we 
would have forty-four in all, but some of the moods 
which are valid in one figure are not in an other, be- 
cause they violate the rules against the " undistributed 


by Google 



4 Kubre, 


Mk. Sk. Mj. 8j. 

16 Sugre, 

-S^^. Mj. Si. Aizan, Aizan, Aizan. 


i Aizan 




64 Natije Mk.Mh.Mj.Mj. 

In chaunsath zarbon men bahut riadurust hain, is sabab 
Be ki khilaf bain un qaidon ke, jo mazkur ho chnke bain, 
waste qiyas aur sbaklon ke. Maslan jo zarb, ki jis ka 
kubra aur sugra mujiba bo, aur natija saliba bo, jaise Mk. 
Mk. 8k. aur Mk. Mj. 8j. sabib nabin, is waste ki wuh kbilaf 
pable qanun ke bogi, [Saf. 115. Q. 1.] Kull zarben, jin 
kd kubra aur sugrd sdliba bon, maslan Sk. Sk.j aur SJ. Sj.y 
aur Sk. Sj. qanun ke kbilaf bain, [Saf. 117. Q. 3.] Jin zarbon 
ke kubra o sugra juziya bote bain, wub zarben bbl ba-bais 
Vbildf i qaida bone ke gir jati bain, [Saf. 129. Q. 7.] 
Chand zarben, jaise Mj. Sk. Sj., ba sabab " kuUiyat najaiz*' 
bone ke gir jati bain, [Saf. 127, Q. 6.] Cbaunsatb mert 
athdis zarben to sirf ba sabab saliba aur juziya bone kubra 
o sugra ke, gir jati bain. Garaz yih ki sirf gyfirab sabib 
rabti bain ; yane, — 

ChdrMUjihe, Sdt Sdhle. 

Mk. Mk. Mk. aur Sk. Mk. Sk. 

Mk. Mj. Mj. Mk. Sk. Sk. 

Mk. Mk. Mj. Sk. Mk. Sj. 

Mj. Mk. Mj. Mk. Sj. Sj. 

Sj. Mk. Sj. 

Sk. Mj. Sj. 
Mk. Sk. Sj. 

2. — ^Agar cbaron, sbaklon men gyirab gy&rab zarben 
istiamdl ki jatin, to kull chaualis zarben botin, lekin yih 
bat nabin hai, balki b^ zarben, jo ek sbakl men sahlh 
hain dusrl men galat, ba b&is mukhalif hone un qawdid ke, 
jo dar bab na bono " juziyat badd i ausat," aur " kuUiyat 


by Google 

162 MOOD. 

middle'^ and '^ illicit* process." Thus the mood I A I, 
which is valid in the third figure, cannot be used in the 
first figure, because it would involve an undistributed 
middle. Again A E E, is a valid mood in the second 
figure, but in the first it would have an illicit process 
of the major term. By thus testing these eleven moods 
in the four figures, it is found that there would be six 
in each figure, that is, twenty-four in all. Now of these 
twenty-four moods, five, though valid, are thrown aside 
as useless, giving ^ particular conclusion when a univer- 
sal might have been drawn. For example, A A I, of 
the first figure is useless, as A A A is allowable and 
really contains it. Thus. 

All human beings are mortal. 
All Hindus are human beings. 
Therefore, some Hindus are mortal. 

This is a valid enough syllogism, but it is useless 
because we might draw here the universal conclusion. 

All Hindus are mortal. 

There will remain then nineteen moods in all, viz. 
four in the first figure, four in the second, six in the 
third, and five in the fourth. They may be arranged as 
follows : — 

Fig. 1, A A A, E A E, A 1 1, E I 0. 

1^^. 2, E A E, A E E, E I 0, A 0. 

Fig. 3, A A I, I A I, A 1 1, E A 0, A 0, E I 0. 

Fig. 4, A A I, A E E, I A I, E A 0, E I 0. 

These symbols simply exhibit in order, the nineteen 
moods, and for greater facility in remembering them, 
and at the same time to aid in the reduction of the 
moods, a subject to be noticed hereafter, they have beea 
worked up into mnemotechnic lines in Latin measure 
as below : — • 


by Google 



ndjaiz" ke bayan ho chuke hain. Pas yihl zarb Mj. Mk. 
Mj, jo hai, shakli seyum men sahili hai; magar auwal 
men nahin kyiinbi wahan hadd i ausat juzi ho jaegi. Isi 
tarah Mk. S/c. Sk, kl zarb, shakl i doyum men sahih hai, 
lekin auwal men nahin ; kyunki agar wahan istiamal men ati, 
to kulliyat najaiz akbar ki hoti. Garaz i%i is hi tarah par in 
gyarah zarbon ko eharon shaklon men jancho, to malum 
hoga, ki har shakl men chha zarben, yane kull chaubis 
saMh rahti hain. Magar in chaubis men se bhi pdnch agar- 
chi sahih hain, lekin ba bais dene natija juziya ke, jis hai 
men ki natija kulliya nikal sakta hai, bekdr hain. Maslan 
zarb Mk. Mk, Mj. ki shakl bekar hai; zera ki zarb Mk. 
Mk. Mk. ki bhi nikal sakti hai, jis men natija zarb i auwal 
dakhil hai. Maslan: — 

Kull ins^n fani hain. 
EuU Hindu insan hain. 
Pas, Baz Hindu ikni haii}. 

Tih zarb bilkull sahih hai, lekin jis hai men ki 
natija kulliya, yane "Kull Hindu fdni hain," nikal sakta 
hai, to yih kis kam ka hai. Garaz ki is tarah par kull 
unnls zarben 16' A rahti hain; char shakl i auwal ki; char 
doyum ki ; chha seyum ki ; pdnch chaharum ki. Chunan- 
chi sab zarben ba tartib, zail men mundarij hain : — 

Shakl 1. Mk. Mk. Mk.,— Sk. Mk. Sk.,— Mk. Mj. Mj.— Sk. Mj. Sj. 
Skal:l 2. S^. Mk. Sk.— Mk. Sk. Sk.-Sk. Mj. Sj — Mk. Sj. Sj. 
Shakl Z. Mk. Mk. Mj.-Mj. Mk. Mj.— Mk.Mj. Mj.— Sk. Mk. Sj.— 

Sj. Mk. Sj.— Sk. Mj Sj. 
Shakl i. Mk. Mk. Mj.— Mk. .Sk. Sk.— Mj. Mk. Mj.— Sk. Mk. Sj.— 

Sk. Mj. Sj. 


by Google 


Fig. 1, bArbArA, cElArEnt, dArll, fErlOque, prioris. 
Fig, 2, cEsArE cAmEstrEs, fEstlnO, bArOkO. secundae. 
Fig. 3, tertia, dArAptI, dlsAmls, dAtlsI, fElAptOn, bOkArdO, 

fErlsO, habet : qiiarta insuper addit. 
Fig. 4, brAmAntlp, cAmEnEs, dImArls, fEsApO, frEsIsOn. 

It must be noted that in these lines the moods are 
represented by the large vowels. The consonants hayo 
a use to be explained when treating of reduction. The 
Latin words have nothing to do with these subjects, but 
make up the verses. 

Perhaps these lines will be much more easily com- 
mitted to memory by most students, if put in a uniform 
type without the Latin additions, thus : — 

Barbara, celarent, darii, ferio. 

Cesare, camestres, festino, baroko, 

Darapti, disamis, datisi, felapton, bokardo, ferison. 

Bramantip, camenes, dimaris, fesapo, fresison. 

These are the only valid moods, and any syllogism 
not found in the moods of this table is to be rejected. 
If the table be. committed to memory, the validity of 
any syllogism proposed in an argument, may be found 
at once. 

By looking at this table of moods it will be seen, that 
a universal affirmative can be proved only in the first 
figure, in which every other proposition may be proved 
also. In the second figure negatives only can be proved^ 
in the third, particulars only. 

3. Ebduction. — The moods of the first figure have 
been called perfect moods, because Aristotle's dictum, 
the law on which alone some have claimed that the syl- 
logism is founded, can be applied directly to any syllo* 
gism in this figure. The moods of the other three figures, 
can all be reduced to the first figure, by what is called 
'* reduction" so that we can prove the same conclusion, 
in the figure to which Aristotle's dictum immediatiely 


by Google 

KHULF, 165 

Sirf yihi zarben sahlli hain, aur jo qiyas zurub i mun- 
darja e naqsba i bala ke khilaf boga, najaiz hoga. Agar 
naqsha zurub kd bakbubl yad kar liya jde, to jo koi qiyas 
kisi babs men pesb kiya jawe, us kl sibhat fauran malum 
ho jawegi. 

Naqsba e zurub ke dekbne se malum bota hai, ki 
mujiba e kuUiya fsirf sbakl i auwal bi ka natija waqi hotd- 
bai, aur bdqi aur qaziye bbi is ke natije bote bain. Sbakl i 
doyum kd natija sirf saliba ata hai, aur seyum ka sirf 

3. — Khulf. Baz mantiqin sbakl i auwal ki zarbon ko 
zurub i baiyana aur kamila kabte bain. Is ki wajb yib 
hai, ki qaul i Aristatalis yane wuh qanun, jis par bina 
qiyds ki hai, is sbakl ke jitne qiyas bain, un sab par bil 
Biutdbaqat sahib dta hai. Tin aur sbaklen jo rahin, im ki 
zarben bamujib qantin " khulf ^ ke, sbakl i auwal men late 
bain, yahdn tak ki wuhi natija is sbakl men bbi nikal ata 
hai. Khulf ^ kisi zarb ki tartib ke badalne aur pahili sbakl 
men Idne ko kabte bain. Aur yib do tarab par bai : — 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Reduction consists in, either changing, by conversion 
and transposition, the form of the syllogism in the 2nd, 
Srd, and 4th figare, into a mood of the first figure, so that 
the same conclusion can be drawn, or a conclusion which 
becomes the same by conversion, as we had in the mood 
from which the change was made; which is called "osten- 
sive reduction/' or the conclusion of a syllogism ia 
the second, third, or fourth figure may be shown to be 
correct by proving in the first figure that its contradic- 
tory is false. If we thus prove in the first figure that 
the contradictory is false, of course the original conclu- 
sion must be true. This is called, " reductio ad impos* 

Some writers on logic, proceed at length to show how 
the truth of a conclusion in a syllogism of any of the last 
three figures, can be proved by " reduction" of the syllo- 
gism to the first figure, but the subject hardly repays the 
labour of mastering it, since the rules given for testing the 
validity of syllogisms, are sufficient for all practical pur- 
poses. Lambert claimed that the reduction of syllogisms 
in the last three figures to the first, is "strained and 
unnatural.^' Some of the ablest modern writers as 
Thomson, discard the whole subject as useless. Each 
figure has its own sufficient tests. An advantage claimed 
for the Hamiltonian system is that the quantifying of 
the predicate, dispenses with reduction. 

But for the satisfaction of those who may be desirous 
to study this subject, a brief account with illustrationi 
of it, is given. As has been mentioned^ there are two 
kinds of reduction. 

First, we may notice " ostensive'^ or direct reduction. 
A scheme of symbols will illustrate the reduction of 
moods in the last three figures to the first figure. 


by Google 

EIHULF. 167 

Ek to yih, ki Idnd kisi qiy&s kd, bamiijib qdida i aks 
ke [aur kabhi kubra ko sugra aur sugrd ko kubra 
kamd,] shakl i auwal ki kisi zarb ki siirat men taki wuhi 
natija nikal awe, jo us qiyas men nikla tha. Ya aisa natija 
nikle, ki aks kame se wuhi hojae, jo us qiyas men tha. 

Dusre yih, ki shakl i doyum, yd seyum, ya chaharum 
kd koi qiyas ho, us ke natije ki sihhat shakl i auwal men 
jdkar is tarah par sabit karna, ki naqiz is natije ki galat 
hai. Pas agar shakl se sabit ho jawe, ki naqiz is natije hi • 
galat hai, to albatta wuh .natija sahih hogd. 

Pas malum hota hai, ki tin aur shaklon ki zarben jo 
rahin, un ke natijon ki sihhat, shakl i auwal se bhi daryaft 
ho jati hai. 

Baz mantiqin is Khulf ka bahut tul tawH bayan karte 
hain ; lekin yih mihnat fuzul hai, jis hai men, ki har qiyas 
ki sihhat daryaft kame ke waste, qawaid i kafi maujud 

Lambert sahib ka dawa yih hai ki khulf ke qaide se, 
akhir ki tin shaklon ke qiydsat ko, shakl i auwal men lana 
fuz^ hai. Baze hai ke bare laiq mdquli jaise Thomson 
sfihib hain, is kull bahs ko bekar jante hain. Wuh kahte 
hain ki khulf ki kuchh zarurat nahin. Har shakl ke liye 
^ahda alahda sihhat o adam sihhat ke daryaft ke qajde 
kafi maujtid hain. Aur yih bhi kahd jdta hai ki Hamilton 
sdhib ke qaida e kamiyat i mahmul se, khulf ki kuchh 
zarurat nahin rahti. 

Lekin jo log is bab men kuchh waqifiyat hasil karna 
ohdhte hain, unki taskin ke waste mukhtasar baydn ma^ 
misal kiyd jatd hai. Jaisa ki upar zikr a chukd hai, dalil i 
khulf ki do qismen hain. 

Qism i auwal hhulf kf yih hai ki sugrd ko aks i mus- 
tawi ke qdide se badalkar kubrd ki jagah rakhen. Zail 
se m^um hota hai ki akhir kS tin shaklon ki zurub ko, isi 
qism ke khulf se kis tarah ba shakl i auwal badla hai. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Mood fig. 2 Reduced to 

fig. 1 

A all X is Y -^^^^^^^ 

no Y is Z. (By simple conversion.) 

E no Z is Y ^^^"^^"^ 

all X is Y. 

E no Z is X 

no X is Z. 

no Z is X. (By simple conversion.) 

Mood fig. 3 Reduced to 

fig. 1 

I some Y is X ..^^ ^^ 

all Y is Z. 

A aU Yis Z ^^^-^ 

some X is Y. (By simple conversion.) 

I some Z is X 

some X is Z. 

some Z is X. (By simple conversion.) 

Mood fig. 4 Reduced to fig. 1 

E no XisY 

no Y is X. (By simple conversion.) 

A all Y is Z 

someZ is Y. (Conversion by limitation.) 

some Z is not X 

some Z is not X. 

The cross lines X show that the premisses are trans- 
posed in forming the new syllogism. A single illustra- 
tion by propositions, of the mood A E E given above, 
must suffice. It will be a good exercise for the student 
to work out some illustrations for himself. Example : — 

Every covetous man is discontented. 

No happy man is discontented. 

Hence, no happy man is a covetous man. 

This syllogism may be reduced to the mood E A E 
of the first figure by converting the minor premiss by 
simple conversion and then transposing it to the place 
of the major premiss, thus :— 

No discontented man is a happy man. 
Every covetous man is a discontented man. 
Hence, no covetous man is a happy man. 

This conclusion becomes by simple conversion, '' No 
happy man is a covetous man/' the same as before 


by Google 

KHULF. 169 

Shakl i dutoam. 

Shakl i aufval. 


kull A. B. ha -x 

. ^ koi B. J. nahig. Aks imus- 
X tawlse. 


koi J. B. nahin ^ 

^ \ kull A B. hai. 


kol J. A. nahls 
Shakl % suwam. 

koi A. J. uahiQ. 


baz R [A. had .^ 

^ kull B. J. hai.. 


kull B. J.hai / 

^ ^"^ baz A. B. hai Aks i mustawi se 


b^ J. A. hai 
Shakl i chahdrum. 

baz A. J. hai. 
baz J. A hai. Aks i mustawi se 


koi A. B. nahig 



kuU B. J. hai 

baz J. B. haL Aks i mustawi se 


baz J. A, nahlg 

b^ J. A. uaMn- 

Terhe khutut se x malum hota hai ki muqaddamdt 
badalkar nai stirat i qiyas men ho gae hain. Ek misal 
ibarati, shakl i duwam ki zarb (Mk. 8k. 8k.) maz^ 
kurae sadr ko kdfi hogi. Talib i ilm ko achchhd mashq hoi 
jaega, agar apni taraf se chand misalen tajwiz karke isl 
tarah amal kare. 


Har t^mO) be-sabr hot^ hai* 

Nek log, be-sabr nahin hot^. 

Is liye, Nek admi, t^e nahin bote. 

Is qiyds ko, shakl i auwal ki zarb {sk. mk. sk.) ki stirat 
men is tarah badal soJkte hain ki sugra ko aks i miistawi 
se badalkar kubra ki jagah rakhen : — 

Maslan — 

Koi be-sabr, nek nahiQ. 
Har tame, be-sabr hai. 
Is liye, Koi t^ime^ nek ^dmi nahin. 

Is natije kd ^ yih hai ki^ <^ nek ^dml tdme nahin hai| 
jaisd pahile hua. 

Digitized by 



Second^ it remains to illustrate the reductio ad impose 
fifiti'Ze, or indirect reduction. By this mode of reduction, 
we prove that our conclusion is true, because when the 
contrary of this conclusion is inserted as a premiss in a 
syllogism of the first figure, a conclusion manifestly false 
is drawn. Take the mood A 0, of the 2nd figure :— 

All good men are contented. 
Some ricli men are not contented. 
Therefore, Some rich men are not good men. 

Now if this conclusion is not true, then substitute 

the contrary of it as a premiss in a syllogism of the first 

figure thus : — 

All good men are contented. 
All ricli men are good men. 
Therefore, All ridi men are contented. 

Now this conclusion is not only manifestly false, but 
it is untrue because it is contrary to the minor premiss 
of the original syllogism in which the premisses are sup- 
posed to be true. Hence one of the premisses in this 
syllogism must be false, or the fault must be in the form 
of the syllogism. But the reasoning or form of the syl- 
logism being in the first figure, we know to be correct, 
hence one of the premisses must be false, and it is the 
minor, because the major is granted in the original syl- 

We may work this out in symbols thus : — 

All X is Y. 
All Z is not Y. 
Therefore. Some Z is not X. 

This conclusion must be true, but if it is claimed 

that it is not, then its contradictory must be, true i. «., 

all " Z is X.". By using this as a premiss, we may form 

a syllogism in the first figure thus :— 

All X is Y. 

Therefore, All Z is Y. 


by Google 

e:eulf. 171 

JDmri qlsm i hhulf se, yih sdbit kiyd ]&i& hai ki natija 
sahihhai,kyunki jabnaqizi natija, shakliauwalkeqiyaska 
ek muqaddama banakar rakha jat^ hai, to natija sarib galat 
nikalta hai. Maslan dusri shakl ki zarb Mk, 8j. 8j. ko lo : — 

Tam^m nek, q^n^ haio. 
£az daulatmand, qan4 nahln* 
Pas, Baz daulatmand, nek nahln. 

Farz karo ki agar yih natija sahih nahin hai, to naqiz 
i natija ko, shakl i auwal ke qiyas ka ek muqaddama 
banao is tarah par ki — 

Tamam nek, q^nj hain. 
KuU daulatmand, nek hain. 
Is liye, Kull daulatmand, q^nj hain. 

Yih natija na faqat sarih galat hai, balki khilaf i 
waqi hai kyunki asl-qiyas jiske muqaddamdt sahih farz kiye 
hain sugra is qiyas ka uske mukhalif hai. Is w6ste qiyas 
ke muqaddamat men se ek zurur galat hoga, ya tartib i 
qiyas men kuchh qiisur hoga. Lekin chunki yih dalil yane 
tartib i qiyfe ba-shakl i auwal hai, ham j£nte hain ki sahih 
hai. Is waste ek muqaddama zurur galat hoga aur wuh 
muqaddama sugra hai, kyunki kubrd asl qiyas se sahih 
farz kar liya gaya hai. Huruf i Hija se is ki misal is 
tarah hai 

Kull A. B. hai. 
KuU J. B. nahin. 
fiaz J. A. nahln. 

Tih natija zurur sahih hai. Agar na ho, to naqiz iski 
sahih hogi yane kull J. A hai. Is qaziye ko shakl i auwal 
ke qiyas k& ek muqaddama banakar rakhen, to mis&l yih 
hogi, ki 

Kull A. B. hai. 
Kull J. A. hai 
KuU J. B. hai. 


by Google 


Bat from the premisses of the former syllogism, we see 
that some "Z is not Y,*' and this being the contradictory 
of the conclusion just drawn, both cannot be true. Now 
as the premiss " all Z is not Y," of the former syllogism 
is assumed to be true, the conclusion ^' all Z is Y " must 
be false. If then this conclusion is false, either the error 
is in the form of the syllogism, or one of the premisses 
is false. But the form of the syllogism according to the 
first figure is valid, hence one of the premisses must be 
£silse, and it cannot be the major, because this in the 
original Syllogism is assumed to be true. Hence the 
minor, ^' all Z is Y," must be false, and its contradictory 
^' some Z is not Y,*' is true in the first syllogism. 

The verses constructed to aid in remembering the valid 
moods of the four figures, are also arranged, as was inti- 
mated, to facilitate reduction. The student is referred to 
these lines, (page 164) with this explanation that in the 
scheme, the consonants b, c, d, f , in the beginning of the 
words in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th figure, show to which mood 
of the first figure the reduction may be made. To illus- 
trate, festino (E I 0) of the 2nd figure, felaptony feriso 
(E A 0, E I 0) of the third, and fesapoy fresison (E A O, 
E 1 0) of the fourth, may be reduced to ferio (E I of 
the first figure. The letter m. shows that the premisses 
are to be transposed. Thus, in reducing from camestres 
of the second figure, to cekrent of the first, the premisses 
A E become E A. The letter s shows that the proposition 
for which the preceding vowel stands, is to be converted 
simply ; p shows that the proposition, indicated by the 
preceding vowel, is to be converted " per aocidens" or 
by limitation. The letter k shows that the mood is to be 
reduced ad impossible^ i. e., the premiss immediately pre- 
ceding k. is to be substituted by the contradictory of the 
conclusion, and then the proof of the original conclusion be 
worked out, as was shown in illustrating this form of re- 
duction. It will be seen that baraJco of the second, and 
hohardo of the third figure, are to be reduced thus. Other 
letters in the scheme not mentioned, have no meaning in it. 


by Google 

keulf: ira 

Lekin pahle qiyas ke muqaddanlfit se yili malum hota 
hai ki " baz J. B. nahin hai." Aur chunki yih muqaddama, 
mukhalif natije " kull J. B. hai" ke hai, is waste donon 
sahih nahin rah sakte hain. Lekin " kull J. B. naMn," 
pahle qiyfis k& muqaddama sahih f arz kar Hya gayd. hai, is 
waste yih natija ki " kull J. B. hai," galat hond chdhiye. 
Agar galat hai, to y& to tartib i qiyas men ya kisi muqad- 
dame men galati hai. Lekin tartib i qiy6s bi-hasb i shakl 
i auwal durust hai. Is waste koi muqaddama galat hai. 
Lekin kubrd galat nahin ho sakta kyunki asl qiyds men 
sahih farz kar Kya gayd hai. Is isabab se sugra, " kull J. 
B. hai" zurlir galat hai, aur uski naqiz pahle qiyas men ki 
" kuU J. B. nahin hai" sahih hai. 


by Google 

Of Hypothetical Akguments. 


So far we have considered only purely categorical 
arguments and syllogisms^ that is^ such as are formed 
from categorical propositions. We come now to con- 
sider hypothetical forms of argument, and the syllogisms 
formed from them. An argument containing a hypoth- 
esis may be called a hypothetical argument. 

A syllogism containing a pure hypothetical propo- 
sition, or more than one, is called a hypothetical syllogism, 
and the syllogism will take its name as ^'conjunctive'' or 
*' disjunctive/^ from the proposition contained in it, [see 
page 66 ]. In the hypothetical syllogism, the hypoth- 
etical proposition is the major premiss, the minor is a 
categorical, and the conclusion is also categorical. In 
the hypothetical proposition, the first member is called 
the antecedent, the second member the consequent. The 
antecedent and consequent may be inverted, as " John 
will be fit to travel, if he is not sick. '* We first examine : — 

I. The conjunctive syllogism, which in its most 
common form, has for its major premiss a conjunctive 
proposition and for its minor a categorical. For ex- 
ample :— 

If Zaid has a fever, he is sick. 
Zaid has a fever. 
Therefore, He is sick. 


by Google 


BayXn Giyas Shartiya ka. 

Tahan tak ham ne un qiyason ka, jo murakkab hain 
hamKyat se, bayan kiya, aur jin ko qiyds hamliya kahte 
hain ; ab ham bayan karte hain un qiyason kd, jo murak- 
kab hain shaitiyat se. 

Wazih ho ki jis qiyds men qaziya i shartiya paya jdtd 
hai, use shartiya kahte hain, aur jaisa qaziya jis qiyas men 
paya jata hai, waisa hi us ka ndm hotd hai. Agar qaziya 
muttasila pdyd i^we, to qiydn i ittisdli, aur agar qaziya 
munfasila payd jawe, to infisdlt, kahenge. Qiyas shartiya 
men, kubr^ qaziya i shartiya, aur sugra hamliya hota hai, 
aur natija bhi hamKya nikaltd hai. Qaziya i shartiya ke 
juz i auwal ko ^^ muqaddam^^^ aurdusreko ^^tdli" kahte 
hain, aur baz jagah muqaddam plehhe 4 jdta hai aur talf 
aiiwal. Misal qaziya i shartiya — 

Agar Zaid ko bukhar hai, to wuh btmar hai. 
Tahan par, " a^ar Zaid ko bukhar hai" muqaddam, aur " to 
wuh bimdr hai^' tdlt hai ; aur muqaddam agar tdli ki jagah 
a jae, to yun hoga, ki — 

" Zaid bimar hai, agar us ko bukh&r hai." 

I/par baydn ho ehukd hai, ki qiyas shartiya, yd ittisdli 
hota hai, y& infisdli, 

I. Qiyas IxriSALf. 

Auwal, ham bayan karte hain ittisali ka, jis kd 
kubra shartiya muttasila hota hai, aur suffrd, hamliya. 
Misaliskl, — 

Agar Zaid ko bukhar hai, to bImar hai 
Lekin Zaid ko bulbar hai. 
Pas, Wuh h\mkr hai. 


by Google 



If A is B, A is C. 
But A is B. 
Therefore, A is C. 

In this example it is plain that if we affirm tbe an- 
tecedent, the affirmative of the consequent necessarily 
follows, and we get the first rule for conditional propo- 

1. — If the antecedent he granted the consequent mvst 
he granted also. 

But if we deny the antecedent, we cannot therefore 

deny the consequent; thus — 

Zaid bas not a fever. 
Therefore, He is not sick. 

For it is plain that he may be sick from some other 
cause than fever. 

If we deny the consequent, we may deny the 
antecedent also, thus — 

Zaid is not sick. 
Therefore, He has not a fever. 

For it is plain that if Zaid is not sick, he cannot 
have a fever, hence the second rule : — 

2. — If the Consequent he denied^ the antecedent must he 
denied also. 

But it must be observed, that if the consequent be 
affirmed, we cannot therefore affirm the antecedent 
and say, 

Zaid is sick. 
Therefore, He has a fever ; 

for he may be sick from some other cause. 

Putting these two rules together we may draw 
from them a third rule : — 

3. — If the consequent he affirmed or the antecedent 
denied no conclusion can he drawn. 


by Google 


Wuhi misal bp. zaria huruf , — 

Agar A. B. hai, to A. D. bai. 
Lekin A. B. hai. 
Pas, A. D. hai. 

Is misdl se bakhtibl roshan hai, ki agar muqaddam 
taslim kiya jae, to tali ko bhi taslim kajna parega. Pas 
yih pahla qajda nikla, ki — 

1. — Agar muqaddam taslim kiyd, jdwe, to tali ko bhl 
taslim kamd paregd. 

Lekin agar muqaddam kd inkar kiyd jae, to kuchh 
zarur nahin, ki taK ka bhl inkar kiya jae. Maslan, 

Zaid ko hukhar nahin hai. 
Pas, Wuh biniar nahin hai. 

Tih kuchli zarur nahin hai, ki agar bukhar na ho, to 
bimar bhl na ho. Shayad kisl aur sabab se bimar ho. 

Agar taK ka inkar kiya jawe, to muqaddam ka bhi 
inkdr kama parega. Maslan, — 

Zaid bimar nahin hai. 
Pas, Us ko bukbar nabla hai. 

Saf zahir hai ki agar Zaid bim^ nahin hai, to us ko 
bukhar bhi nahin hai. Pas dusra qaida yih nikla ki, — 

2. — Agar tali kd inkar Uyd jde^ to muqaddam kd inkar 
bhi kamd paregd, 

Lekin gaur kama ch^hiye, ki agar iQi taslim ki jdwe, 
to kuchh zarur nahin, ki muqaddam bhi taslim kiya jawe. 
Maslan, yun na kahna ehahiye, 

Zaid bimar hai. 
Pas, Us ko bukhar hai. 

Kyunki shayad kisi aur sabab se bim^r ho. 

Donon qdidon mazkura e bald se tisra qaida nikalta 
hai : — 

3. — Agar tdli taslim ki jae, yd muqaddam kd inkar 
kiyd jdwOy to kmhh natija nahin niklegd. 


by Google 


When from the affirmation of the antecedent, we 
pass to the affirmation of the consequent, the argument 
is called constructive, and when we pass from the denial 
of the consequent to the denial of the antecedent, the 
argument is called destructive. For the constructive 
syllogism then, we take the whole of the conjunctive 
proposition as the major premiss, the affirmative of the 
antecedent for the minor, and from these premisses, we 
draw the affirmative of the consequent as a conclusion.. 
The following is a constructive syllogism. 

If this man is a sinner, God is displeased with him. 
He is a sinner. 
Therefore, Grod is displeased with him. 

In the destructive syllogism, we take the whole of 
the conjunctive proposition as before, for the major 
premiss, the denial of the consequent, as the minor, and 
draw the denial of the antecedent, as the conclusion. 


If this man is a sinner, God is displeased with him. 
God is not displeased with him. 
Therefore, He is not a sinner. 

Again, — 

If just law prevails, the rights of the weaker are secured. 
But the rights of the weaker are not secured. 
Therefore, Just law does not prevail. 

As we have seen, the conjunctive proposition may 
have various forms, (p. 66) and the syllogism will be 
varied accordingly. For example — 

If A Is B ; C is D. 
A is B. 
Therefore, C is D. 

If the rains are scanty, the crop wiU be light. 
The rains are scanty. 
Therefore, The crop will be light. 


by Google 


Jab muqaddam ko sadiq qarfir dekar tdli ko sddiq 
thahrawen, to dawd q^m hotd hai, aur jab ki tali ko^^qarar 
dekar muqaddam ko qazib thahrawen, to us waqt men 
dawd batil ho jata h ai. Auwal surat ko tmisbita, aur 
dusri ko manfi yd kaLna chahiye. Auwal surat ke qiyas 
men waste qaim kame dawe ke kidl qaziye muttasile 
ko kubrd gardante hain, aur uske ain muqaddam kosugra ; 
pas qin tali us kd natija niklega. Chimanchi misal is ki 
zail men likhi hai : — 

Agar yih shakks gunahg^r hai, to 'KhxxAk us se iia-h:husli hai. 
Lekin yih shakihs gunahg^r hai. 
Pas, £[hud^ us se nV^hush bai. 

Waste batil kame dawe ke, kull qaziye i muttasile koj 
jaisa pahll surat men tha, kubra karte hain, aur naqlz i tall ko 
sugr&. Pas naqiz i muqaddama, natija nikalta hai. Maslan — 

Agar yih shakhs gun^hgar hai, to Khudi us se nd-khush har. 
Lekin Khud^ us se na-khush nahln hai. 
Pas, Wuh gunahgar nahln hai. 

Dusri misal : — 

Agar insaf ka qanun jlri ho, to garib gurbon ka haqq, thikine 

raht^ hai. 
Lekin garib gufbon k^ haqq, thik^ne nahln rahti hai 
Pas, Insaf &k qanun j^rl nab In hai. 

Jaisa ki malum ho chuka hai, [saf . 67] qaziya muttasila, 
kai suraton par dta hai, aur waisi hi surat qiy^s ittisdli kf 
bM badal jati hai, maslan 

Agar A. B. hai, to J. D. hai. I Agar barsat thorl hai, to f asl 
A. B. hai. halkl bogi. 

Pas, J, D. hai 1 Bars4t thori hai 

I Is liye, Fasl halki hogL 


by Google 


Other examples conforming to the form of the 
conjunctive proposition can be made np by the student. 
There may be cases of conjunctive syllogisms in 
which both premisses are conjunctive, e, g. 

If A is B, C is D. 

If C is D, E is F. 

Therefore, If A is B, E is F. 

We may remark here that a conjunctive proposition 
is really a universal aflBrmative, whether the antecedent 
and consequent be universal or particular, affirmative 
or negative. For instance, '^ if a man is sick he is not 
fit to travel." Here the antecedent is a universal affirm- 
ative and the consequent a universal negative, yet the 
entire sentence is a universal affirmative proposition. 
The truth or falsity of the conjunctive proposition 
depends on the consequent, that is, if the consequent 
follows from the antecedent the proposition is true, 
otherwise it is false. The conjunctive proposition may 
be true as a proposition, and yet the antecedent and 
consequent be false, thus — 

"If science is a bad thing, it should be neglected.'^ 

This proposition is true, although both its members 
are false. 

The conjunctive syllogism may be reduced to a 
simple categorical one by removing jihe conditional 
character of the major premiss. 

The form of condition may be removed by the 
phrases '^ The case of put in place of the conditionaj 
*^ if." The proposition then becomes categorical, with 
the antecedent for its subject and the consequent for its 
predicate ; thus. 

The case of Zaid having a fever is a case of his being sick* 
Zaid has a fever. 
Therefore, Zaid is sick. 


by Google 


Qaziye muttasile ke bamujib, aur misdlen talib i Urn 
bana sakta hai. Qijas i ittisall ki aisi suraten bhi ho eakti 
hain ki donon muqaddame muttasile hon. Maslan — 

Agar A. B. hai, to J. D. hai. 
Agar J. D. hai, to K. S. hai. 
Is liye, Agar A.' B. hai, to E. S. hai 

Jannd ohdhiye H qaziya i muttasila dar haqiqat mtiji- 
ba kulliya hota hai, khwah us kd muqaddam aur tdll kulli 
ho ya juzi, mujiba ho y& saliba. Maslan, — 

Agar kol shakhs gun^h kare, ](^hud^ us se khush na hogi. 

Dekho, agarchi yahdn par muqaddam mujiba kulliya 
aur tali sdliba kuUiya hai, t^am kuU qaziya, mujiba kulliya 

Sidq aur kizb qaziye muttasile kd, us ki tali par mau- 
quf hai, y^e agar tall muqaddam ko lazim hai, to qaziya 
sachcha, wama jhuthd. Maslan, — 

Agar Zaid ko bu^h^ir hai, to wuh blmarhai 

Yih qaziya muttasila sachoha hai kis w^e ki tdli 
muqaddam ko Idzim hai. 

Lekin agar koi kahe ki— 

" Agar yih admi ohor hai, to Hindu hai," 

qaziya jhutha hai kytinkiiski tdll muqaddam komutlaq 
ikzim nahin hai, zeraki tali aur muqaddam ke darmiy&i 
kuch ildqa zaruri nahln hai. Aur aisa bhi hota hai, ki kull 
qaziya mattasila sadiq hotd hai, lekin muqaddam aur tdQ 
donon kazib bote hain. Maslan, 

Agar pm buii chlz hai, to ohhor den^ ohShiye. 

Is qaziye ke sadiq hone men kuchh kalam nahin, magar 
donon juz is ke kdzib hain, y^e na to ilm buri chlz hai, na 
yih, ki us ko chhor dend chahiye. 

Qij&s ittisali ko hamliya ki taraf pherte hain, yane 
qiySs hamliya bandte hmn, is tarah par ki kubrd ki alamat-i- 
ittisdl "agar'' ko dur karke us kijagah lafz " jis mauqe 
?ar'',y& "jis hdlat men", aur "is mauqe par", j& "ishflat 
ben", barMte hain. Maslan, 

Jis h^lat men Zaid ko bnkh&r hai, wuh blm^ hai. 
Is h&l meg, Zaid ko h41at bubJi^ ki hai. 
f aa, Is h41 mefi, wuh bim^ hai. * ^ , 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


The same rules apply for testing the validity of 
coDJunctive syllogisms as for categorical. 

II. — Disjunctive Syllogisms. 

The disjunctive syllogism is one, the major premiss 
of which is disjunctive, and the minor categorical. It is 
of the form. 

Either A is B, or it is C. 
A is B. 
Therefore, A is not C. 


This metal is either gold or it is silver. 
It is not silver. 
Therefore, It is gold. 

It will be seen that the major premiss consists of 
an alternative between two members. The minor pre- 
miss affirms the one, and the conclusion denies the other^ 
or, as in the second example, the minor denies the one, 
and the conclusion affirms the other. 

We may have instead of two alternatives, three or 
more ; thus, 

Either A is B, or C, or D. 
A is not B or C. 
Therefore, It is D. 


Either the world is eternal, or it produced itself, or 
it is the work of an intelligent Being. 

But the world is not eternal, nor produced by itself. 
Therefore, It must be the work of an intelligent Being. 

Again — 

The angle A must he equal to, or greater, or less, than 

the angle B. 
But it is neither equal to, nor less than B. 
Therefore, It must he greater than B. 

The simple rule for disjunctives is that, — 
If one or more of the alternatives he denied, the rtmcming 
one, or some one of those that remain, may l6 affirmed, 
and vice versa. ^ « ^ . , ^^~ 

qiTAS INFlSJTLr. 183 

Qiyds ittisali ki sihliat darydft kame ke w&ste yilii 
qawajd mustainal hain, jo hamliya ke wdste the. 

II. QiyXs-i-infisalI. 

Qiyas infisali wuh hal, jis ka kubrd qaziya munf asila 
aur sugrd hamKya ho. Surat us ki yih hai : — 

Tih A. y^ B. hai, y^ J. hai. 
Yih A. B. hai. 
Pas, Yih A. J. nahlg hai. 

Dusri misal. — 

Yih dhat ya son^ hai, y^ ohindl. 
Lekin yih chlndi nahln hai. 
Pas, Yih sonk hai. 

Nazirin ko m^um hog^, ki kubra men do juz infis^f 
bote hain, aur siigrd men. donon men se ek miijiba hota 
hai, aur natije men dusrd s^liba ya baraks is ke, jaisa ki 
dusri misdl se zdhir hai. 

Aur jannd chdhiye H yih kuchh zuriir nahin ki do hi 
juz infisdli hon, balki tin hon, yd ziyMa. Maslan — 

Yih A. y^ B. hai y^ J. hai ya D. hai. 
Yih A. na B. hai na J. hai. 
Pas, Yih A. D, hai. 

Dusri misfl. 

" jjilam qadim hai, yk az khud ban gaya hai, yk kisi hakim 

kk han^iy^ hai. 
Lekin alam na to qadlm hai na az khud ban gay4. 
Pas, Eisi hakim k^ banay^ hai." 

Tisri misdl. 

Z4viya A. jk bar&barhog&, jkhark hogky y&kam hogk, zaviya 

B. se. 
Lekin z^yiya A. na bar^bar hai, oa kam hai, zaviya B. se. 
Pas, Zaviya A. zurur bara hog^ zaviya B se. 

Ek sahl sd qdjda wdste qiyds infisdli ke yih hai, ki 
Agar ekjuz kdzib qardr diyd jde to dusrd sddiq qardt 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


This rule, however, is not without exception, for 
in some instances by affirming one alternative, we are not 
authorized deny the other ; thus, 

'^ Virtue tends to procure us, either the esteem of 
mankind, or the favour of God/' Here both parts of 
the proposition may be true. In such cases we mu&t 
determine from the context, whether the two members 
are intended to exclude one another or not. 

III. The Dilemma. 

The dilemma is a hypothetical argument or syllo- 
gism of which the major premiss is a compound con- 
junctive proposition, and the minor premiss a disjunctive 

In the dilemma there are in reality two or more 
conjunctive syllogisms blended into one, so that the 
statement is briefer than if each syllogism were separately 
unfolded in the argument. 

The dilemma has several forms, as. 

Simple dilemma. 

If A is B, or C is D, then E is F. 
But either A is B, or C i« D. 
Therefore, E is F. 

Another form of the simple dilemma is. 

If A is B, then C is D, or E is F. 
But C is not D, nor E is F. 
Therefore, A is not B. 

Complex dilemma. 

In this there are several antecedents each with its 
own consequent ; thus. 

If A isB, GisH; and if C is D, LisM; and if EisF, 

But either A is B, or C is D, or L is M. 
Therefore, Q is H, or L is M, or X is Y. 


by Google 


Janna chahiye ki kabhi is ^m q&ide ke khilaf bhi 
t^aqi hua kartd hai. Maslan — 

Basabab nek! ke, ham jk insan ki nazar meg p^sond 4te, 
y4 !l^hada ki nazar ineD. 

Tahan par mumkin hai, ki donon juz sadiq hon. Jis 
bajran men aisd qaziya waqi ho to wahan par tarz i bayan 
se malum ho jaegd ki donon juz sddiq hain, yd sirf ek. 

III. QiyXs Murakkab Shartiya. 

Qiyds murakkab shartiya us ko kahte hain, jis ka 
kubra qaziya muttasila murakkab hotd hai^ aur sugra 
qaziya munf asUa. 

Is qiyds men dar haqiqat do yd is se ziydda qiydft 
ittisdli bote hain, jin sab ko ikhtisdr ke liye mildkar ek kar 
dete hain. 

Qiyds murakkab shartiya ki kai s6raten hain, maslan 
amml surat wuh jis men kai ek muqaddam bote hain, aur 
tdli ek hoti hai, yd tali kai ek aur muqaddam sab kd ek. 


Agar A. B. hai, yk J. D. hai, to R. S, hai* 
Lekin y^ to A. B. hai, yk J. D. hai* 
Pas, R. S.hai 


Agar A. B. hai, to J. D. hai, y& R, S. hai. 
Lekin na to J. D. hai, na R. S. hai 
Pas, A. B. nahSg hai. 

Dusrl siirat wuh hai, jis men kai ek muqaddam bote 
hain, aur bar muqaddam ki tali judd hoti hai, — ^Maslan: — 

Agar A. B. hai, to J. D. hai, anr aear R. S. hai, to F. K 

hai, aur agar L. M. hai, to N. W. hai. 
Lekin y^ A. B. hai, y& R. S. hai. jk F. K. hai. 
Pag, J. D. hai, jk f. K. hai, y& N. W. hai 

Digitized by V3OOQ IC 


These examples as given are in the constructive form, 
but if we wish we can reason in the destructive form. 

An illustration of the first form or simple dilemma 

T^ . K the blest in heaven have no desires, or have them fully 
-^^^^» gratified, they will be perfectly happy. 

,,. But thevwill either have no desires, or have them fully 

-^^"^^» gratified. 

Cow., Therefore the blest in heaven will be perfectly happy. 

It was remarked, that the dilemma is in reality two 
or more disjunctive syllogisms, blended into one with 
a disjunctive minor. In illustration of this statement, 
we may unfold this dilemma into the two syllogisms con- 
tained in it ; thus, — 

If the blest in heaven will have no desires, they will be 

perfectly happy. 
But they will have no desires. 
Therefore, The blest in heaven will be perfectly happy. 


If the blest in heaven will have their desires fully grati- 
fied, they will be perfectly happy. 
But they will have them fully gratified. , 
Therefore, The blest in heaven will be perfectly happy. 

An example of the second form of the simple di- 
lemma is. 

If man cannot make progress towards perfection, he is 

either a brute, or divine. 
But man is neither a brute nor divine. 
Therefore, He can make progress towards perfection. 

This also may be resolved into two syllogisms. 

If man cannot make progress towards perfection, he is a 

But man is not a brute. 
Therefore, He can make progress toward perfection. 


by Google 


Yih sab misalen mazkiira, musbita bain; agar ham 
chahen, manfiya band sakte hain^ 

Auwal surat kl misal yib hai, ki — 

Agar pak logon ko bihisht men kisi bat kl khwahish nab in 
hoti bai,"y^ boti hai aur"puri bo jati bai, to nn ko 
kam^l rabat bogi. 

Lekin un ko ya to kbwabish nahin boti, yS boti bai to puri 
bo jati bai. 
Pas, Pak logon ko bibisht men kam^ rabat bogL 

iTpar mazkur ho chuka hai, ki Qit/ds i murakkab 
sMrtiya dar haqlqat do ya is se ziyada qiyas bote hain, jin 
ko imlakar ek kar dete hain, aur sugra jin ka munfasila 
hota hai. Chunanchi waste zahir kame is bat ke, donon 
qiyas, jo is qiyas i murakkab men milakar ek kar diye 
hain, juda juda karke likhe jate hain : — 

1. — Agar p&k logon ko bibisbt men cb§b kisi bat ki nabin 
bogi, to we kamal r^bat men bonge. 
Lekin nn ko cb^b nabin bogi. 
Pas, Pak log bibisbt men kamil rabat men bonge. 

2. --Agar Pak logon ki cb^b bibisbt men puri bo jaegi, to 
we kam^l r^hat men bonge. 
Lekin nn ki cb^b bibisht men purl bo jaegi. 
Pas, Pak log bibisht men kam^l rabat men bonge. 

Dusri misdl. — ^Tdli kai ek, aur muqaddam ek. 

Agar insan neki o flm ki taraqqi nabin' kar sakta bai, to 

wub nir^ baiw^n bai, ya 5huda ke bar^bar bai. 
Lekin na wnb nir^ baiw^n bai, na Khuda ke bar^bar bai. 
Pas, Wub neki o jlm ki taraqqi kar sakta bai. 

Is ke bhi do qiyas ho sakte hain, Maslan — 

1. — Agar insan neki o flm kl taraqqi nabig kar sakt^ bai, 
to wub nir^ baiw^n bai. 
Lekin wub niri baiwan nablQ bai. 
^ Pas, Wub neki o Jim ki taraqqi kar sakt^ bai. 

2. — Agar insan neki o jlm kl taraqqi nabin kar sakta bai 
to wub Khuda Ue barabar bai. 
Lekin wub 5huda ke barabar nabin bai. 
Pas, Ins^n neki o jlm ki taraqqi kar sakta bai 


by Google 



If man cannot make progress towards perfection, he is 

But man is not diTine. 
Tlieref ore, He can make progress towards perfection. 

An example of the second or complex, form of the 
dilemma, in which there are several antecedents each 
with its own consequent. 

If this man were wise he woold not speak irreverently of 
Major, ^^^ ^ J^*' and if he were good, he wonid not do so in 
earnest, and if he were a weU-wiaher of hamanity, he 
wonld not do so in f orgetfuLiess even, g 

Minor, But he either does it in jest, or in earnest, or in f orgetfnlness. 

Con, Therefore he is either not wise, or not good, or not a lover of 

This dilemma may be resolved into the three 
syllogisms contained in it, — 

If this man were wise, he.would not speak irreverently of 
J God even in jest. 

He does speak irreverently of Gfod in jest. 
Therefore, He is not wise. 

If this man were good, he wonld not speak of God irrever- 
2 ently in earnest. 

He does speak irreverently in earnest. 
Therefore, He is not good. 

If this man were a well-wisher of hnmanity, he wonld not 
«. speak irreverently of God in forgetfulness. 

He does speak irreverently of God in f orgetfnlness. 
Therefore, He is not a well-wisher of hnmanity. 

The difiFerence between the dilemma then, and any 
simple conjanctive syllogism, is that the dilemma really 
contains m a contracted form, two or more conjunctive 

The dilemma may be stated also in a categorical 
form J and the rules for testing the validity of the syllo- 
gism applied directly to it. Jast as in reducing a con* 


by Google 


Qiyas i murakkab ki dtisri surat kl misal, jis ke kal 
muqaddam hote hain, aur har muqaddam ki taH juda hoti 
hai: — 

Agar yih Sdmi aqlmand hota, to ^l^wda ki nisbat be-tamizi 
k^ kalima (hatthe se zaban par na lata, aur agar nek 
hot^, to haqiqat men ais4 na karta, aur agar khair- 
kbwah ins4n k^ hot^, to bhiilkar bhi aisi na korta. 

Lekin wuh ya to t^iatt^G se y^ haqtqatan, ya bhulkar ais^ 
kart^ hai. 
Pas, Wuh y^ to aqlmand nahin, ya nek nahlo, y^ insan k^ khair- 
khwah nahin. 


Is qiyas men bhl tinon qiyas juda juda ho sakte hain : — 

Agar yih ^dmt aqlmand hota, to !^ud^ ki nisbat be-tamizi k4 
kamna (ha^^he se zaban par na lata, 
"j Lekin wuh be-tamizi ka kalima tha^fche se zab^n par lata hai. 
LPas, Wuh aqlmand nahin hai. 

'Agar yih ^dmi nek hota, to Khud^ ki nisbat be-tamizi ka 

kalima haqiqat men zab^n par na l^ta. 
Lekin wuh be-tamizi kk kalima Khuda ki nisbat zaban par 

\kik hai. 
. Pas, Wuh nek nahin hai. 

f Agar yih admi khair-khwah ins^n k& hota, to Khuda ki nisbat 
I be-tamizi ka kalima bhulkar zab^n par na lata. 
3. -{ Lekin wuh Khuda ki nisbat be-tamizi k^ kalima bhCilkar zaban 
I par l^t^ hai 
l^Pas, Wuh ^hair-khwah insan ka nahin hai. 

Qiyas i murakkab shartiya do tin qiydson shartf se, jo 
ikhtisar ke sath hon, milkar banta hai. 

Qiy^ i murakkab shartiya bhi qiyas i hamliya kl surat 
men ho sakta hai, aur waste daryaft kame sihhat is qiyds ke 
bhl wuhl qawdid, jin ka baydn upar & chuka, istiamal kiye 
]6wen, aur jaisd ki qiyas i ittisdli ko hamliya kl taraf 
pheme ke waste, lafz ^^jis mauqq par^^ aur " h mantis 

Digitized by LjOOQ IC 


ditional syllogism to a'categorical the phrases^ ^' the case 
of^', and ^' the present case/' are used, thus : — 

The case of A being B, or of E being F, are cases of X 

being T. 
The present is a case of A being B, or of E being F. 
Therefore, This is a case of X being Y. 

If the premisses are admitted^ of conrse the concla- 
sion must follow, and the rules for testing syllogisms 
must be applied to ascertain the validity in this case 


by Google 


pavy wg. mustamalhain, isl tarah is men bhihond chdhiye^ 
Maslan: — 

Jis mauqa par A. B. hota y^ J. D. hot^ hai, us mauqa pa 

R. S.* hota hai. 
Is mauqa par A . B. hai, ya J. D. hai. 
Pas, Is mauq^ par B. S. hai. 

Agar muqaddamdt taslim kije jden^ to jonatija in se 
niklega, us ko zurur mdnna chdhiye. 


by Google 


Otheb Fobhs of Abguxeht. 
Ibbegulab and compound Stllogisms. 

The Enthtmeme. 

The enthymeme is a syllogism with one premiss 
omitted. It is thus a contracted syllogism* As was 
remarked in another part of this work on the syllogism^ 
(page 110^ 5) in reasonings some propositions in the 
chain of argument are usually suppressed because the 
mind readily takes in the argument without unfolding 
all its steps at length. The enthymeme is a common 
form of abridged argument. Either premiss may be 
omitted from the syllogism. For example^ 

All men are mortal 
Caesar is a man. 
Therefore^ Csesar is mortal. 

In this we may omit the major premiss^ thus^ — 

Osesar is a man. 
Therefore, Osesar is mortaL 

Or we may write it thus, suppressing the minor 

premiss J — 

All men are mortaL 
Therefore, Osesar is mortaL 

Now, both these statements are satis&ctory, because 
the suppressed proposition is readily supplied in the 

^ Digitized by VjOOQIC 




Jis qiyAs ka ek qaziya y^ne kubrd yd sugrd muqaddar 
ho, us ko qit/ds i mukhaffaf 8amajlm& ch^ye. , Jaisd ki i 
kitab men bay&n ho ohukd hai {8af. Ill, Y.) aksar yun 
hua kartd hai, kidalflon men muf assal bayda naMn hota baij 
is Uye ki us dalil ko ham waisa hi samajhte hain, agarohi 
baz qaziye chhorte j&en. Mukhaffaf dallLen aksar isi su- 
rat men \M, karti hain. Aur yih ikhtiy& hai, ki kubi:^ 
woigck men se jaun sd. oh&heQ muqaddar karei}. Maslan ek 
dalil hai, ki — 

Eull insin ikoX baie. 
Zaid insln hai. 
Pas, Zaid f ^ hai 

Ab agar ham ohdhen, to kubrfi ko is dalU men na sdkr 
karen, Maslan, 

Zaid ins^ hai 
Pas, Zaid f &iii hai. 

Donon tarah dalU ptiri hai, ky^ki qaziya i muqaddara 
: Uman san^jhd li\& hai, go ki lafzan maujM na ho. 


zed by Google 


The completed syllogism may be easily constructed 
from the given enthymeme, which always contains the 
three terms of the syllogism. By examining the con- 
clusion of the enthymeme we know at once what the 
major and minor terms of the syllogism are, since the 
conclusion always contains these terms. Hence^ since 
the subject of the conclusion is always the minor term^ 
and its predicate the major, we may know which 
premiss is given in the enthymeme, from the term it 

Thus, in the first example of the enthymeme given, 
we see that the given premiss must be the minor be- 
cause it contains the subject of the conclusion, and in 
the second example the given premiss must be the 
major, because containing the predicate of the conclu- 
sion. Having thus ascertained what premiss is want- 
ing, the syllogism can at once be constructed, and its 
validity tested by the rules for testing syllogisms. It 
may be remarked, that ordinarily, in speaking or writ- 
ing, the major premiss is suppressed, because being 
generally some fact or principle to which the mind 
yields ready assent. Thus, in the example given, it 
would be more natural to suppress the major premiss, 
** all men are mortal because this is a fact so 'estab- 
lished by observation as to command our assent. Hence 
we would simply say, — 

Caesar is a man. 
Therefore, He is mortal. 

Sometimes the enthymeme is not in the syllogistic 
form, thus, — 

Caesar is mortal. 
Because, Caesar is a man. 

When the causal conjunction " because,'' thus unites 
iKe propositions of an enthymeme, they may be invert- 


by Google 


Jdnna chahiye ki mukliafEaf qiyds se pdra qiyas ba 
isani ban sakta hai, kytinki tiaon inz qiyas ke yane akbar 
anr asgar aur hadd i aus^t maujiid hain. Qiyas i mukhaf- 
faf ke natije ke dekhne se malum ho jata hai, ki akbar anr 
asgar yih hain, kyunki natije men hamesha yih jnz maujiid 
hote hain.. Pas chtinki mauzii natije ka asgar hota hai, 
aur us ka mahmul akbar, yih malum ho jata hai, ki yih 
qaziya qiyas i mukhaffaf men kubra hai ya sugra. Maslan 
pahli misal i mazkura e qiyas ,i mukhaffaf men ma- 
lum hota hai, ki pahla qaziya jo hai, sugra hai, is sabab se 
ki natije ka mauzu lis men pay d jata hai; aur dusri misal 
n en, jo qaziya paya jata hai zartir kubra hoga, kyunki 
natije ka mahmul us men maujtid hai. Pas jab malum ho 
jata hai, ki fulana muqaddama is qiyas men maujud nahin 
hai, us hi ko lake pura qiyas band lete hain, aur us ki sih- 
hat ba zaria un qawaid ke, jo waste parakhne qiyds ke 
muqarrar hain, daryaft kar lete hain. 

Janna chdhiye ki aksar dalil men, kubra muqaddar 
hua karta hai, is wajh se ki wuh ek aisa mashhur o m^o^f 
qaziya hai ki dil bagair zikr kame ke ba dsdni use taslim 
kar leta hai. Maslan agar koi bayan kare, ki Zaid f ani 
hai, to kubrd, yane kull imdn fdni hain^ is ko muqaddar 
karega, kyunki adna aur fla is haqiqat se wdqif hain, ki 
sab admi mamewale hain. Pas wiJi yun kahega ki — 

Zaid ins^n hai. 
Pas, Wuh fani hai. 

Baz mauqa par qiyas i mukhaffaf, qiyas ki surat par 
nahin hota hai, jaisa koi kahe: — 

Zaid f ^nl hai, 
Ky uski, Wuh4«»i-hai. 


Jahan kahin koi harf iUat kd, jaisd "cAmwA;*,'' kyunki^^^ 
" is hak se,'^ wg. kisi qiyas i mukhaffaf ke qaziyon ko ba- 
ham-digar rabt de, to agar ham chdhen, un ka aks yane 
n uqaddam ko muakhkhar, aur muakhkhar ko muqaddam 
karenge, aur harf i illat ko dur karke akhir ke qaziya men 

d by Google 

Digitized fc 


ed and joined by the conjunction " therefore/' and 
then the Ryllogism can be constructed from them. 
Thus with the above, — 

Caesar is a man. 
Therefore, Caasar is mortal. 

The rule for constructing the syllogisnv from the 
enthymeme is. 

If the premiss given, contains the subject of the con- 
clusion^ it is the minor, if the predicate of the conclusion 
it is the major. 

The Sorites.* 

The Sorites is a string of contracted syllogisms of 
the first figure. It has already been remarked that in 
reasoning we do not usually unfold an argument in its 
full logical or syllogistic form, but suppress some of 
the propositions. Now, if we have a string of syllogisms 
in the first figure, so arranged that the conclusion of 
each becomes a premiss in the next, these syllogisms 
may be contracted into the Sorites, in which the pre- 
dicate of the first proposition is made the subject of 
the next, until the predicate of the last proposition is 
predicated of the subject of the first proposition. This 
is a very common form of argumentation. The follow- 
ing is the form of the Sorites : — 

Therefore, AisF. 
Or by substituting propositions for these letters — 
The mind is a thinking substance. 
A thinking snbstance is a spirit. 
A spirit is incorporeaL 
That which is incorporeal is indissolable. 
That which is indissoluble is immortal. 
Therefore, The mind is immortal. 

♦ From the Greek word Soros, meaning aheap. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


lafz pas barha d^nge, to is h&lat men pura qiyas banne ke 
laiq hoga. Pas upar ki misal ko agar is surat men U-*- 
wen, to yun hogi, — 

Zaid ins^n hai, — 
Pas, Zaid faui hai. 

Qijasi mukhatfaf so pura qiyds bandne ka qdida 
yih hai : — 

Agar kisi muqaddame men mauzu nattje kdpdydjdwe 
to with sug,rd hai, aur agar mahmul pay a jde to kubrd. 


Qiyh i Musakal shakl i auwal ke kai qiyfison mukh- 
tasar ke silsile ko kahte hain. Tih upar zikr ho chuk4 
hai, ki bahs mubahise men har dalil ko bajinsihi ba surat 
i qiyas ^ahida sJahida karke nahin bay&i karte hain, balki 
baz qaziye aise mauqa par muqaddar karte hain. Agar 
kai ek qiyas silsilewar is tartib se bayAn kiye jawen, ki 
natija har qiyas k4 dusre ka muqaddama wdqi ho, to aise 
ikhtisar ko Qiyds i musakal kahte hain. Aur ydd rakhni 
chdhiye, ki qiyds i n usalsal men mahmul qaziya iauwa 
^, dusre qaziye M mauzu hotd hai, aur tisre kd mahmfil, 
diauthe ka mauzu wdqi hotd hai ; hatta ki sab se 6khir ke 
qaziye kd mahmul, qaziya i auwal ka mahmul partd hai. 
Tihl qaida aksar dalil lane kd haL Misdl qiyds i musai- 
sal ki, zail men mundarij hai : — 

A. B. hai. 

B. J. hai 
J. D. hai. 
D. R. hai. 
R. S. hai. 

Pas, A. 8. hai 

Aur agar in huriif ke iwaz men qaziye qdim kiya 
jden, to misdl yun hogi : — 

Zihn, ek q6wat i darr^ka hai. 
Quwat i darraka, r(ih hai. 
B.ixh gair jism hai. 
Jo chiz gir jism hai, gair-f^nl hai. 
Jo cbiz gair-f^ni hai, abad tak rahegi. 
Fas, Zihn abad tak rahega. 


by Google 


Now this abridged argument can be nnfolded into 
the syllogisms contained in it, thus, — 

12 3 4 






Or if we substitute the propositions given for the 
betters then we will have,— 

( A thinking substance is a spirit. 

1 I The mind is a thinking substance. 
( Therefore the mind is a spirit. 

^ A spirit is incorporeaL 

2 < The mind is a spirit. 

( Therefore the mind is incorporeaL 

i That which is incorporeal is indissoluble. 

3 < The mind is incorporeal. 

( Therefore the mind is indissoluble. 
i That which is indissoluble is immortal. 

4 < The mind is indissoluble. 

( Therefore the mind is immortal. 

Now, it may be seen that these are all syllogisms in 
the first figure, and by comparing them with the sorites 
it will be observed that it contains as middle terms, 
B« C. D. E., which are used twice, that is the sorites has 
as many middle terms as there are propositions between 
the first and the last, and consequently is an abridgment 
of so many syllogisms. It will be further seen from 
a comparsion of these syllogisms with the sorites from 
which they are formed, that it contains but one minor 
premiss, viz.^ A. B. The other, are all majors. Hence 
it is plain that in the sorites we simply take the only 
minor term given and by passing from middle term to 
middle term, link it with the final major term in a con- 
clusion, as if we had but one syllogism. Thus, in the 
example given, the minor A was joined to the major 
throughB. C. D. E. 


by Google 


Agar is dalil i muVhtasax men jitne qiyasdakldl hain, 
Tin sab ko juda juda karke rakhen to dalil yun hogi :— 

B.J.hai. IJ.D. haL 1 !>•?:• ^^V WVti 

A. B. hai. A. J. hai. A. D. l^ai A- R- l^«i- ^ 

Pas, A. J. hid. I Pas, A. D. hai. | Pas, A. H. hai. 1 Pas, A. 8. hai 

Yih misal hurdf ki Mi. aazion ki misdl yih tai :— 

( Cluwat i darr&kSi rdh hai. 

1. < Zihn ek quwat i darrlka hai. 
( Pas zihn ruh hai. 

( ROh gair i jism haL 

2. < Zihn ruh hai. 

( Pas zihn gair i jism hai. 

!Jo chiz guir i jism hai, gairfani hai. 
Zihn gair i jism hai. 
Pas zihn gair-f^ni hai. 
i Jo chiz gair-fani hai, abad tak rahegi.. 
4. < Zihn gair-fani hai. 

( Pas, zihn abad tak rahega. 
Ab dekhna chahiye, ki yih sab qiyas sbakl i auwal ke^ 
hain, aur qiyds i musalsal se muqabala kame se malum 
hota hai, ki B. J. D. E., jo qiyds men do do b&P &e hain 
hadd i ausat hain. Aur malum hoga, ki qiyas i musalsal 
men utne hadd i ausat bote hain, jitne auwal qaziye aur 
natije ke bieh men qaziye bote hain. Pas zahir hai, ki 
jitne hadd i ausat hain, utne hi qiyason se ikhtiMr karke 
qiyds i musalsal bana hai. Aur alawa is ke in qiyason ka 
qiyas i musalsal se muqabala kame se malum ho jata hai,. 
ki is men sugra sirf ek hota hai, yane " A. B. hai," aur 
bdqi sab kubra bote hain. Garaz ki yih zahir hai, ki qiy&s^ 
i musalsal men asgar ko leke ek hadd i ausat ko dusre se 
silsilawar milate ehale ate hain ; hatta ki natije men akar 
us hi asgar ko sab se akhiri qaziye ke mahmul se nisbat' 
dete hain, is tarah goya ki sirf ek hi qiyas hot& hai. 
Chunanchi misal i mazkura e bala se zahir hai^. ki asgar B 
akbar S., se ba zaria hadd i ausat B* J. IK R> ke, niabat.. 
f\j^& gaya hai. 


by Google 


Since the sorites is an abridgment of syllogisms in 
the first figure^ it is plain that its first proposition^ and that 
alone^ may be particular^ because it is a minor premiss^ 
and in the first figure the minor premiss may be parti- 
cular but not the major (p. 142, r. 1.), and in the sorites 
'all the other propositions are majors. It is further mani- 
fest that in the sorites there can be one, and only one, 
negative premiss and that the last; if any other premiss 
were negative, one of the syllogisms contained in the 
sorites besides the last would have a negative conclu- 
sion which becomes the minor premiss of the following 
syllogism, but in the first figure the minor premiss can- 
not be negative, (p. 142, r. 2.) We may then lay down 
the following rule : — 

In the sorites, except the conclusion, thejirst proposi^ 
Hon alone may be particular, and only the proposition pre- 
ceding the conclusion can be negative. 

A sorites violating this rule is not valid. When 
the sorites is resolved into syllogisms, these may be 
tested by the rules formed for this purpose. A rule for 
resolving the sorites may be thus stated, — 

Take the second proposition of the sorites for the major 
premiss of the first syllogism, the first proposition for the 
minor, and use the conclusion thus drawn for the minor 
premiss of the second syllogism, with the third proposition 
of the sorites as a major, and so on, as long as any middle 
term remains. 

There is an inverted form of the sorites called, from 
the name of its inventor, the Goclenian sorites. In it the 
propositions are reversed, thus,-— 

E is F. 
D is E. 
C is D* 
B is C. 
A is B. 
Therefore, A is F. 


by Google 



Jab ki yih bat qar&r pal, ki qiyds i musalsal qiydson 
shakl i auwal ka ikhtisdr hai, to malum hua ki qiyas i 
musalsal men bajuz qaziya i auwal ke, aur koi juziya nahin 
hota hai, is sabab se ki pahld qaziya sugra hota hai, aur 
fihakl i auwal men sugra hi juziya atd hai na yih ki kubra; 
{Saf. 145, 1.) aur baqi sab kubra hote hain. Aur yih bhi 
malum hud, ki is qiyas men sirf ek hi qaziya i saliba hota 
hai, aur wuh dkhiri hai, kydnki agar aur koi qaziya i sa- 
liba ho, to aldwa qiy^ akhiri ke, ek aur qiyas, qiyas i 
musalsal men aisa hoga, ki jis kd natf ja saliba niklega, aux 
yih natija qiyas men sugra waqi hoga, lekin shakl i auwal 
men sugra saliba nahin hota hai. {Saf. 145, 2.) Pas ek 
qdida zail men likhte hain : — 

Qiyas i musalsal men siwd natije ke, sirf pahld qaziya 
j'uzia hota haiy aur sirf dkhiri yam natije ke uparjohotd hai, 
sdliba hofd hai, 

Jo qiyas i musalsal is qaide ke khilaf hoga, sahih 
nahin hogd. Jab qiyas i musalsal ke sab qiyas alag alag 
karke likhe j^n, to un ki sihhat im qdidon se darydft kama 
<5b4hiye, jo is maqsad ke waste muqarrar hain. Qaida 
w&ste juda karate qiyds ke yih hai : — 

^yds i musalsal ke dusre qaziye io pahld qiyas bandne 
^*e waste kubra, aur pahle qaziye ko sug.rd garddnte hain, aur 
phir un donon muqaddamdt se, jo natija nikaltd hai, us dusre 
qiyds kd sugrd karte hain, aur ishi qiyas kd kubrd, qiyas i 
musalsal ke tisre qaziye ko qdim karte hain, Isi tarah par 
karte chale jdte liain, jab tak sab hadd i ausat tamdm na ho 

Qiy&s i musalsal ka aks bhi ho sakta hai, chunanchi 
misal i zail se zahir hai : — 

R. S. hai. 
D. R. hai. 
J. D. hai. 
B. J. hai. 
A. B. hai. 
Pas, A. S. hai 


by Google 


The same in proposition, thus, — 

That which is indissoluble is immortal 
That which is incorporeal is indissoluble. 
A spirit is incorporeal 
A thinking substance is a spirit. 
The mind is a thinking substance. 
Therefore, The mind is immortal. 

It will be observed here, that the concla&ion reached 
is just the same as before, although the order of the 
propositions is reversed. It will be seen also, that in 
this form we begin with the most extensive proposition 
first, and reason from the general to the particular. It 
may often best suit the argument to do so. 

The sorites may also be composed of conditional 
propositions, and is then called the hypothetical sorites. 
The hypothetical sorites, consists of a btring of condi- 
tional propositions so arranged that the consequent of 
each becomes the antecedent of the succeeding one, and 
the conclusion is drawn by either affirming the first an- 
tecedent with the last consequent, or by denying the last 
consequent with the first antecedent. For example, — 

If A is B, then C is D. If A is B, then C is D. 

If C is D, then E is F. or If C is D, then E is F. 

But A is B. But E is not F. 

Therefore, E is F. Therefore, A is not B. 

If God is holy then He is not the author of sin. 

If He is not the author of sin, then the doctrine of fate 

is false. 
But God is holy, therefore the doctrine of fate is false. 

The second example is a destructive hypothetical 

If gaming is a good thing, the practice of it is right. 
If the practice of it is right, it will result in good. 
But it does not result in good, therefore tlie practice of it is 
Jiot right. 


by Google 


Misdl qazion ki yih hai, — 

Jo chiz gair-fani hai, abad tak raliegl. r, 

Jo chiz jisra nahin, gair-fani hai. 
Ruh, jism nahin hai. 
Quwat i darr^ka, ruh hai. 
Zihn, qOwat i darraka hai. 
Pas, Zihn abad tak rahega. 

Yahdn par dekhna chahije, ki is stirat men bhl wuhi 
iiatija nikla, jo pahli surat men nikald tha, go ki qaziye qi- 
yas ke, sab ulte ho gae hain. 

Tih bhi malum kama cMhiye, ki is aks ki surat 
men pabla qaziya jo late hain, us ke afrdd aur qazion se 
ziydcja hote hain, aur kulli se juzi ki taraf dalil Mte hain. 
Aksarmauqa.6kar parta hai, ki yunhin dalil land achchha 
hota hai. 

Qiyds i musalsal, qaziyon muttasila se bhl murakkab 
hotd hai, aur tab qiyds i musalsal shartiya kahte hain 
Qiyas i musalsal shartiya, qazion muttasilon ke silsile se 
murakkab hota hai, aur wuh qaziye is tarah par dte hain, 
ki tdli har qaziya i auwal kl, apne ma bad kd muqaddam 
w&qi hotl hai, aur natlja yd to pahle muqaddam ko dkhiri 
tali ke sdth nisbat i isbat dene se hasil hota hai, ya dkhiri 
tall ko pahle muqaddam ke sdth nisbat i nafi dene se. 

Agar A. B. hai, to J. D. hai Agar A. B. hai, to J. D. hai. 

Agar J. D. hai, to R. S. hai. Yd Agar J. D. hai, to R. S. hai. 
Lekin A. B, hai; Pas, R. S. hai. Lekin R. S. nahin; Pa8,'^A. B. nahio 

Mifl&l i auwal, qiyds i musalsal shartl bil ijdb ki : — 

Agar ]grhud^ pik hai, to B^l gnn£h ki nahls hai. 

Agar wuh B4ni gun&h ki nahin hai, to qismat ki masla 

galat hai. 
Lekin ]S[huda pak hai, pas qismat ki masla galat hai. 

Misdl dusrl, qiyds i musalsal shartl bis salb kl : — 

Agar jiii khelni achohhl bit hai, to us ki khelni dumst hai. 
Agar khelni dorust hai, to us ki anjim bihtar hogi. 
Lekin ns ki anjim bihtar nahlg hoti, pas us ki khelni durust 
nahin hai. 


by Google 


The hypothetical sorites may be reduced to the 
categorical one, by the rule for reducing hypothetical to 
categorical propositions (p. 180) . It may then be tested 
by the rules for the sorites, or it can be resolved into 
hypothetical syllogisms and then tested by the method for 
trying the validity of hypothetical syllogisms, [p. 180.] 
We may now briefly recapitulate the whole subject 
of hypothetical, compound, and abridged syllogisms* 


by Google 


Qiyas i musalsal shartiya ko usi q&ida Id rd se, jo 
shartija ko hamliye men lane ke wdste muqarrar liai, 
hamliya bhi kar sakte hain, [^Saf, 181 ;] aur pliir silihat 
us kl, qdidon qiyds i musakal se malnm ho jdti hai ; ya 
yih ki us qiyds i musalsal men jitne qiyas i shartiya dd- 
khil hain, un sab ko judi juda karke phir un kl sihhat usi 
qdjda kl ru se jo qiydson shartiya ki sihhat malum karae 
ke waste muqarrar hai, darydft ki jdwe. [^Saf. 181.] 

Ab ham kull baydn qiydson ka, bil-ijmdl likhte hain : — 


by Google 


Syllogisms are divided thns^—- 

SyUogwnw | Hypothetical... \ Disjunctive. 

(Dilemma. (Simple. 
( Complex. 
Irregular and Compound ( Entbymeme 
syllogisms^ ( Sorites 


1, — For the conjanctive syllogism. 

First. If the antecedent be granted, the consequent 
must be granted also. 

Second. If the consequent be denied , the antecedent 
may be denied also. 

Third. If the consequent be affirmed, or the anteco' 
dent be denied, no conclusion can be drawn. 
2.-— For the disjunctive syllogism. 

If one or more of^healternatives be denied, the remain^* 
ing one, or some one of those that remain may be affirmed. 

3.— For constructiDg a syllogism from the Enthy- 

If the premiss given contains the subject of the con^ 
elusion, it is the minor, if the predicate of the conclusion, it 
is the major. 

4. — For the Sorites. 

In the Sorites, except the conclusion, the first propo* 
sition mlone may bepartictdar, and only the p^ oposition pr^ 
ceding the conclusion may be negative. 


by Google 


Uiyds is tarah par mimqasim hai : — 

^. . (Hamaliya, ( Ittis&li. 
^y^> I Shartiya, .. J InfisilS. 

( Murakkab. 

1 A • ^ ( Qiy^ I Mukhaffaf . 

1. — Q^yds i lUiadli he Uy%. 

Pahla. — ^Agar muqaddam taslim kiyd jdwe, to tali 
"bhi zurur taslim kami paregi. 

DtJSRi. — ^Agar tdfi ka inkdr kiyd jdwe, to muqaddam 
k4 bhi inkar kamd paregd. 

TfsRA. — ^Agar t&U taslim ki jawe, ya muqaddam kd 
iuk^ kiy& j&we, to kuohli natija uahiQ nikleg^. 

2. — Qiyda i Infisdli he Uye. 

Agar ek juz kdzib qar^ diy& jdwe, to dusrd s&diq 
qarar diya jawega. 

3* — Q^ds i Mukhaffaf he liye. 

Agar kisi muqaddama moQ, mauz^ natije kd pdy4 
jawe, to wuh sugrd hai, aur agar mahmul pdyd jawe, to 
kubrd hai. 

4. — Qiyd% Mmahal he Uye, 

QajSa i Musalsal men, siw& natija ke, sirf pahU qa^ya, 
juziya hotd hai, aur sirf dkhiri qe^ya, yane natije ke upar 
]o hot& hai, saliba hota hai. 


by Google 



Bt applied Logic is meant the practical use of the 
science for general purposes^ as distinguished from a 
mere knowledge of the science in the abstract^ t. e,^ a 
mere knowledge of the laws and rules of logic, without 
any special reference to their use and application. It is 
one thing to havamerely a knowledge of the nature and 
structure, so to speak, of a science, and quite another 
thing to be familiar with its practical use in every day 
life. For instance, one may know the names of all the 
implements used in carpentering, and the mode of using 
them, and have a knowledge of the rules used in that 
useful art, and yet may not be able to make furniture. 
The knowledge required for this, is quite different from 
a mere acquaintance with names and rules. Again, by 
studying a book, one may gain a knowledge of the 
nature and rules of surveying, but a practical or 
" applied^^ use of the science of surveying, is obtained 
in the field and by observing, how under different cir- 
cumstances, these rules are applied. Having gcfne over 
the laws, rules, and terms, that constitute the science of 
Logic, we propose in this part of our book ta treat 
more of a practical application of the science, showing 
how it is applied in every day life. We will first 
classify the different forms of error commonly met, and 
illustrate the mode of treating them, and then explain 
some modes or forms in which arguments are commonly 


by Google 

HissA rv. 


Mantiq i Istiamall se yih murad hai, ki is ilni ko, jaliaij 
kahin hajat pare, amal men lawen. Chunanclii mantiq i 
istiamall us ilm i mantiq se, jo sirf zihn men ho, faqt isi bat 
men raukhtalif hai. Kisi ilm ka jan lena anr bat hai, aur 
us ka mashq rakhna is tarah par ki roz-marra kam men 
awe, aur bat hai. Maslan, yih mumkin hai ki koi shakhs 
jitne hathyar barhai ke kam kame ke hon, sab ka nam 
bakhtibl janta ho, aur is bat se bhi waqif ho, ki fulana 
hathyar fulane kam men ata hai, aur is ko is tarah istiamal 
men lana chahiye. Garaz ki sab kam barhai ka janta ho, 
magar bain hama, chahiye ki koi chiz un hathyaron se 
barhai ki tarah bana le to kabhi na banegi ; pas mashq 
rakhna barhai ke kam ka aur bat hai, aur sirf jan lena 
us ka apne zihn men aur bat hai. Isi tarah agar koi shakhs 
ek kitab ko parhkar, paimaish ke qajdon se waqif ho jawe 
to ho jawe, magar mashq jo ek chiz hai, wuh, jab tak khe- 
ton kheton napta na phire, aur tarah tarah ki baten us ki 
nazar se na guzren, kabhi nahin hasil hoga. 

Bayan qawaid aur qawanin, aur istilahat i mantiq Be 
faragat pai. Ab irada hai, ki age chalkar is kitab men 
mufassal bayan istiamal i mantiq ke tariqon ka likhen, aur 
batlawen, ki kis tarah is ko roz-marra amal men lana 
chahiye. Auwal bayan mukhtalif suraton mugalte ka jo 
aksar &ke parte hain, likhenge ; aur phir tariqa un mugdl- 
ton ke rafa kame ka, ba zaria misalon ke batlawenge ; aur 
phir chand tariqe dalil line ke samjhawenge. 

d by Google 

Digitized fc 



Having described the varioas forms of argument 
and syllogism^ it is important that we now consider 
more at lengthy the various kinds of fallacy that may be 
nsed intentionally in reasonings or into which one may 
inadvertently fall. A fallacy is an invalid argument. As 
much of the practical usefulness of logic depends on the 
ready detection and exposure of fallacies^ it is very im- 
portant that the subject be well understood. The learner 
should strive to get a thorough acquaintance with all 
forms of fallacy. We are not simply to guard against 
the false weapons of others^ but also against the mis- 
takes into which we ourselves are liable to fall in rea- 
soning. The fallacy may be in one, or all, of the three 
parts of the argument or syllogism. Some word or 
term may be used in a doubtful or double sense, or a 
proposition may be false^ or the form of the syllogism 
may be invalid. 

Now, it is plain that all fallacies may be divided 
into two great classes, jirstj where the error is in the 
form of the reasoning, i. e,, where the conclusion 
does not follow from the premisses; second, where 
the error is not in the form of the reasoning, i. e., where 
the conclusion does follow from the premisses, notwith- 

d by Google 

Digitized fc 


Bayan Mu^alton KA. 

Dalil aur qiyas k£ sab suraton ke baydn se -faragat 
pal, ab zarur hai, ki rangalta, jo aksar dalil lane men parta 
bai, ns ki raukhtalif qismon ka bayan bit-tashrib likben. 
Mug.4lta, na-durust dalil ko kahte bain. Cbundncbi istiamal 
ilm i mantiq k& is bat par bahut munbasar bai, ki mugdlte 
ko bakhfibi pakar len, anr malum kar len, is wdste baydn 
mugflte ka kbiib samajb lena nibayat zariir bai. Is ilm ke 
sikbnewflon ko mugalte ki sab suraton se waqifiyat i kdmil 
paida kaml ohdbiye. Mugalte se waqif bona sirf isi kam men 
nabin at^ bai, Id auron ki galat dalil se mabf uz raben, balki 
apni galatidn, jo bar waqt dalil lane ke bo jdya karti bain 
un se mabf uz rabne ke w&ste bbi kam ata bai. Mugdlta 
tin jagab parta bai, maslan jab koi lafz masbkuk ho, y^e 
do roanon men istiamfil kiyd jdwe, yd koi qaziya galat bo, 
jawe, yd tartib qiyds ki nd-durust bo jawe. 

Yib zdbir bai, ki sab galatidn do qism par bo sakti bain. 
Auwaly jabdn ki tartib i qiyds galat ho, y^ne wuh natija 
muqaddamdt se nabin hdsil hotd bai. Dot/um^ jah&n 
tartib i qiyds galat nabin hai, yane sahih natija muqadda- 
mdt se hdsil hotd hai, lekin us qiyas ke kisi lafz ya qaziye 


standing an error in some term or proposition of the 
syllogisms. Here the erroi* is in the matter of the 
syllogism. The first are called /' logical or formal falla- 
cies,'' the second " non-logical or material fallacies.'^ The 
first great class will now be described. 

I. Logical ob formal Fallacies. 

The fallacies of this class include all violations of 
Aristotle's dictum, and the rules for syllogisms. They 
are of five kinds : — 

1. Undistributed middle. 

2. Illicit process of the major or minor term. 

3. Negative premisses. 

4. Affirmative conclusion from a negative prem- 

iss, or vice versa. 

5. More than three terms in the argument. 

In all these forms of fallacy, the error is manifest 
from the form of expression, when the syllogism is fully 
stated. But in practice, frequently the difficulty of 
detecting the arror, arises from the argument being 
elliptical, i, e,, one of the propositions may be suppressed, 
or the fallacy may be so covered up in a volume of 
words, that the error does not readily appear. In such 
case, if the argument is drawn out to its full form, or 
stripped of its verbosity and put in the syllogistic form, 
the -error becomes manifest. These errors were illus- 
trated io some extent in drawing out the rules for 
testing the validity of syllogisms, and we need do but 
little more here than classify them as above, and give 
an additional illustration of each. Let it be well borne 
in mind, that in these fallacies, the conclusion does not 
follow from the 'premisses. Even if the conclusion be 
.true, the argument is yet a vicious one. 


by Google 


men galati waqi hai. Pahli qistn ke mugalte ko, jane jab 
ki qiyas ki tartib men galati waqi hoti hai, MugAlta i Surt 
kahte hain, aur dusri qism ke raugalte ko, yane jab ki 
^aziye ke raanon men galati w^i hoti hai, MitgAlta i Mqna- 
wty kahte hain. 

Qism avwal^ Mugalta i StJRi. 

Is qism men wuh mngalte ddkhil hain, jo ba bd,is' 
khilaf hone qani i Arastatalis ke, a,\nr qaidon qiyas^ 
ke, w^qi hu4 karte hain. Anr yih paneh tarah par hain : 

1. — Hadd i ausat juzi. 

2. — ^Kulliyat i najaiz, akbar ya asgar ki: 

3. — ^Muqaddamat saKbe. 

4. — ^Natija i mujiba muqaddame salibe se, ya baraks^ 
is ke. 

5. — ^Ek qiyds men tin jnzon seziyada k& bona. 

In sab suraton ki galati, surat i qiyas se malum ho 
j^ti hai, jab ki apni siirat men baydn kiyd jawe. Lekin 
galati ke pakame men aksar mnshkil us waqt dke parti hai, 
jab daJil mukhaffaf ho, yane koi qaziya wahan muqaddar 
ho, ya yih ki bahnt se lafzon ki tab men galati aisi chhip 
gaiho, ki ba dsdni na malum hoti ho. Aise waqt men agar 
dalfl ko puri surat men lawen, y^ yih ki un bahut se 
lafzon ke janjdl ko dur karkar ba tartib i qiyas rakhen, to 
lis waqt galati saf zahir ho jaegi. Galation ka kuch 
h61, qiyfis ki sihhat daryaft kame ke qajde nikalte men, ham 
ne bayan kiya hai, is wajh se yahan kudih ziyada bayan 
ki hajat nahin hai, sirf mugalte ki qismon kd bayan likha 
] awega, aur bar baydn ke sdth rais^len hongi. Tad rakhna 
chahiye, ki is qism ke mugdlte men jo natija nikalta ho,. 
agarchi ba iatibdr apne mane ke sahih ho, lekin muqad- 
damdt se wuh natija na nikalta ho, to dalil naqis rahegiJ. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


h Undistributed middle. 
Form of the fallacy. 

Some A is B. or. All B is A. 

Some A is C. AH C is A. 

Therefore, Some C is^B. Therefore, All is C B. 

Here it will be observed, that neither the major nor 
minor term is compared with the whole of the middle 
term, i. e,, the middle term is not distributed, hence the 
argument is not valid^ as the conclu^on does not follow 
from the premisses. Suppose one should argue, that the 
religion of the Hindu is true because believed and 
taught by some good men ; his argument would contain 
an undistributed middle as may be seen by unfolding 
it thus, — 

True religions, are believed and taught by good men. 
The Hindu religion, is believed and taught by 
good men. 
Therefore, The Hindu religion is true. 

Here the middle term, *^ believed and taught by 
good men,'' being the predicate of two affirmatives is 
undistributed (p. 76, r. 3), hence the conclusion is an 


by Google 

h'-^Sadd i ausat juzu 
Surat mugalte ki yih hai :— 


Baz A. B. hai, 

Baz A.D. hai, 

Paa, Baz D. B. hai, 

Sab B. A. hai. 

Sab D. A. hai. 

Pas, Sab D. B. hai. 

Dekho is misdl men na akbar atir na aBgar, hadd i 
ausat ke kull afrad se muqabala kiya gayd hai, yane hadd 
i ausat, kulli nahin hai, juzi hai ; pas is sabab se dalil galat 
hai, aur isi wajh se yih natija jo yahdn par likha hai, 
muqaddamat se nahin nikalta hai. Farz karo, koi shakhs 
dalil Idwe^ ki Hinduon kd mazhab haqq hai, kytinki baz 
'adiehhe ddmi us par im&n lie hain, aur us ki talfm dete 
hain. Tahdn hadd i ausat juzi hogl, jaisa ki qiyas ko puri 
surat men likhne se zahir hai. Maislan, — 

Haqq mazhab ko, achchhe ^dml qabul kajrte hain, 

aur us ki tallm dete hain. 
HindCiog ke mazhab ko, achchhe kdm\ qabM karte 

haig, aur us kl talim dete hain, 
Pas, Hindtion ka mazhab haqq hai. 

Is misal menyhaddiausat <*adiehhe'dami qabtil karte 
hain," ba baiff wdqi hone mahmtil'do mujibon ke jtizi hai, 
ISaf. 77, Q. 3,] isfeababBenatijetnengalatitfii. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


2. Illicit 'process of the 'major or minor term. 
Form of the fallacy. 


All A is B. AUAisB. 

XoCisA. All A is C. 

Therefore, NoCisB. Therefore, All C is B. 

Sappose some one should argue that a certain man 

^as not a bad king^ because he was not a tyrant. His 

argument unfolded would be^ 

All tyrants are had kings. 
Zaid was not a tyrant. 
Therefore, Zaid was not a had king. 

Here the major term '^ bad king^' is distributed as 
the predicate of a negative [p. 78, r. 4] in the conclu- 
sion but not in the major premiss, because the predicate 
of an affirmative, [p. 76, r. 3.] 

Again, suppose some one should argue that all 

instruction of women in science is bad, because certain 

bad women were instructed. His argument when 

written in full, would show an illicit process of the 

minor ; thus, — 

Certain women were had. 
They were women instructed in science. 
Therefore, All instruction of women in science is had. 

Here the minor term ^^ instruction of women m 

science,'^ is distributed in the conclusion but not in the 

minor premiss, because it is the predicate of an aJBSnn- 

ative^ hence the argument is not valid. 

., . byGoogk 


2. — Ndjdiz kulliyat akbar yd asgxir Id. 

Surat is qism ke mugalte ki jdh hai : — 

Sab A. B. hai, Sab A. B. hai. 

Koi J. A. nahin, Y^ Sab A. J. hai. 

Pas, Koi J. B. nahln. Pas, Sab J. B. hai. 

Farz karo, koi shakhs dalil lawe, ki fulana bddsMh 
burd na thd, kyiinki wuh zalim na thd. Tih dalil agar 
ba tartib i qiyas Ukhi jdwe, to yun hogi : — 

Sab z41im b&dshahbure badshah, hote.hain. 
Zaid badshah, zalim na tha. 
Pas, Zaid bura badsb^h na tha. 

Is misdl men akbar, " bure badshdh," kidli hai natije 
sffibe men, kyunki us ka mahraul pard hai, \8af, 79, Q. 
4 ;] lekin kubra men kuUi nahin hai, kyunki qaziya i mu- 
jibe ka mahmul pard hai, [&/. 77, Q. 3,] pas kulliyat nd- 
jdiz akbar ki hui. 

Misdl i doyum, — Farz karo, koi shakhs daHl lawe, ki 
talim kisi tarah ki kyun na ho, auraton ko taJim dend bura 
hai, kjninki fulani fulani kharab auraton ne talim pai thi. 
Xih dilil agar puri surat men likhi jawe, to kulliyat najaiz 
asgar ki zdmr ho jawegi. Maslan, 

Ful&ni auraten burl thin. 
Un auraton ne jlmon ki talim pai thi. 
Pas, Kisi tarah k^ ilm kyu^ na ho, auratoQ ko sikh^nS 
bur^ hai. 

Is misdl men asgar " auraton ko ilm sikhlnd," natije 

men kuUi hai, lekin sugra men kulli nahin hai, kyunki 

muiibe kd mahmul pard hai, pas dalil sahih nahin hai,^ , 

.... by Google 


S. Negative permisses. 

The form of this error is as if one would say, 

No A is B. 
No CisA. ( B 
Therefore No C is B. 

It is manifest that A, the middle term, is no 
medium of comparison between the other two terms, 
and although in this instance the conclusion is true, 
there might be instances in which B and 0, while not 
being A, would still have some connection with each 
other aj9 shown by this diagram. 
Hence, this is an erroneous form 
of argument. Suppose one were v£> 
to argue that education has no connection with yirt ue 
and goodness, because a certain nation was not an edu- 
cated nation neither was it a wicked nation. This 
would be an example of negative premisses from which 
one would not be justified in drawing any conclusion. 
The argument stated in full would be, 

A certain nation was not a wicked nation. 
That nation was not an educated nation. 
Therefore, An uneducated nation is not a wicked nation. 

4. Affirmative conclusion from a negative premiss, 
and vice versa. 

First case, — If one of the premisses is negative, we 
cannot draw an affirmative conclusion, because this 
would be declaring two things to agree in the conclusion 
when one of them had been declared not to agree with 
the same third in the premisses. This is contrary to 
the axiom for the syllogism [p. 114 a. 2.] Hence any 
syllogism or argument, in which an affirmativ^e conclu- 
sion follows where one of the premisses is negative, must 
be erroneous. 


by Google 


3. — Muqaddamdt sdlibe, 

Tih aisi galati hai, jaise koi kahe, — 

Koi A. B. nahin hai, /^~ \ 
Koi J. A. nahiy hai. ( B ) ( -^ 
Pas, Koi J. B. nahiu hai. \^ ^ ^^^— 

Tih zahir hai, ki hadd i ausat " A", muq^bala kame 
ka wasta, in donon juzon ke darmijan men nahin hai ; aur 
agarchi is sdrat men yih natija sahih hai, magar mum- 
kin hai, ki koi siirat aisl akar pare, ki B. aur J. A. men na 
dakhil hon, magar taham dpas men ilaqa rakhen. Maslan, — 

Pas yih dalil galat thahri. 

Faxz karo, koi shakhs dalil lawe ki jlm aur neki men 
kuchh ilaqa nahin, kyunki fulani qaum tarbiyat-yafta na 
thi, aur phir bhi badzat qaum na thi. Tih misal muqad- 
damat salibon ki hai, is liye kuchh natija nikalna sahih 
nahin hai. Agar yih dalU ba tartib i kamil likM jawe, to 
yun hogi : — 

Fnlinl qanm badzat na thi. 
Wuh qaum tarbiyat-y^fta na thi. 
Fas, Galr talim-yafta qaum badzat nahin hoti bai. 

4. — Natija i mujiba nikdlndjabki muqaddamon men se 
eJc sdliba hai, aur barqks is ke, 

Surat i auwal. — ^Agar koi muqaddama saliba ho, to 
natija mujiba nahin niklega, aur agar niklega, to goya aisa 
hoga ki do juz jin men se ek juz tisre juz, yane hadd i ausat 
se nisbat nafi ki rakhta tha, natije men akar baham-digar 
nisbat is bat ki rakhenge, aur yih bat qiyas ke qanun i 
badihike khilaf hai, I8af, 115. Q. 2 ;] pas koi dalil ya qiyas 
jis ka natija mujiba nikle, jis halat men ki us dalil ya 
qiyas ke muqaddamat men se ek saliba ho, zarur galat 


by Google 


Second case. — We cannot draw a negative conclasion 
from affirmative premisses, for this would be declaring 
things not to agree in the conclusion that had agreed 
with the same third in the premisses, which is contrary 
to the axiom for syllogisms [p. 114 a. 1.] Hence any 
syllogism in which the conclusion is negative from affirm- 
ative premisses may be pronounced erroneous. 

5. More than three terms in the argument,* 
It is plain that a correct argument which may be 
put into the form of a valid syllogism must have only 
three terms, hence any argument containing more than 
three terms must be erroneous. 

This form of fallacy may arise in two ways ; jeither 
from ambiguity in the major or minor term, or from 
ambiguity in the middle term. In either case, where 
the word does not preserve the same meaning through- 
out the argument, there will be really more than three 
terms in the syllogism. An example of this kind of 
fallacy in the minor premiss would be, 

A certain person was treated unjustly. 
He was wrongly imprisoned. 
Therefore, A prison is a place of injustice. 

Here the fallacy lies in assuming that '^ wrongly im- 
prisoned'^ and ^^ prison '^ have the same meaning, t. e., 
that the minor term of the minor premiss, is the same as 
the minor term of the conclusion. 


Hindus have a religious faith. 
Hindus are often giiilty of falsehood. 
Therefore, Some guilty of falsehood are often faithful persons. 

* This has been humorously called the logical quadruped, as it makea 
the reasoning go on four legs instead of three. 


by Google 


Diisri surat, — Muqaddamat mujibon se natija saliba 
nahin nikalta hai, aur agar nikle to goya aisa lioga, ki do 
juz jo kubra sugra men tisre juz, hadd i ausat se nisbat 
ifebdt kl rakhte the, natije men akar ek dtisre ke munafiho 
jawenge, aur yih bat qiyas ke qanun i badibi ke kbilaf hai, 
\_Saf, 115, Q. 1 ; pas jo koi qiyas aisa ho, jis ke muqadda- 
mat mujibon se natija saliba nikle, galat hoga. 

5. — Ek qiyas men tin jtizon se ziydda hd horn, 

Yih zahir hai, ki jo kol dalil, ba tartib i qiyas sahih 
likhl jati hai, to zarur us men sirf tin juz bote hain. Pas 
jis dalil men tin juz se ziyada honge, wuh dalil zarur galat 

Is qism ka mugalta do surat men akar parta hai, ya 
to yih ki akbar ya asgar mushtarak ul mana hon, ya hadd 
i ausat mushtarak ho. In donon suraton men se jis kisi 
sdrat men hadd i ausat ke ek hi mane kull qiyas men qaim 
na rahen, to be-shakk qiyas men tin juz se ziyada ho ja- 
wenge. Misal is qism ke mugalte ki, jo sugra men akar 
parta hai, is tarah par hai, — 

Fulane admi par zulni bu&^ 
Us ko na-haqq, qaidkhane men dal diya* 
Pas, Uaid-khana, zulm kl jagah hai. 

Tahan par is sabab se galati waqi htii hai, ki "na-haqq 
qaid-Khane men dal diya" ke, aur " qaid-khane" ke, ek hi 
mane liye hain, yane is dawa kame se ki jo sugra ka 
asgar hai, wuhi natije ka bhi asgar waqi htia hai, lekin dar 
haqiqat aisa nahin hai. Dusri misal, — 

Hindu ek tarah ka iman rakhte hain. 
Hindu gun^h aksar karte hain. 
Pas, Baze gunabg^r, Im^ndar hote hain. 


by Google 


Here the major term " faith '* of the major premiss, 
is really a different term from the major term " faithful/' 
of the conclusion. 

The major and minor term then must preserve the 
same meaning in the premisses and conclusion, otherwise 
there will be more than three terms in the syllogism. 

But the most common form of the fallacy of havings 
more than three terms in the syllogism, arises from the 
'^ ambiguous middle ; " hence this requires more careful 
guarding. Some word is used as a middle term having 
a different meaning in the premisses^ hence there are in 
reality four terms in the syllogism. The middle term 
should be the same word in both premisses and be un- 
derstood in the same sense, for if the word be the same, 
but have a different meaning in each premiss, there are 
four terms in the syllogism. 

In every language there are a number of words 
which have various senses. Words which spring from 
the same root as noun, adjective, verb, ^c,, often differ 
widely in meaning, hence sometimes in use lead to an 
ambiguous middle. Thus faith and faithful though 
from the same root do not always convey the same mean- 
ing; thus. 

The faithful will be saved. 
John was firm in the faith. 
Therefore, John will be saved. 

One may be resolute and firm in his religion with- 
out being faithful, hence the fallacy of this syllogism. 

There are many ways in which words come to 
have various meanings, and hence are liable to mislead 
in argument. (1), There may be an accidental resem- 
blance in the words, as ^' light'' opposed to darkness and 
''light" opposed to heavy. (2), There may be somo 
resemblance between the different things for which the 


by Google 


Yahdn akbarkubra kd, yane " iman raklite hain," us 
akbarse, jonatijemendy&hai, yaae "im&idar/' mukhtalif 
hai. Garaz akbar aur asgar ke muqaddamat men aur 
natije men ek hi m^e rahen, wama us qiy& men tin juz 
se ziyada ho jawenge. 

Lekin aksar is tarah ka mugilta, yane ek qiyas men 
tin juz se ziyada ka hona us surat men dkar partd hai, jab ki 
hadd i ausat mushtarak hai ; pas hadd i ausat par khub lihaf 
rakhn^ chdhiye, taki galati na pare. B^ lafzjohaddi 
ausat men waqi hota hai, us ke mukhtalif m?ine muqadda- 
mat men liye jate hain, yane ek hadd i ausat menkabhi 
shirkat mane ki, a parti hai. Maslan, agarchi imdn aur 
imdndar, donon ka masdar ek hi hai, lekin in ke mane 
hamesha ek hi nahin rahte hain; maslan, — 

I'ln^nd^r najat piwegge. 
Zaid im^n meu pukhta hai. 
Pas, Zaid naj^t pawega. 

Mumkin hai ki 2iaid apne mazhab ka pukhta aur khub 
sakht ho, lekin imtodar na ho; pasyihi wajh mugdlte 
ki hai. 

Ek lafz ke kai mane hone ke chand sabab hain. Auwal 
yih, ki mushdbahat i lafzi ho, jaise lafz "ag" kd, ki waste 
darakht aur ag, donon ke mustamal hai, yd lafz "lahsan" 
ka, ki .wdste us chiz ke, jo per se paida hoti hai, aur 
wfete us dag Ue jo larakpan men admion ke badan par 
kahin na kahin hota hai. Doyum yih, ki ba sabab musha- 
bahat surat ke ek hi lafz do mukhtalif chizon ke wdste 
bola jawe, jaise lafz "bhale" ka, ki hai men lagd hota 
hai, us ko bhi kahte hain, aur charkhe men jo hota 
hai, use bhi kahte hain. Ta lafz "kaman" kd, ki wdste 
kaman ke aur gari ke kahte hain. Set/urn yih, ki ba sabab 

Digitized by VjOOQ iC 


same word is used. Thus, " spear'^ is used for a weapon 
and for a blade of grass. (3), There may be some anaU 
ogy in the purpose for which the word is used. Thus, 
we speak of the "leg" of a chair and of the " leg'^ of an 
animal because bofch are used as support ; of " sweet'' 
food and of " sweet'' sound, because both are pleasing 
somewhat in the same way. (4), Association again 
leads to calling different things by the same name; thus, 
*^ shot'' may mean the hall used, the effect of the ball or 
the person shooting. (5), In the same way by ellipsis 
the same word comes to mean different things : thus, we 
use a person's name either to indicate the man or his 
writings. A careful study of this matter will lead ta 
a proper discrimination and aptitude in detecting and 
exposing the ambiguous middle. The way to remove 
the ambiguity and detect the error, is to jfo on some 
uniform meaning for the word used as middle term, and 
then see that it remains the same in both premisses. 

There are two more forms of fallacy that should 
be discussed here, as the error lies in the middle term. 
.The first of these is : — 

The Fallacia Accidentis, 

This error consists in arguing from the general to 
the special in a way not justified. The error arises 
wher^e the middle term is con sidered in one premiss 
in reference to its essence or general nature, and in 
the other premiss is considered in reference to some 
accident or something incidental to it, so that incon- 
gruous or incompatible things are compared in the 
conclusion. A stock illustration of this error, which it 
is the fashion to give in almost all the books, hence 
we do not pass it by, runs thus, — 

Things bought in the market, are what we eat- 
Kaw meat, is a thing bought in the market. 
Therefore, Eil^7 meat is what we eat. 


by Google 


musliabahat maqsad ke, ek hi lafz bola jawe, jaise lafz 
** paya" ka, ki waste pd,yaichauki, aur waste pay a i shami- 
ydna, donon ke bola jata hai. Donon pae ek hi maqsad ke 
waste hain, yane ek ehauki tbarane ke waste, aiir dusra 
shamiyane ke tbamne ke waste; yamaslan "mithi"ehiz, 
aur "mithi" awaz, donon men yili ranshabaliat hai, ki 
tabiat ko khnsh karti hain. Aur ehnhdrum, kahin par 
ba sabab qarabat ke ek nam mukhtalif chlzo'n ke waste 
bola jata hai, jaise lafz "sawari" ka ki waste ehiz ke 
jo baithne ke liye hoti hai, anr waste us fial ke jo 
sawar se hota hai, yane donon ke waste mustamal hai ; 
maslan kol kahe, ki baggl ek sawari hai, ya yun ki fulana 
shakhs achchhi sawari karta hai; ala haz-al-qiyas lafz 
"gari" ka. Agar is bayan par bagaur, lihaz rahe, to 
hadd i ausat mushtarik ka janna aur zahir kama ajaegd. 
Tariqa rafa kame mushtarika mane aur pakarne galati kd 
yih hai, ki Jo lafz hadd i atisat wdqi ho, us he ek hi mane 
muqarrar kiyejden ; aur phir yih dekhd jde, ki dyd in donon 
mvqaddamon men wuhi mane qdim rahte hain yd nahin ? 

Do suraten aur mugalte ki hain, jin ka bayan yahan 
par zarur kama chahiye, kyunki un ke sabab se hadd i ausat 
men galati par jdti hai. 


Jab imm. se har khass ko sabit karen to is qism ki 
galati kabhi waqi hoti hai. 

Yih galati us surat men bhi ake parti hai, jab ki ek 
muqaddame men hadd i ausat ke zdtt mane liye jawen, 
aur dusre men drizi mane, yane mana i ittifaqiya, yahan 
tak ki natije men akar do aisi baten, jo ek dusre ke munafi 
ioti hain, jama ho jati hain. Ek sahl si misal is qism ki 
galati ki yahan par di jdti hai: — 

Bkzkr se wuh chizen kharidi jati haig, }0 ham khate liaiQ. 
Kacbcha gosht ek chiz hai, jo bazar se kharlda jata hai. 
Pas, Kachcha gosht ek chiz hai, jo ham khate haiij. 


by Google 


In the major premiss the middle term " things 
bought in the market/' is considered in reference to its 
essence or general use, and in the minor term it is con- 
sidered in reference to one of its accidents, that is, that 
meat bought in the market is " raw/^ The middle term 
in one premiss has a general meaning and in the other 
an accidental or specific meaning; hence there are in 
reality two middle terms, involving a fallacy in the 

Another illustration of this error may be thus 
given : — 

Food is necessary to sustain life. 
Potatoes are food. 
Therefore, Potatoes are necessary to sustain life. 

" Food'^ in the minor premiss here, is restricted to 
a special thing, of which we cannot aflSrm that it is 
necessary to life, as may be affirmed of the general term 
*' food^' of the major premiss. 


Civil law is necessary .to the existence and control of 

human society. 
Tyrannical law, is also civil law. 
Therefore, Tyrannical law, is necessary to the existence of human 


Here there is an erroneous argument from the 
general meaning of the term '* law" as a necessity to 
the existence of society, to special law which is not a 
necessity. The check to this error is to see that the 
middle term have the same use in both premisses, that 
is, if it is used in the major premiss with reference to 
its essence or general nature, the same be preserved in 
the minor premiss. 


by Google 

JBA mr M TJGA'L TON KA. 227 

Kubrd men hadd i ausat, yane "bazar se wah chizen 
kharidi jati bain" jo hai, us ke zati mane liye bain, aur 
sugra men us ke arizl mane; pas jab ek muqaddama 
men dmm mane badd i ausat ke, aur dusre men mane itti- 
faqi, yane kbass mane liye, to dar baqiqat do badd i ausat 
bo gae, jin ke sabab se natije men mugalta parta bai. Is 
galati ki ek aur misdl yib bo sakti bai ki, — 

Khurak qijam i hay at ke liye zarur hai 
Alu khurak hai. 
Is sabab se, Alu qiy^m i hayat ke liye zarur hai. 

Kburdk sugrd men juzi mane par bai, yane ba mane 
makbsus cbiz ke bo gayd. Is sabab se jis tarab us lafz i 
kburak ko, jo kubra men waqi bone se kasir id afrad bai 
qiyam i baydt ke waste zaruri kah sakte bain, is tarab is ko 
nabin kab sakte. 

Dusri misdl : — 

Qandn, rtf4h o qiyam i khalaiq[ ke Hye zar^r hai. 
Qilnun izulm bhi, q^un hai. 
Is liye, d^nun i zulm, rif ah o qiy^m i khalaiq ke liye zarfir hai. 

Is misdl men dalil ki galati yib bai ki ek jagab qaniin 
kd Ififz $mm mane se rifab o qiydm i kbalaiq ke liye zaruri 
garddnagaya bai, aur dtisri jagab kbass mane se, kiwub za- 
ruri nabin. Aisi galati raf a kame ke wfiste yib libaz rafcb- 
nd obabiye, ki badd i ausat ke ek bi mane donon muqadda- 
inon men qdim raben, yane agar kubra men badd i ausat ke 
zati mane liye bon, to cbdbiye, ki wubi m?ine sugra men 
qaijn raben. 


by Google 



This error arises where the middle term is used in 
A collective or additive sense in one premiss, and in a 
distributive sense in the other. If it is first used in the 
major premiss in a collective sense, and then in a dis- 
tributive sense in the minor premiss, this is the ^' fallacy 
of division/' If the middle term is used in a distribu- 
tive sense in the major premiss, and in a collective sense 
in the minor, this is the ^* fallacy of composition/^ 
Familiar examples follow.— 

Hindus are idolaters, (collectively) 
R^m Chandar is a Hindu, (separately) 
Therefore, Kam Chandar is an idolater. 

This is the fallacy of division, for in the major pre m- 

iss, Hindus are considered collectively or as a people, 

and as such are idolaters ; but in the minor premiss 

they are considered as individuals, and hence it cannot 

be said of all that they are idolaters, and B&ta Chandar 

may not be an idolater. 


Zaid, Amr, Bakr are Mohammedans, (separately.) 
Mohammedans were engaged in tlie mutiny, (collectively. ) 
Therefore, Zaid, Amr, Bakr were engaged in the mutiny. 

Here we have the ^^ fallacy of composition,'* for in 
the major premiss the middle term " Mohammedans *' is 
considered separately, or as referring to certain individ- 
uals, but in the minor premiss the term "Mohammed- 
ans'* is used collectively for a people who were generally 
engaged in the mutiny. Hence, as the middle term is 
used in a distributive sense in the major premiss, and 
in a collective sense in the minor, there arises the 
'' fallacy of composition" in saying that Zaid, Amr, 
Bakr were engaged in the mutiny, for they may have 
had nothing to do with it. 

This error is checked by seeing that the middle 
term be used in the same collective or distributive 
sense iu both premisses. ,,,.,,,Google 



Tih galati us surat men wdqi hot! hai, jab ek muqadda- 
ma men hadd i ausat ba man! jama istiamdl kl jawe, aur 
ek men bataur i taqsim. Pas agar kubra men ba m^ni 
jama istiamdl ki jdwe, aur siigrd men bataur i taqsim, 
to us ko ''nwg.dlta i taqsim'^ kahte hain; aur agar hadd 
i ausat kubra men bataur i taqsim istiamal ki j&we, aur 
sugra men bamani jama, to us ko '^mug^nUa i pma^^ kahte 
hain. Ek sahl si misal yahan par di jati hai: — 

Hind(i butparast hain. (ba mani i jama) 

Ram Chanaar Hindu hai. (ba m^ni i taqsim.) 
Pas, K^m Chandar butparast hai. 

Tih " mugalta i taqsim" hai, kytinti kubra men BHn- 
du ba mane jama istiamal kiye gae hain, yane ba lihaz 
qaumiyat butparast hain, magar sugra men bataur i taqsim, 
is wajah se yun nahin kah sakte hain, ki sab Hindu but- 
parast hain, kyunki mumkin hai, ki Edm Chandax but- 
parast na ho. 

Dusri Misd.1, — 

Zaid, Amr, Bakr, MusalmSn hain. 
Musalm^non ne gadar par kamar bindhi thi. 
Pas, Zaid, Amr," Bakr ne gadar par kamar b^ndhi thi. 

Tih " mug^ta i jama" hai, kyunki kubrd men hadd i 
ausat " Musabndn" bataur i taqsim ke 6i hai, yane fard f ard 
ke waste &i hai; lekin sugrd men hadd i ausat " Musalmdn,'^ 
ba mane jama mustamal hai, waste ek qaum ke, jis ne 
gadar mach&ie par kamar bdndhi thi. Pas jab ki hadd i 
ausat kubra men ba taur i taqsim, aur sugrd men ba m^o 
jama isti^mfil ki jdwe, to wahdn mugdlta i jam^ par j6t4 
hai; pas yih kahnd, ki Zaid, Amr, Bakr ne gadar par 
kamar bdndhithi, galat thaharta hai; shayad unhon ne 
kuchh bhi na kiyd ho. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


Another simple example of both errors is,- 

Five is one number. 
Three and two are five. 
Therefore, Three and two are one number — 

making the fallacy of division. 

Three and two are two numbers. 
Five is three and two. 
Therefore, Five is two numbers 

making the fallacy of composition. 

II. — Non-logical ob matebul Fallacies. 

Non-logical fallacies are those^ as was remarked, 
where the fallacy is not in the form of the argument, 
but in the matter of the propositions that make up the 
argument. In this kind of fallacies, the conclusion 
does follow from the premisses, so that the error is not 
in the form of reasoning but, as said, is in the matter of 
the propositions which are, in the case of the premisses, 
either false or unduly assumed, or the error may be 
that the conclusion is irrelevant, t. 6., not the one requir- 
ed. Non-logical fallacies then may be divided into-* 

Fallacies in the premisses. 
Fallacies in the conclusion. 

First, where the error is in the premisses. There 
are several forms of this error, as a premiss may either 
depend on the conclusion, or be in itself entirely false. 
We notice,— 

1. The Petitio Principii, in which a premiss de- 
ends on the conclusion. This is the fallacy called 
pb egging the question" and consists in provingthe 


by Google 


Ek aiir said si misdl donon qism ke mugdlte ki yih 
hai — 

F^Doh ek adad hai. 
Tin aur do p^nch bote haig, 
Pasy Tin aur do ek adad hai. 

Yih " mugdlta i taqsim" hai. 

Tin aur do, do ^d hai^. 
F^Qch, tin aur do hote hain. 
Fas, F&nch do adad hain. 

Yih " mugdlta i jama" hai. 

Is qism kk mugalta raf ^ kame ke wdste, is amr par 
lihaz rakhna chdhiye, ki agar hadd i amat ha mane jama 
mustamal ho, to donon mtiqaddamon men ba mane Jama rahe, 
aur agar ha taur i taqsim ho, to donon muqaddamon men ba 
taur i taqsim rahe. 

Bayan Mugalta i MfNAwf ka. 

I/pAR zikr ho chukd hai, ki " mugdlta i manawi" us 
ko kahte hain, jahdn tartfb i qiyas men galati na wdqi ho, 
balki Tin qazion ke manon men galati ho, jin se wuh qiyds 
band ho. Is qism ke mugilton men natija to muqadda- 
mdt se nikaltd hai, aur qiyas ke stirat men koi galati nahin 
malum hoti hai, lekin qaziya ke m^on, yane mddde men 
galati par jdti hai; aur galati mddde men, ya yih ki muqad- 
damdt galat hon, ya be-mauq^ isti^tmdl kiye gae hon, to 
parti hai ; ya yih, ki wuh natija nikald jawe jo gair mat- 
lub ho. Garaz ki mugalta i m^mawi ki do suraten hain : — 

Mugalta muqaddamdt men, 
Mugdlta natije men. 

Pahle. — Bayan us mugdlte kd, jo muqaddamdt men 
parta hai. Is ki kai suraten hain, yd to yih ki koi muqad- 
dama aur natija donon ek hi hon, yd muqaddamdt khud 
bilkull galat hon. 

1. — Muqaddama nur natija elchi hond. 

Is qism ke mugdlte men yih bdt hai, ki natija nikaltd 
hai aise muqaddamdt se jo mauquf hon natije ke subfit par, 


conclasion from a premiss that depends on the truth of 
the conclusion^ or is the same in sense as the conclu- 
sion. It is an attempt to support a proposition by it- 
self as a proof. The point or question to be proved is 
• thus "begged/' because it is assvmed in fact, in the prem- 
isses, while a conclusion should not be thus assumed 
but be proved b/ independent propositions. Suppose 
one should attempt to prove the proposition (conclu- 
sion) that God is eternal, and offer as proof the state- 
ment that he is without beginning or end. Here the 
proof and the conclusion to be drawn, are in reality 
the same, and the argument put in the form of a syllo- 
gism would be. 

Any being without beginning or end of existence, 

is eternal. 
God is witbont beginning or end of existence. 
Therefore, God is eternal. 

Here the premisses are true enough, but the argu- 
ment is invalid, because they unduly assume the con- 

As a further example of this form of error, sup- 
pose that one should argue that a certain religion is 
true because its sacred books are from God. Here the 
proposition offered in proof of the truth of the religion, 
really assumes that the I'eligion is true, for if its sacred 
books are from God, it follows that the religion is true, 
but all of this is the point to be proven by independent 
propositions. This error will be detected by observing 
carefully whether the premisses unduly depend on the 
conclusion itself, or assume its truth. 

2. Arguing in a circle, is another form of fallacy 
in which the premiss is unduly assumed, because depend- 
ing on the conclusion. It differs from the " petitio 
principii^^ under which it is sometimes classed, in this 


by Google 


ya aise muqaddamat se jo mane men natije ke muWaqif 
ho ; pas jab natlja aise muqaddamdt se nikle, jo us par 
mauquf hain, ya mane men ek hi hain, to natija kya sabit 
hoga. Balki chahiye, ki natije ke subdt men aise muqaddamat 
awen, jo us se alahda hain. Is qism ke mugSlte njen yih 
bdthai, ki natija nikaltd hai aise muqaddame se,^ jo mauquf 
ho natije ke subut par, ya aise muqaddame se, jo mane 
men natije ke muwafiq ho. Farz karo ki koi shakhs is 
qaziye ko, ki " Khuda azali hai," is tarah par sabit kam^ 
ohahe, ki wuh bagair ibtida aur intihA ke hai, to subut 
natije ka, aur natija jo nikla hai, donon fil-waqai ek hi ho- 
jdwenge. Yih dalil agar ba stirat i qiyas likbi jawe, to' 
yun hogi : — 

Jo zkt ki be-ibtida aur be-intih& hai, azoli hai. 
Khud4 be-ibtid^ atir be-iiitih§i hai. 
Fas, Khud& azali hai. 

Is raisdl men muqaddamat bild-shubha sahih hain, 
lekin qiyas na-dur'ust hai, kis wdste ki muqaddamat natije^ 
ke manon men hain, aur yih dalil sahih ne^fn hai. Ek aur 
misal is qism ki galati ki di jdti had. Farz karo, koi shakhs 
dalil lawe, ki fulana mazhab bar haqq hai, kyinki us mdz- 
hab ki kitaben Khuda ki taraf se ai hain. Is dalil men 
sihhat i mazhab ke subut men, jo qaziya &y& hai, us ke^ 
mane haqiqat men yih hain, ki mazhab barhaqq hai ; kytinki 
agar mazhabi kitaben Khuda ki taraf se hain, to yih btt 
bhi nikalti hai, ki mazhab barhaqq hai. Lekin is sfirat 
men dawa aur dalfl donon ek hi hain, h&ldnki yih chdhiye 
thd ki dawa sdbit hotd aise muqaddamat se, jiil men na to 
koi natije par mauquf ho, aur na koi manon meij muttahid 
ho. Agar is bat par bakhubi lihdz rahe, ki &y& yih mu- 
qaddamdt natije par mauquf hain, ya natije ke manon men 
hain, to is qism ki galati zahir ho jawegi. 

2. — Daiir i tasakul, us mugdlte ko kahte hain, jah6n 
muqaddamdt beja isti^al kiye jdwen, yane natije par 
mauquf hon ; magar mugdlta i mazklira i bdld se is men 
itnd farq hai, ki is ke muqaddamat aur natije yih kuohh 


that tbe premiss and conclusion need not be the same in 
import. Ifc consists in making the premiss and con- 
clusion prove each other. Thus one proposition (prd- 
miss) is ofiered in proof of another (the conclusion), and 
when the proof of that proposition is demanded the con- 
clusion is offered ; the same as to say,-— A is true because 
B is true, and B is true because A is true. Suppose that 
one should argue that female education should not be 
maintained because it is wrong, and then argue that it 
is wrong because it is female education ; this would be 
reasoning in a circle and the same as to say, — A is not 
true because B is not true, and B is not true because A 
is not true. This error is checked by demanding an in- 
dependent proof for both propositions. 

The wider the circle, that is, the more propositions 
involved before reaching the last which depends on the 
first, the more diflScult is the error of detection, becausie 
the fallacy maybe thus lost sight of in the lengthened 
argument. Thus, A is true because B is true, B is true 
because C is true, C is true because D is true, D is true 
because E is true, E is true because A is true, is a wider 
circle in which the mind might lose sight of the unfair 
dependence of the last proposition on the first. Of course 
the way to check the error would be to demand proof 
for the last proposition independent from anything given 
in the circle. 

3. '^ Non causa pro causa J^ This is the assign- 
ing of a false cause or reason for some effect or conclu- 
sion. In this case the premiss is false, or at least 
unsupported. There is no morecommon form of fallacy 
than this. Some event occurs, or some fact is stated, 
for which a. cause is assigned that has no connection 
with it. Thus ignorant people especially are ever ready 


by Google 

B/Orji:N MUGALTON K/C. 235 

zurur nahin, ki mane men muwafiq hon, jaisa ki uparwale 
mugdlte men thd. Garaz ki daur i tasalsul us waqt hota 
hai, jab ki muqaddama aur natija baham-digar sabit kiya 
jawe, yane is tarah par, ki natija ke subiit ke waste mu- 
qaddama Idya jawe, aur agar muqaddama kd subut talab 
kiya jawe, to natija laya jawe, jaisa A. sahih hai, kyunki 
B. sahib hai ; aur B. sahih hai, kyunki A. sahih hai. Ta 
maslan koi kahe, ki auraton ko talim dena na chahiye, 
kyunki na-durust hai, aur phir dalil lawe ki wuh na-durust 
hai, kyunki wuh auraton ki talim hai, toyih daur i tasalsul 
hogi. Tih kahna aisa hai, jaise koi kahe, ki A. sahih nahin 
hai, kyunki B. sahih nahin hai, aur B. sahih nahin, hai", 
kyunki A. sahih nahin. Is tarah ki galati men muqad- 
damat aur natija donon ke waste alag alag subut talab 
kamd chdhiye. 

Jitnd bara daur hogd, y^ne pahle qaziye se pichhle 
tak jo auwal par mauquf hai, jitne bahut se qa.ziye honge 
usi qadar galati pakame men diqqat ziydda hogi, kyunki, 
tul tawil dalil men mumkin hai, ki galati khiyal se utar 
jawe. Maslan A. sahih hai, kyunki B. sahih hai; B. sahih 
hai, kyunki J. sahih hai ; J. sahih hai, kyunki D. sahih 
hai, aur D. sahih hai, kyUnki A. sahih hai. Tih bahut 
bard daur hai, aur shayad is bat ka khiyal na rahe, ki 
akhiri qaziya, qaziya i auwal par mauquf hai, batariq i nS- 
jaiz ; pas is galati men qaziya i akhiri ke wdste koi aisa 
Bubtit talab kama chdhij e, jo daur ke qazion se bilkull 
juda ho. 

3. — " Wa]h gjdir muwnjjihy^^ kisi bat, j& natije ki galat 
wajh lane ko kahte hain. Is hdl men wuh wajh ya to 
galat hogi, ya musallam na hogi. Tih nmgalta aksar waqi 
hua kartd hai. Bazd mudmala aisa waqi hota hai, j& koi 
haqiqat aisi baydn ki j&tl hai, jis ke wdste ek aisa sabab 
muqarrar kiyd jatd hai, ki kuchh us se ilaqa nahin rakhta 
hai. Jahil admi hamesha jhuthe sabab qaht ke, aur tarah 

Digitized by VjOOQ iC 


to assign false causes for famine and various calamities. 
For instance, eclipses are supposed to be the cause of 
numerous effects with which they have no possible 
connection. A man gets sick or dies, and it is attri- 
buted to the displeasure of some god or evil spirit. A 
certain king was beheaded and his son ascended the 
throne. This son once met a man, then blind, who had 
opposed his father to whom he said, " Do you not think 
your crimes against my father were very great, since you 
have been punished by God with the loss of your eyes?^' 
*' Nay your majesty,^^ replied the blind man, " if my 
crimes on that account may be considered great, how 
much greater the crimes ( f your father, seeing that he 
was punished by God with the loss of his head, while I 
have lost only my eyes" The king must have felt the 
force of this reply to his '^ non causa pro causa" and he 
must have seen that the cause assigned was as good in 
one case as the other. An example of the nou causa 
pro causa is found in the statement sometimes made 
that the tyranny of the English Government was the 
cause of the rebellion in India ; when in reality the real 
cause was something else, as the fanaticism and political 
ambition of the natives. 

Sometimes the non causa pro causa takes the form 
of a question which assumes unduly that something is 
80, the interrogatory form aiding in concealing the undue 
assumption. The question was once asked, why a vessel 
of water is no heavier after a fish is put in it than be- 
fore. Efforts were made to determine the reason^ with- 
out reflecting that the question assumes an error^ 
for the vessel is heavier with the fish in it. The way 
to meet this form of error is to demand that the came 
itself be proven, and not to accept it till some satisfactory 
proof be given that it is the real cause of the event or 


by Google 


tarah ki dfaton ke batlate hain. Maslan gahan ko, bdis 
batlate hain tarah tarah ki tasiron kd, jin ka ilaqa gahan 
se mutlaqan nahiri hai. Koi admi bimar ho jawe yd mar 
jdwe, to kahte hain, fxilana deota j& bhut us se nd-khush 
thd, is sabab se aisa hua. Ek badshah ka sar kat gayd, 
aur us ka betd takht par baitha. Ek martaba aisa ittif aq 
hua, ki is bete ne us shakhs ko, jis ne us ke bap ka muqa- 
bala kiya tha, dekha ki andha ho gaya hai, to kahne laga, 
Kaho ab turn nahin jante, ki turn ne kaisi bar! khatd mere 
bap ke sdth ki thi, jis ke sabab se Khuda ne turn ko aisi 
jsaza di, ki tumhari ankhen jfitirahin. Us andhe ne jawab 
diya, ki Nahin khudawand i niamat, jahan-pandh, agar is 
khatd ke sabab se meri 4nkhen jati rahin, to malum hota 
hai, ki dp ke bap ne koi is se bhi barl bhari khata ki hogi, 
Jo Khuda ne aisi saza di, ki us kd sar kat gaya, meri to 
sirf ankhen hi gain. Badshah apni wajh gair muwajjih 
ke jawdb kd sawab ko sunkar bahut qail hua, aur dekha, 
ki jo iatiraz main is par karta hun, wuh khud mere tipar 
aid hotd hai. Isi tarah ek misal " wajh gair muwajjih" 
M yih hai, ki aksar log.Sarkari Angrez par ittiham rakhte 
hain, ki bais bagawat ka Hindustan men Angrezon ka 
zulm tha ; agarchi dar haqiqat sabab is kd kuohh aur hi 
thd, yguie hardrat i dini, aur hawass mulkglri ki. Baz 
mauq?i par wajh gair muwajjih kd, jab ba surat suwdl dke 
partd hai, to galati chhip jdti hai. Ek martaba ek shakhs 
ne suwdl kiyd, ki pdni hhare bartan men machhli ddlo, to 
wuh bartan banisbat qabl ke kyun nahin bhdri hotd hai ? 
Dusrd shakhs is kd sabab darydft kame lagd, magar yih 
na sochd, ki yih suwdl hi galat hai, kyunld machhli ddlne 
86 wuh bartan bhdri ho jdwega. Is galati ke pakarne kd 
yih qdjda hai, ki malum kamd ki dyd yih sabab durust 
hai yd nahin ; aur jab tak dalil i shdfi is bdt ki na di jawe. 


by Google 


eflTects produced. In case of a question, the fact assumed 
should not be accepted till proved. 

These three — ''petitioprincipio/^ '' arguing in a circle'* 
and " non causa 'pro causa'' are the principal forms of 
*' non-logical fallacy'^ where the error is in the premisses. 
"We now turn to non-logical — 

Fallacies in the Conclusion, 

The common term for this form of error is " ignoiatio 
elenchi/' or ^^ irrelevant conclusion." The conclusion 
established is not the one required, but something that 
conceals or appears to be it, or diverts attention from 
the required ^^ elenchus" or conclusion. Elenchus is a 
Greek word which means the contradictory of an oppo- 
nent's assertion. 

The *^ irrelevant conclusion*' then is the establish- 
ment, either from ignorance or design, of a conclusion 
not required in the argument. Thus, suppose the ques- 
tion is, whether a man committed a certain theft or not. 
Now the one that undertakes to prove it, finding ifc 
difficult to establish the theft, sets about proving the 
man a rascal at any rate, which is not the point to be 
ascertained,'but is an " irrelevant conclusion.'' There are 
various forms of this error. Sometimes the question is 
dexterously changed to something else. Sometimes an 
effort is made to bring an opponent into a state of mind 
to accept a conclusion not proven, by arousing in him 
som^ passion or feeling. The way to meet this error is 
to settle clearly the point of dispute or inquiry, and keep 
this well in view. Any diversion or conclusion " irre- 
levant " to this should be promptly rejected. 

Some common forms of this fallacy are enumerated 

1. Argumentum ad hominem, or '^personal argu- 
ment." This is an unfair appeal to the passions, pre- 


by Google 


Ki yihl haqiqi sabab hai is mu^ale y& tasir ka, us waqt 
tak use taslim kamd na chahiye. Kisi suwdl ke dawe ko 
tasllm na kamd chdhiye, jab tak sabit na bo. Mugalta i 
manawi, jo muqaddamat men par jaya karte bain, aksar 
yihtln bain, yane ^^ Muqaddama native parmauqiif,^^ ^^Daur 
i tasakuV^ " Wajh gjair muwajjih.'^ 

DoYTJM, baydn un mugAton kd native men hote. 

Is qism ki galati ko aksar " MugAlta i natfja i g,air 
tnatluba kff^ kabte bain. Jo natija cbabiye, wub nahin 
nik^d jatd bad, balki koi anr aisa bota bai, jo natija i mat- 
liiba ki tarafse dby an ko bata letA bai. Garaz ki " mn- 
g6lta natija gair matltib kd" ns ko kabte bain, ki ns dalil 
men wnh natija muqarrar kiyd jawe, jo matliib na bo, 
kbwab wub natija na-samjbi se nikal dwe, ya jan bujbkar 
nikdla jdwe. Maslan farz karo koi sbakbs suwdl kare, ki 
is ddmi ne fulani cbori ki. Aur dusra sbakbs jawab dene- 
wala dekbe, ki cbori sabit nabin boti, to idbar udbar k j 
l)dten Ukar sabit kare, ki agar cbor nabin bai, to babar bdl 
bad-raaasb to bai. To yib " mngdlta natija i gair matlub 
ka" boga, kyunki us ki bad-maasbi par babs na tbi, balki 
balls us ki cbori par tbi. Is mugdlte ki kai, ek suraten bain, 
jin ka zikr age cbalkar likbd jawega. Baz martaba aisd 
hotdbai, ki dawe ko cbaldkise badalkarkucbb kd kucbb 
kar dete bain. Aur kabbi jawab denewald babs kamewd- 
le ke dil men aisi bdten ddl deta bai, ki galatnatije ko wub 
fihakbs qubiil kar lewe. Pas is qism ke mugdlton se mab- 
fuz rabne ke wdste, cbdbiye ki jis bdt par babs bo usi par 
qdimrabe, aur agar koi bdt babs se judd yd natija gaiy 
matlub pdwe, us ko bild taammul radd kare. Is mugdlte kl 
chand suraten, jo aksar dke parti bain, zail men likbi jdti 
bain : — 

1. — Mug,dlta i tamalluq-dmez, wub bai, jis men jawab de- 
newdlabad mudmali se babs kamewdle kedil ko, ydjis 

Digitized by LjOOQ IC 


jadices, personal opinions, vanity, modesty, &c., of an 
opponent or those whom it is desired to convince. An 
unfair effort may be made to arouse the anger or ridicule 
of persons against the truth. A 'Maugh^' sometimes 
brings the truth into contempt. A few simple illustra- 
tions of this error will make it plainer. 

It an unworthy [beggar appears before your door, 
and to your statement that he is not a fit subject for 
alms, replies by an appeal to your feelings of charily 
and compassion for the poor, and sense of duty in alms- 
giving, this would be a fair example of the ** argumentam 
ad hominem/* The conclusion of the beggar's argument 
would be " irrevelant,'' because the propriety of mani- 
festing feelings of charity and compassion for the poor, 
or the duty of alms-giving in general is not the ques- 
tion, but rather, is this particular -person a jit subject for 
oharity. The beggar avoids the question but tries to 
gain his point by a personal appeal. 

Again, many persons in India who object to female 
education, do not attempt to prove directly that the 
things in itself would be an injury, either to females or 
to the country generally, but try to arouse the prejudices 
of people against it by saying that it is not the custom 
and that they will bring discredit upon their families 
by sending their daughters to school. All attempts then 
to gain some point by passing by the real question at 
issue, and appealing to passion, prejudice, vanity, Soc, 
constitute the " argumenium ad homnem.^' When this 
appeal to passion, &c. is to an assembly or number 
of persons, it is sometimes called "argumentum ad 

This error should be met by calmly referring t3 tlio 
question at issue and keeping attention on that. 

It may be observed that any proper appeal to pas- 
sion or feeling to establish the real question at issue is 
not an error, and may be justly employed. 

.... by Google 


kisi ko qdil kama manzur ho, aisi targib de, ki us ke dil 
men josh ya taassnb paida ho jdwe, ya us ke dil ki sikahne 
la-g^j y^ ^^ ^^ barhdwe ki dp aise hain, aur waise bain, yd 
haya wg. dilawe. Aksar haqiqat ki bdt par gussa 
dilate hain, yd thatthe men urate hain. Thatthe se bhi 
haqiqat ki bat chhip jati hai, yd us se nafrat paidd ho jdti 
hai. Chand misdlen sahl si is galati ki yahdn par likhi 
jdti hain, jin se us kd hdl bakhubi khulegd. 

Agar koi faqir jis ko dend mundsib nahin hai, turn- 
hdre darwdze par dwe, aur turn us se kaho, ki tti is Idiq na- 
hin hai, ki tujh ko khairdt di jdwe, to wuh faqir is ke jawdb 
men yih kahe, ki "Bdbd, garib-parwari aur rahm kamd 
garibon par farz hai, khairdt dend sab par farz hai.'* Yih 
misdl mugdlta i tamalluq-daxez ki hai. Faqir ki dalil 
kd natija gair matlub hai; kydnki garib-parwari, aur rahox 
kamd, khairdt dend, ^urnuman farz hai. Is men kaldm na 
thd, balki is men thd ki &jq, yih faqir khairdt ke Idiq hai 
yd nahin? Wuh faqir suwal kd jawdb nahin detd, balki 
tamalluq-dmez dalllon se tumhdre dil ko lubhdtd hai, tdki 
turn rahm khdkar us ko khairdt de do . 

Dusri misdl. — ^Bahut log Hindustdn ke, jo g-uraton ki 
talim men muzdhimat kaxte hain, subiit i kdmil is amr kd 
nahin dete, ki talim se auraton ko yd mulk ko kyd nuqsdn 
hotd hai, balki logon ko talim ki taraf se pherte hain, aur 
kahte hain, ki yih dasttir nahin hai. Apni larkion ko 
isktil men bhejne se hamdre khdnddn ki badndmi hogi. 
Qetraz ki yih sab bdten, ki bahs men asl matlub ko chhor 
dend, aur josh o taassub paidd kamd, aur shekhi dildnd 
" mugdlta i tamalluq-dmez" men ddkhil hain. Is mugdlte 
se mahfuz rahne ke wdste yih dhahiye, ki asl matlub ko 
bar waqt mubdhise ke, hdth se na de, balki usi par dhydn 

Yih jdnnd chdhiye, ki bar waqt mubdhise ke aisd josh, 
o targib dildnd, ki bahs kamewdld rdsti pax dwe, aur sahih 
natija nikdle^ kuchh galati nahin hai. 


by Google 


2. The fallacy of shifting ground. Let; it be kept 
in mind that we are discussing the " irrelevant concla- 
sion ^j i, e., cases where the required conclusion is not 
drawn but something foreign to it, and which, if estab- 
lished, gives the appearance only, of having gained the 
point in dispute. The fallacy of shifting ground ia a 
common artifice for this purpose. Often during a discus- 
sion, when one finds that he cannot maintain his point, 
he slyly shifts the discussion to some other proposition 
difierent from the one under consideration in whole or 
in part. Thus, suppose one is trying to prove that the 
drinking of a single drop of ardent spirits is wrong, but 
failing in this, he quietly sets about proving that the 
drinking ardent spirits in excess is wrong, which is 
quite another question. This fallacy is efibcted in 
various ways. Sometimes an ambiguous or general 
term is used, and when it cannot be maintained in one 
meaning, a second or third meaning is claimed for it. 
Thus, an attempt may be made to prove that a certain 
people have faith in God in the sense of knowing him 
aright and obeying him, but on failing in this, an attempt 
may be made to prove that they have faith in the 
eadstence of one God, which is a different conclusion or 
'^ ground.'' Sometimes a particular is proved when a 
universal should be proved. Thus, some persons oa 
failing to prove that the Christian religion is not good, 
"shift'' their "ground" by showing that particular 
persons are not good, which is not the required conclu- 
sion, and if it be proved even, the real question ia not 

Sometimes the discussion is shifted from one to the 
oth^r of an opponent's premisses alternately. The attack 
on failing on one is changed to the other, and on failing 
there, is shifted back again without settling finally any 
one point. No fallacy is more common than this in a. 


by Google 


2. — Mug,dlta i tagaiyur i mazmim. Is bat ko yad rakh- 
n& chahiye, ki yih bahs natija i gair inatlub l<i hai, yane 
natija i matltib na nikala jawe balki koi aur aisi bdt gair 
roatliib, ki agar qaim Ui Jdwe, to ba zahir malum ho ki yih 
wuhi hai. Garaz yih fareb yane, " tagaiyur i mazraun/' 
jawab denewala aksar is maqsad ke waste karta hai, ki 
mubdhise men jab wuh dekh+a hai, ki main apnl bal^ par 
qdim nahin rah saktd hun, to as bahs ko chhorkar aur bdt 
par, jo Lilkull mukhtalif ho, ya bilkull na ho balki kuchh 
. ho, bahs karne lagta hai. Maslan farz, karo l<oi shakhs 
sdbit kama chahe, ki sharab ka ek qatra bhi pina gunah 
hai, magar ^bit na kar sake, to chalaki se bahs ko badal- 
kar kahne lage ki sharab ka bahut b& pina gundh hai. 
To yih bahs auwal se bilkull mukhtalif hogi. Yih nmgal- 
ta kaf tarah ake parta hai. Maslan baz jagah lafz i 
mushtarak istiamal kiya jata hai, aur jab ek m^e qdim 
nahin rah sakte hain, to muqabilwala dusre tisre mane 
istiamdl kame lagta hai. Maslan koi sdbit kama eh^e 
ki f ulane log Khuda par is tarah Imdn lae hain, ki us 
ko bakhubl jante hain, aur us ke ahkam ko mante hain ; 
lekin is ko sdbit na kar sake, to kahne lage ki we IChuda 
ke wujtid par iman rakhte hain, to yih bahs 1 ilkull judi 
ho jdwegi. Baz jagah aisd hota hai, ki qaziya i juziya 
Babit kiya jdta hai, jab ki kulliya sdbit kam& ohahiye. 
Maslan baze log jab yih nahin sabit kar sakte hain, ki fsal 
mazhab]achchha nahin hai, to is bahs ko chhorkar kahne 
lagte hain, ki baz shakhs is raazhab ke, achchhe nahin 
hain : pas yih wuh natija nahin hai, jo nikalna chahiye 
tha, aur agar yih sdbit bhi ho jawe, ki baz shakhs is maz- 
hab ke achchhe nahin hain, to asl d^twe se yih bat bilkidl 
alag hai. 

Baz daf a muqdbilwdla barwaqt mubdhise ke, ek mu- 
qaddame ko chhorkar, dusre par bar! bdri se bahs kame 
lagta. Jab ek muqaddame par iatiraz nahin ho sakta hai, 
to dusre par iatir&5 kame lagta hai, aur ja ) dusre par bhi 
ifitiraz nahin ho sakta hai, tophirpahle par & jdta hai. Garaz 


by Google 


weak disputant, ofshifting the discussion from one prop- 
osition to another in a perpetual round or flight with- 
out fully settling any one point. Thus, often in religious 
disputes we vrill find persons combating first one and 
then another of an opponen^/s doctrines with a great 
noise and clamour of words, but not waiting for a full 
reply on any point, nor delaying to either disprove it or 
acknowledge defeat. 

The effective way to deal with the fallacy of shift- 
ing ground is to fix some meaning on doubtful or gen- 
eral terms and settle the " ground^' of dispute fairly 
and clearly in the beginning, and demand that the dis- 
pute remain there ; and in case an opponent '' shifts^' 
his attack from premiss to premiss alternately, or from 
one proposition to another, the demand should be made 
that a proposition taken in hand be settled before pass- 
ing to another. 

3. The fallacy of ohjections. This consists in rais- 
ing some objection against a proposition or science or 
proposed improvement, and then because this objection 
can be urged, concluding that the proposition, science, 
or proposed improvement, or whatever the point may 
be against which the objection is urged, is erroneous 
or not to be maintained. The " fallacy of objections'* 
is put under the division of " irrelevant conclusion'* 
because, simply the conclusion that objections can be 
urged against a proposition, is not the conclusion to be 
drawn, but rather it should be shown whether the objec- 
iions have greater weight against the proposition than the 
reasona which can be urged for it. This is the point to 
be proved and not simply that some objections can be 
urged against the proposition. Many truths have such 
a weight of evidence in their favour that no one should 
hesitate for a n oment to accept them, and yet there may 
be some plausible objections urged against them. An 


by Google 


ki Idsi bahs ko pura naMn karta hai. Agar bahs kame- 
wild kam aql ho, to us ko is sebarhkar aur koi mugfilta nahin 
partd hai, ki ek qaziye ko chhorkar dusre par ohala jata 
hai, hamesha idhar udhar ghurata phirtd hai kisi bahs par 
bakhubl qdim nahin rahtd hai. Mazhabi mubfihison men 
ham ne aksar dekhd hai, ki muqabilwdla ek masle par iati- 
raz kartd hai, aur phir dusre masle par bare shqr o 
gul ke sith. ZariS thaharta nahin, ki piira jawdb pawe 
ya dp radd kare, j& iqrar apne qdil hone ka kare. Pas 
aise mugalte se mahf uz rahne ke waste yih khiib taxiqa hai, 
ki agar koi lafz mushtarak ho ya dmm ho, to auwal us ke 
m?me muqarrar kiye jdwen, aur auwal hi auwal khub jata 
diya jdwe ki isi par bahs rahe ; aur phir agar muqabile- 
wdl&ek muqaddame ya qaziye ko chhorkar dusre muqadda- 
me yd qaziye par bdri bdri se jane lage, to use muttald 
kartd rahe, ki jab tak ek bdt par bahs ptiii na ho jdwe, diisri 
ko na pakre. 

3. — Mug,dUa iqtirdzon kd. Mugdita iatirdzon kd us ko 
kahte hain, jab ki iatirdz kisi qaziye par, j& jo koi bdt jis 
par bahs ho rahi ho wdrid howe, aur ba sabab wdrid hone 
iatirdz ke, us bdtko galat qardr diyd jawe. 

Mugdlta iatirdzon kd bhi " natija i gair matl6b'^ k^ 
qism se hai, kyunki sirf is qadr natija nikdlnd, ki fuldne 
qaziye par iatirdz ho sakte hain, natija i matluba nahin hai 
balki yih batldnd chdhiye, ki fuldne qaziye par iatirdz ziyd- 
da yd us ki isbdt i sihhat ki dalilen ziydda hain, ysine yihi bdt 
Bdbit kamd chdhiye, ki dyd iatirdz^ dalilon se ziydda hain ya 
nahin ? Bahut bdten aisi hain, jin ke subut men us qadr 
dalilen hain, ki koi un ke qabulkame men kisi tarah kd taam- 
mul nahin kar saktd hai ; magar bain hama un ke upar 
kuehh iatirdz ho sakte hain. Agar koi muqdbilwdld un 
bdton par bare shor o gul ke sdth iatirdz uthdke zdhir kare 

Digitized by VjOOQ iC 


oj)ponent of these truths by making a noisy parade of 
the objections^ might make it appear that they should be 
rejected and in this lies the fallacy. 

For instance, a medicine has been useful in scores 
of instances, but in a few cases failed ; now it would be 
erroneous to urge that because in a few instances it 
had failed, the medicine is not a good one. The 
Bible has many and weighty arguments to prove that 
it is God*s book, and that it has remained uncorrupted 
through ages down to the present time. Yet because 
some objections or diflSculties can be urged against it, 
some persons claim that it should be rejected. This is 
the '^ fallacy of objections,'^ and the question here should 
be, is there a preponderance of evidence in favour of the 
inspiration and uncorrupted preservation of the Bible ? 
Another illustration of the fallacy of objections is 
found in the objections that are urged against some 
change or improvement ill the government or public 
works of a country. Although the change may have 
many reasons to commend its adoption, yet because 
one or two objections may be urged against it, some 
persons are ready to reject it. 

Where the fallacy of objections is urged against 
any question or proposition it should be met by the 
position, that while the proposition has stronger arguments 
in its favour than can he urged against it, it is not disproved, 
and this point should be kept clear above all the clamour 
ot debate. 

4. The fallacy oj proving only a part. This is just 
the reverse of the fallacy of objections, and consists in 
proving only &part of what is required, and then claim- 
ing that the whole question has been proved. Thus, 
suppose that the question is whether a certain book is 
good, or not. Now, if only a few good points could be 
shown in the book, it would be the " fallacy of proving 


by Google 


ki in baton ko radd kama clialiiye, pas yihi mngalta 
iatirazon ka hud. Masai to maslan, koi dawa ho, jis se 
bisiyon marizon ko faida htia ho ; magar ek-adh martaba kisi 
ko na hua ho, to yih kahna ki yili ndqis dawa hai, galat hoga. 
Ya maslan, Baibal ke subut men bahuteri pakki dalilen 
hain, ki yih kitab Khuda ki hai, aur sal-ha sal se aj tak 
bajinsihi bagair tahrif chali at! hai, magar taham, ehdnki 
baz jagah diqqat ake parti hai, aur bazahir chand iatiraz ho 
sakte hain, is sabab se baz admi kahne lagte hain, ki is ko 
radd karna chahiye. Yih mugalta iatiiazan ka hua. Ya- 
han par yih suwal ehahiye tha, ki Baibal ke ilhami hone 
aur bagair tahrif rahne ki ziyada dalilen hain ya nahin ? 
agar ziyada hain, to taslim kamd chahiye. Ek anr misal 
" mugalta i iatiraz" ki yih hai, ki baz admi, jab umtirat i 
saltanat men rafah i khaldiq ke wdste kisi tarah ka tagaiynr 
amal men awe, to iatiraz karte hain. Agarchi us tagaiyur 
men us mulk ki bahut bihtari ho, taham ba sabab do ek 
iatiraz ke baze log radd kame lagte hain. 

Jis mubahise men, ki mugalta iatiraz ka waqi ho, to 
us ke jawab men yih qaida baratna chahiye, ki jitni dalilen 
subiU i slhhat men haw, is se ziyada iatiraz jab tak na 
hon, us waqt tak use radd karnd na chahiye^ aur kaisa hi 
shor gul kytin na mache, is qaida ko hath se na de. 

4. — MagAlta subut i juzi ka, Yih mugalta, mugalta 
i iatiraz ke baraks hai. Mugalta i iatiraz men juzi par iati- 
raz karke kulli ko radd karte hain, aur is men juzi ko sabit 
karke dawa karte ki kuUi sabit hai. Maslan farz karo, 
\oi shakhs suwal kare, ki aya Mani kitab achchhi hai ya 
nahin ? aur us ke jawab men kaha jawe, ki chand bayanat 
M kitab men achchhe hain, is sabab se wuh kitab achchhi 


only a part'* to argue therefore that the book is a goofi 
one. The question to be proved is, " is the book upon 
the whole a good one.*^ To prove anything short of 
this is " irrelevant/^ Again, suppose the question is, 
" whether a certain government is a good one or not/* 
Now, to prove two or three good points in the govern- 
ment is not enough, but the government should be 
considered as a whole ; anything short of this is proving 
but a part, and a partial conclusion is **irrelevent'' here. 
The fallacy of proving a part should be met with a 
demand that while proof for the whole question is 
not brought forward it must not be decided. The caution 
may here be given that in every question, care should 
be taken not to attempt to maintain too much, for if 
more is claimed in the question than can be fairly proved, 
the argument is open to the objection that it involves 
the " fallacy of proving only a part/' 

These four kinds of fallacy then, " argumenium ad 
hominem^ — ^^ shifting grourhcC' — ^* fallacy of ohjections^^ 
and " fallacy of proving only a part of a qtiestion'^ in- 
clude the usual forms of" irrelevant conclusion/' 

We may give here some general rules for the 
examination of arguments and then conelude the subject 
of fallacies with a recapitulation. 

To Discover Formal Fallacies* 

First, reduce the rieasoning or argument to the form 
of a syllogism. This can be done in the following^ 
manner whether it be an oral discourse, a book, chaptec 
or section. — Observe what the concluding assertion of 
position is, for this is usually the conclusion. Go bacfc 
from this and ascertain on whsit grounds this assertion is 
made or from what reasons this conclusion is drawn. 
These " grounds'* or " reasons'' will be the premisses, 
and from the conclusion and premisses thus obtained the 

Digitized by LjOOQ IC 


hai, to yih " mugdlta subut i jiizi ka" hoga ; kyunki juzi ke 
hal se kulli ki taraf dalil pakartd hai. Suwal is bat men 
thd, ki wuh kitab sab taran se achchM hai y a nahin ? Pas 
yahdn par natija juzl nikalna, jis surat men kulli cbahiye tM, 
gair-matlub hai. Diisri misal. Farz karo, kol shakbs suwal 
kare, ki fulani Sarkar aehchhl bai } a nahin ? to us ke jawab 
men sirf do tin laten us an»aldari ki achchhi sabit kam^ 
kdfi na hoga, balki kull baton par gaur karke natija nikal- 
na chahiye, aur agar kull baton achchhi sabit na hon, 
balki juzwi baten, to yih natfja yahan par gair-matltib hoga, 
kiyunki bahs hamari kull par thi na jnz par. Garaz ki 
mugaltai subtit i juzi se mahftiz rahne ke waste, kulli par 
dalil talab kama chahiye, aur is amr se agah kar dena 

chdhiye, ki agar kull suwdl kd jawab na milega, to dalil 
puri na hogi. Aur wazih ho ki har bahs men is bat ka 
lihaz rakhna chdhiye, ki jitni bat ho, utna hi dawa kama 
chahiye na yih ki ziyada ; kyunki agar ziyada daw^ kiya 
}&we, to kull sdbit na ho sakegi, aur dalil men iatiraz mu- 
gdlata i juzi ka paida hoga. Natija gair-matltib, aksar 
inhin ch&r qismon ke mugalton men yane " tamalluq-amez,'' ' 
aur"mugalta tagaiyur i mazmun," aur "mugaltaiiatirdz," 
aur " mugalta i subtit i juzi" men akar parta hai. 

Ab yahan par chand qdida i dmm, waste daryaft kame 
sihhat dalilon ke, likhenge, aur phix bayan mugalton ka,. 
bil-ijm^ likhkar tamam karenge. 

Mugalta i stJRf ko pakarna. 

Dalil ko ba stirat i qiy& kama chahiye, khwah dalil 
zabani ho yd tahriri, aur tahriri khwah kull kitab men 
ya bab men ya fasl men ho. Stirat i qiyas is tarah 
lana chahiye, yane dekho ki akhiri bahs kya hai, kytinkar 
iksar wuhi natija hogd, aur phir yih daryaft kama, ki kis 
lina par wuh dkhiri bahs qaim hai, yane kin dalilon se wuh 
natija nikla hai, aur wuh lina yane dalilen muqaddamat 
^Qg© ) PO'S is tarah qiyds ban jawega, aur jab qiyas ban 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


syllogism or syllogisms, as the case may be, can bo 
constructed, which may then be tested by the rules for 

Is^. Observe whether the syllogism be categori- 
cal or hypothetical. If hypothetical the rules for the 
hypothetical syllogism must be applied. 

2nd, If categorical count the terms. 

Zrd, If there are only three terms, ascertain 
whether the middle term is distributed, and is used in 
only one sense. 

4/A. Observe whether the premisses are both 
negative in reality or in appearance merely. If but one 
is negative, see if the conclusion is negative also ; or if 
both are affirmatives, observe if the conclusion is 

5^^. Mark what terms are distributed in the con- 
clusion, and ascertain whether they are distributed also 
in the premisses. 

&th. If the syllogism is in the first figure, observe 
if it is in the form of Aristotle^s dictum. 

To Discover Material Fallacies. 

If no fault appears in the syllogism as such, that 
is in the /orm of the reasoning, then proceed to try the 
truth of the premisses and the relevancy of the con- 
dusion. Take each premiss separately and observe: — 

\st. Whether it is self-evident or not. 

2nd. If not self-evident, but requiring proof 
mark if the ground or proof on which it rests is valid or 

Zrd, Observe whether the premiss is the same 
as the conclusion in reality, or whether it depends upoa 

If the premisses are true and unobjectionable, turn 
to the conclusion and observe; — 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


jawe to us ki sihliat un qdidon se, jo waste daryaft kame 
sihhat qiyason ke muqarrar hain, daryaft kama chahiye. 

Auwal. — ^Tih dekho, ki wuli qiyas hamliya ya shartiya 
hai, agar shartiya hai, to iinhin qaidon se, jo waste shartiya 
ke muqarrar iain, sihhat us ki malum karo. 

Doyum, — ^Agar qiyas hamliya ho, to yih dekho, ki us 
men kitne juz hain. 

Sepum, — ^Agar sirf tin juz hon, to yih dekho, ki hadd 
i ausat kulli hai ya nahin, aur ba mane mufrad istiamal ki 
gai hai, ya nahin. 

Chahdrum. — ^Tih dekho, ki donon muqaddamat sdlibe 
hain ya mujibe, aur agar salibe hain, to manan ya lafzan, 
aur agar ek muqaddama sdliba ho, to dekho ki natija bhi 
saliba hai ya nahin ? agar donon muqaddamat mujibe hon, 
to yih dekho ki natija bhi mtijiba hai yd nahin ? 

Panjum. — Yih malum karo, ki jo juz natija men kulli 
hain, muqaddamat men bM kuUI hain ya nahin ? 

Shashum. — ^Agar qiyds ba surat shakl i auwal ho, to 
yih daryaft karo, ki bamujib " qaul i Arastatalis'* ke hai 
ya nahin ? 


Agar wuh qiyds in sab nuqson se khaK ho, yane us ki 
surat men galatlna ho, to yih daryaft karo ki muqaddamdt 
sahih hain, Qxxrnatija wuhi hai jo matlub thd. Aur daryaft 
is tarah par karo, ki har ek muqaddama ko judd juda 
karke, — 

Pahle. — ^Yih dekho, ki yih muqaddama badihi hai ya 

Dm}*e,—'Ag3x badihi na ho, balki muhtaj subut ka ho, 
to yih dekho ki wuh bind yane dalil, jis par wuh qdim hai, 
eahih hai ya nahin P 

Tisre — ^Yih dekho, ki muqaddamdt dar haqiqat wuhi 
lain, jo natija hai, yd natija par mauquf hain. 

Agar muqaddamdt sahih aur iatirdz se khdli hon, to na- 
t^'a ki taraf mutawajjih ho. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 



Ist, If it is '^ relevant,^' that is, the one required 
in this argument. 

2nd» If it is the one that the reasoner set out to 
prove or has the question been changed. 

'6rd. If it is the whole or only a part of what 
should be proved. 

Some such analysis as this will generally load to 
the detection of any errors in an argument. Each form. 
of fallacy in the recapitulation, should be studied and 
dwelt on till its nature is fully understood and till it can 
be illustrated by a number of instances. ' 

Eecapitulation op Fallacies. 


I. Logic 

AL or error «{ ^ 

in form, 

Undistributed middle. 
Illicit process. 
^Negative premisses. 

Afltaaative conclusion 
from negative premiss- f Ambiguous major or 
es and vice versd. minor. 

the argument. | j,^^^ ^f ^^^.^^ ^^ 

(^ composition. 

\' First, fallacy in 
the premisses. 

11. NON^ 
material, er- 
ror in mat- 

' Petitio principii. 
Arguing in a circle. 
Non causa pro causa. 

Second, fallacy in 
the conclusion, "ig- 
noratio elenchi," or-< 
irrelevant conclu- 
L sion. 

f Argumentum ad hominem. 
Shifting ground. 
Fallacy of objections. 
Fallacy of proving only 


by Google 



Pahle. — ^Yih dekho, ki natlja matluba hai, yane wuhl 
hai jo is dalil men chahiye thd ? « 

Dusre, — ^Yih, kinatija wuM hai, jobahs kamewdlene sa- 
bit kama cbdM thd, j& bahs badal gai hai ? 

Tisre, — ^Yih dekho ki natija jitna s6bit kama chfihiye 
thd, utna hai yd juz us kd ? 

Pas in sab baton mazkura i bdla par lihaz rakhne se 
agar kisi tarah kl galati dalil men ho, bakhubi malum ho 
jaegi. Mugdlta ki har surat par, jo zail ke baydn i muj- 
mal men likhi hai, tawaqte ki us ki kaifiyat bakhfibi ma- 
lum na ho jawe, aur har surat ki misdl apni taraf se na ba- 
nd sake, khub dhydn dend aur gaur kamd chdhiye. 

Mug,dlton kd mujmal bat/dn. 

'1. Hadd i ansat juzl. 

2. Eulliyat i n^j^iz. 

3. Muqaddam^ti B^libe. 
1, Mugdlta J 4. Natija mujaba muqad- 

. c/ . < dam&t silibonse, y^ f avv^o, ^a „„««» „& 

baraks is ke. ^tT^ ^ ^?"' ^l 

5. Ekqiyasmegtlnjuzon tarika 
L seziy&dak&hoiKi. ^ Mug&lta i arzl. 

Mugdlta taqdm o 

i Sdri, 

2. Mugdlta ^ 
i Man'awij * 

iMuqaddama aur natija 

f Mug&lta i tamalak&mez. 
Doyww,— Mug^ta nati j e Mug&lta i tagaiyur 1 maz- 
meg, vane ** natija gair-{ ni^ 
matliiD." t Mug&lta iatir&zog k&« 

l^Mv^lta subut jazl. 


by Google 


Op certain methods op ipplyin& logic. 

There are certain peculiar methods oi applying the 
reasoning process in practical life^ to which appropriate 
names are gives. We propose to describe these briefly, 
and illustrate their mode of application. It will be 
seen that the reasoning process^ although always really 
the same, in practical use in the search for truth or in 
the refutation of error, is varied in method. 


1. Induction, is the inferring of general laws or 
truths, from particular truths or fects^ that have pass- 
ed under observation. It is also the process of discov- 
ering causes from effects. A number of facts or 
things are found always associated in the same way, or 
accompanied by the same phenomena; hence we con- 
clude that this class of facts are always so, and infer 
some general law or truth in regard to them. For 
instance, it has been observed that lead, iron, silver, 
gold, &c., melt when a sufficient degree of heat is 
applied to them. Hence, the general truth is inferred 
that metals are fusible. Again, it is observed that 
cows, sheep, goats, deer, and other homed animals 
ruminate, hence the rule is inferred that homed animals 
ruminate. Again, it has been observed in hundreds of 
trials, that pure water resolved into its elements by chemi* 
cal analysis, yields but two gases, oxygen and hydrogm. 


by Google 



Mantiq ke istiamdl ke waste chand tarlqe hain, jin ke 
juda judd nam muqarrar hain. Ab hani&ra ir&da had, ki \m 
tariqon ko likhen, aur nn ke istiamfl k& tanrbatUwen. Tih 
malum hog& ki aql agarchi haqiqatan bamesha ekhi tanr 
par daurti bai, magar pbir bbi W waqt mubUhise ke, jab 
ki kisi bat ki baqlqat dary&ft ki j&we, j6, koi galati rafa ki 
jawe, to dalil lane ke tari^e men kudidi na kuohb tagaiyur 
bo jata bai. 

Bayan IstiqrX kA, 

1. — Istiqrd ns ko kahte bain, ki jnziyat se kulliyat ko 
malum kama, yane cband bdton se us qism ki kull bUton 
ke liye koi qdida i $mm nik&ln&. Jab cband martaba bam 
ne dekbH, ki jab ek amr hotd bai, us ke sdtb fuldni bat bbi 
boti bai, pas us se bam natija nikdl lete bain, ki is qism ki 
jitni baten bain, sab bamesha isi tarab par boti bain, aur ek 
^bnm qdida un sab baton ke waste nikal ata bai. Maslan 
ham dekbte hain, ki sisa, lobfi, cbdndi wg. jab khub garm 
kiye jawen, to pigbal jdwenge. Pas qUida i $mm yib nikld ki 
dhaten pigbal jdti^n. Diisri misdl, bamne dekha, ki g^e, 
bhains, bakridn, aur aur singwdle jdnwar jugdli karte bain 
pas q&ida nikla ki singwdle j^war jugdli karte bain. Tisri 
misal, saikron martaba izmiiae se m^tim bti&, ki kb&lis 
pdni, jab us ke andsir kimiyditarkib se judd judU kiye jHwen 
to do gdsen bo jati hain, is bisdb se &^b bissa dksijen aur ek 

_ _^._Ie 


in the proportion of 8 to 1 ; hence it is inferred that 
all pure water consists of two elements, oxygen and 
hydrogen, combined in the proportion of 8 to 1. 

2. We may remark here, that induction, as far at 
least as the material world is concerned, is founded 
on the belief, that the laws of nature are uniform. 
This belief itself is perhaps an induction. From child- 
hood up, we observe that the sun uniformly rises and 
sets, that day and night succeed each other in the same 
regular order, that the seasons come and go, that 
seeds germinate and plants grow, and produce flowers 
and fruit in the same order; hence the belief has 
fastened itself in the mind from these observations, 
that nature^s laws are uniform. For this reason, when 
in a number of cases we see the same thing accompanied 
by the same phenomenon, we infer from the uniformity 
of nature's laws that it will always be so. 

3. The induction will be complete or incomplete 
according to t he number and accuracy of the observations 
that have been made. It would be an incomplete and 
hasty induction to infer a general law or truth from a 
few facts, or from a few hasty and immature observa- 
tions. Yet this is a common mistake; because 
a thing happens in a certain order or connection for a 
few times, it is referred to some cause with which it 
has no connection whatever. It is a common saying 
among the Hindus, that eclipses have an unfavourable 
influence on the birth of children, because perhaps, 
in some instances, unfavourable births have taken place 
in connection with eclipses ; although there is no pos- 
sible bad influence in eclipses over the birth of a child, 
as the thousands of favourable births at times when' 
eclipses have taken place, should prove. If it should 
occur twice or thrice in a life time, that a journey," 
undertaken when an animal crossed the road before us^ 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


hissa haidrojen, pas natija nikla, ki jitna khalis panl hai, 
do unsar se, yane dksijen aur haidrojen se, is tarah par ki 
ath hissa aksijen hai aur ek hissa haidrojen, murakkab hai. 
2. — ^Ab janna chahije ki bunyad istiqra ki is i/aqifi 
par hai, ki qudrati qdnun ek hi rahte hain, hadalte 7iaMrt, 
aur yih yaqin bhi shayad istiqra se hasil hiia, kyunki 
larakpan se ham dekhte hain, ki aftdb barabar tulii hot^ 
aur gurtib hota hai, aur rat aur din pai dar pai bote 
rahte hain ek hi tartib par ; mausim dte hain, bljon men 
kalla phtitta hai, aur darakht barhte hain, aur phalte phiilte 
hain, ek hi tartib par ; pas deUhte dekhte hamare dil 
par yih yaqin jam gaya hai, ki qawanin i qudrati badalte 
nahin, ek hi rahte hain. Jab kai ek martaba ham dekhte 
tain, ki fulane waqi ke sath fulani Idt hoti hai, to natija 
nikalte hain, ki chiinki qudrat ke qdnun hamesha ek hi 
rahte hain, is sabab se fulane waqi ke sath fulani bat 
hamesha hoti rahegi. 

3. — Jitni martaba aur jis qadr gaur ke sath koi bat 
dekhi jawe, usi qadr us ka istiqrd kamil hoga. Yih nahin 
hai, ki ek bat ko ek amr ke sath do ek martaba hote hue 
dekhkar ek ^mm qajda nikalna, ki jab fuland amr hoga, 
to us ke sath fulani bdt zarur hogi. Yih galati aksar waqi 
hoti hai, kyunki barahd dekhne men &i& hai, ki jab koi bdt 
kisi amr ke sath do ek martaba hoti ho, to log kahne lagte 
hain, ki us bat aur us amr men ildqa zurur hai. Maslan, 
Hindu log aksar kahte hain, ki gahan parte waqt larke ka 
paida hona manhus hota hai, kyunki baz martaba dzma 
dekha hai, ki jab aise waqt men larka paida hota hai, man- 
hus hotd hai, agarchi is bat ki kuehh asliyat nahin ; kyunki 
hazaron martaba larke k& paid& hona aise waqt men masM 
hua. Agar umr bhar men do tin martaba kisi shakhs 
ko aisd ittifaq hua ho, ki safar karte waqt koi janwar us ke 
samhne se r&sta kd^kar nikal gayd, aur us safar men kuehh 
khalal par gayd, to use yih natija nikdlnd na chdhiye, ki 
musdfirat men janwar k& rdsta kdtkar nikal ']&n& shugun i 

Digitized by LjOOQ IC 


proved bad^ we should not therefore infer that there 
is some unfavourable sign in an animal crossing our 
track. On the contrary, a correct induction would 
show us that the instances are vastly more numerous, 
where the crossing of our track by an animal, was fol- 
lowed by a prosperous journey. 

Induction will thus be complete, in proportion to 
the number of cases that have passed under observation. 

An absolutely complete induction would be where all 
the cases had passed under observation. But this is 
usually not practicable, and indeed is not necessary^ 
since a number of observations, more or less just, as the 
case seems to demand, satisfy the mind that a general 
law or truth has been reached. For instance, it is not 
necessary to analyze all the water in the world, to be 
sure that water is composed of two gasses. Bepeated 
trials have satisfied the mind that this is the fact. A 
complete induction, then, is where the trials have been 
sufficient to satisfy the mind and warrant the conclu- 
sion. From the process of induction, diflTerent degrees 
of belief arise, in proportion to the completeness of the 
induction. If the examples have not been num^ous, 
the field of observation having been limited, there may 
be a degree of doubt in the conclusion ; but if the 
observation has been very extended, the belief may rise 
to absolute certainty. 

4. Nearly all science is the result of induction.. 
Numerous observations and experiments having been 
compared, general principles and laws are inferred from: 
them. These principles and laws classified, constitute 
science. Thus, the sciences of astronomy, geology, 
chemistry, botany, medicine, &c., have been developed. 
Centuries of observation and experiment have beett 
required to bring some of these sciences to their prei- 
ent degree of perfection. Induction will mature thee 


by Google 


bad hal ; balki barkhilaf is ke istiqra e kdtnil se ham ko 
yih bat sabit ho jawegi, ki janwar ke nikahie se kuchh 
nahin hoM, kyunki saikron martaba janwar rfeta katkar 
nikal gae, aur saf ar ba khairiyat tamam htia. 

JIs qadr baten hamarl nazar se guzrengi, usl qadr is- 
tiqra un ka, barhta jawega. 

Istiqra e kdmU, ki jis men kuchh bhi kisi tarah ka 
shubha mumkinna ho, jab hoga ki ek qism ki kull baten 
hamari nazar se gusrar jaen. Lekin yih amr aksar gair 
mnmkin hai, anr haqiqat men kuchh zarur bhi nahin hai, 
jab ki tabiat ke chand hi martaba dekhne se qarar wdqai 
itminan ho, ki han yih $mm qaida nikalta hai. Maslan 
yih zarur nahin hai, ki tamam duniya ke pan! ko juda karke 
dekhen, taki yaqin ho jawe ki pani do gason, yane do 
hawdon se murakkab hai, kyunki chand martaba azmane 
se dil ko qarar waqai itminan is amr ka ho gaya hai, ki 
pani do gason se murakkab hai. Garaz istiqra e kfimil jab 
hoga, ki ek bdt itni martaba azmSi jawe, ki dil ko yaqin i 
kamilho jawe aur jo natija nikala jde, jaiz ho. Yaqin 
jo istiqrd se hasil hota hai, yaksdn nahin hai, yane dalil 
istiqra ki, jis qadr kdmil hogi, usi qadr yaqin k^mil hogd. 
Agar kisi amr ko sirf chand hi martaba dzmdkar dekha, 
to us ke yaqin men shay ad kisi qadr shakk hoga, aur 
jis b&t ko bdraha azm&kar dekha, us k& yaqin khtib pukhta 

4. — Qarib tamam ilmon ke, istiqra se hasil hue hain. 
Bar bar dekhte dekhte, aur dzmdte azmate, ^m qdjde nikle 
hain, aur im qaidon ke jam^ kame se ibn ban gae hain. Ibn 
i Haiat, ibn i TarMb i Zamin, ilm i Kimiya, \\m i Tibb, 
wg. isi tarah nikle hain. Saikron baras ki dzmaish aur 
tahqiqat se baz ilm is kdmiliyat tak pahunohe hain. Istiqra 


by Google 


still further, as new observations are made and now facts 
are compared. 

5. All inductions can be reduced to the syllogistic 
form. An induction is usually in the form of an en- 
thymeme, the major premiss being suppressed. Obser- 
vation having been made in a number of cases, wo 
conclude that whatever is true of them, is true of the 
class of which they belong. To illustrate, we have this 
induction in the form of an enthymeme :— 

The cow, sheep, goat, and deer, are horned animals 
Therefore, They ruminate. 

This is an induction, and put in the full syllogistic 
form would stand thus, — 

Whatever is true of the cow, sheep, goat, deer, 
&c. is likely true of all horned animals. 

Kumination is true of the cow, sheep, goat^ deer, 
Therefore, Rumination is likely true of all horned animals. 

In an induction, we simply discover that some- 
thing common, belongs to a number of cases, and then 
infer that it belongs to all things of this class. In- 
spection of the above illustrations shows that the major 
premiss is suppressed in such inductions. This major 
premiss is some such proposition as : — Whatever is true of 
the case or cases which we have examined^ is likely true of 
the whole class to tvhich they belong.. 

Inductions taken singly may also be put in the 
form of syllogisms. Thus, take the inductions, 'Mead 
is fusible, therefore some metal is fusible,^' " silver is 
fusible, therefore some metal is fusible'^; we find thafi 
cy^vU^O' the majo p premisses *Mead is a metal,'^ '^silver is a' 
metal,'^ are suppressed. ♦ 


by Google 


se aur bhi in ilmon ko pukhtagi ho jawegi, kytinki tahqi- 
qat i jadida hoti jati hai, aur nai baten nikalti hain. 

5. — Dalll i istiqra kisi tarah kyiin na ho, ba siirat i 
qiyas ho sakti hai. Aksar to dalil i istiqra ba siirat i qiyas 
i mukhafPaf hoti hai, jis kd kubrd muqaddar hota hai. Jab 
ek qism ki chand chlzon ke ek se halat bdrha hamari nazar 
se guzarte hain, to ham natija nikal lete hain, ki jo hai nn 
chand chizon par sadiq atd hai, wuhi us qism ki kull chizon 
par sddiq awega. Maslan. 

Gae, bher, bakri, hiran, singhdar janwar haiy. 
Pas, Yih jugali karnew^le hain. 

Tihi istiqra hua. Agar ba tartib i qiyas likha jawe 
to yun hoga : — 

Jo bat ki g&e, bher, bakrl, baran wg. par sadiq ati bai, ga- 

liban sab.singhd&r janwaroy par sadiq awegl. 
Jug&li kama g&e, bher, bakrl, harau wg. par sadiq ata hai. 
Pas, Jugali kama, galiban sab sjyghdar janwaroy par sadiq ata 

Istiqra men auwal sirf yih malum kar lete hain, ki 
fulani imm bat ek qism ki chand chizon men pai jdti hai, 
aur phir yih natija nikalte hain, ki is qism ki kull chizon 
men yih bat pdi jdti hai. TTpar ki misal dekhne se malum 
hota hai, ki aisi dalilon istiqra men kubra muqaddar hota 
hai, aur wuh kubra muqaddar kol aisa qaziya hota hai jaisa 
ki, Jo bat fulani qism H chand chizon par sadiq ati hai, 
wuhi us qism ki kull par sadiq dwegi, 

Dalilon istiqra ko bhi juda juda karke ba surat i qiyas 
rakh sakte hain. Maslan; "sisapighal jfitd hai, pas baz 
dhat pighal jdtlhai;" "Chandi pighal jati hai pas baa 
dhat pighal jati hai ;" lihaza ham ko malum ho jata hai, ki 
Icubra^ " slsa dhat hat,'' " ohdndi dhat hai," muqaddar hai. 

^^ Digitized by GoOglC 


The fall syllogisms are, — 

Lead is fusible. 
Lead is a metal. 
Therefore, Some metal is fusible. 


Silver is fusible. 

Silver is a metaL 
Therefore Some metal is fusible. 

Prom a number of such inductive syllogisms, re- 
duced to one single syllogism, we get a general fact of 
law as a conclusion. Thus, — 

Lead, silver, gold, iron, &c., are fusible. 
These are metals. 
Therefore, Metals are fusible. 

Op Deduction. 

Deduction is just the opposite of induction. la 
induction we deduce general laws or principles itom facts, 
in deduction we infer certain effects from general laws. 
By induction we have learned that certain things are 
poisonous. With this general fact before us, we con- 
clude, that if a certain person has eaten one of these 
things he is poisoned. This is a deduction. In the 
same way we conclude that any horned animal newly 
found, is a ruminant, because the general fact has 
been discovered by induction that horned animals are 
ruminants. Deduction, then, is reasoning from the 
general to the particular, while induction is reasoning 
from the particular to the general. 


Reasoning from example is somewhat of the nature 
both of induction and deduction. It may be called im- 
perfect induction. In induction, we infer a general fact 
from a number of particular cases, but in the argument 


by Google 


Agar jrih istiqrd ba stirat i qiyas likhS ]4we to y un hogd : — 

~ jg \ OioiX Ullat Hal 

^^^' { Pas, Baz dhat pighal ]4ti hai, 

^'^^' 1^ Pas, Baz dhat pghal jati hai. 

In sab qiy&on istiqrdi ko milakar ek kar dete hain, 
aut phir ek imm qaidaun se natija nikalta hai. Maslan, — 

Sls4, ch^gdl, sona, loha Wf^, dhat haio. 
Yih dh^teg pighal j&tt hain. 
Pas, Dhites pighal j^ti I 


Istikhrdj^ (hlk istiqra ke bar^ks hai. Istiqr^ men juzi* 
yat 8e kulliyat sabit ki jdti hai, aur istikhrdj men knlliyat 
se jnziyat sdbit ki jdti hai. Istiqrit se ham ko yih bdt 
m^^m hui hai, ki fuldni chizen zahrddr hain. Pseks is imm 
qaida se, jo ham ko maldm hud h^, ham yih natija nikalte 
hain, ki a^ar in zahrd^ chizon men se koi bhi kiisi shakh^ 
ne kha li hai, to us par zahr ne asar kiyd hog&. Isi ko 
istikhrdj kahte hain. Isi tarah agar koi nayd jdnwar 
singhdfir kahin mile to ham natija nikdl lenge, ki yih 
ju^li kamewdld hai ; kytinki yih dmm qaida dalil i istiqra 
se malum ho chuka hai, ki singhddr jdnwar jugali karte 
hain. Qaraz istikhr&j, kulli se juzi par dalU Idne ko kahte 
hain, aur istiqrd, juziyat se kulli par dalil Idne ko kahte 

Bayan Tams£l Ki. 

Tamsil men, istiqrd aur istikhrij kuehh kuchh doBton 
pde jdte hain. Is ko nd-kdmil istiqra samjho. Istiqr4 
meij juziyat se kulliyat par dalU Mte hain. Tamsil men ek 
juzi se dusrf juzi par, yane ek chia se dfisri chia par haw&la 


by Google 


from example^ we infer something in regard to one 
particular case from another case or other cases. Thus^ 
we might infer that a certain traitor will come to a bad 
end because the traitor Nana Rao came to a bad end. 
But perhaps there is something of the nature both of an 
induction and deduction here^ it having been settled, 
from the example of Ndna Rdo, that traitors generally 
come to a lad end ; hence^ since this man is a traitor^ 
he too will come to a bad end. The apostle Peter 
reasons by example [2 Peter 2, 4-9,] when he refers 
to the destruction of the angels that sinned, and of the 
antediluvian world, and of the inhabitants of Sodom and 
Gomorrah, to prove that the wicked shall be punished. 
This form of reasoning is very plain, and need not be 
further illustrated here. 


1. Analogy, as commonly used, means resemblance, 
and the resemblance may be in the things themselves, 
or in their uses, and their relations. The earth and 
moon both being round and both revolving on their 
axes, is an example of " analogy in things themselves.'' 
The fin of a fish and the wing of a bird, being both 
used for propelling each animal in the medium where 
it lives, aflford an example of analogy of " use" The 
capital of a country bears somewhat the same relation 
to that country as the heart does to the body ; this is 
an analogy of *' relation" 

Kow in reasoning from analogy, we infer that 
because things resemble^ in some known particulars^ they 
will resemble in others. The strength of the argument 
of course will be in proportion to the strength of tho 
resemblance. The following is an example of reason- 
ing from analogy. We see a great resemblance be- 
tween the earth on which we live^ and Mars^ Jupiter^ 


by Google 


diya jata hal. Maslan koi natija nikale, ki fulane bagi 
ka anjam bura boga, kyiinki Nana Eao bagikd anjam bura 
btia. Sbaj'ad yahan par istiqra aur istikhraj donon pae 
jate bain, kytinki tamsil i Nana Kao se istiqra ke tanr par 
yihi bat nikalti bai, \^\ kull baglon ka an am bura bota hai. 
Pas cbunkiyib admi bagl liai, is sabab se us ^m qdida se 
istikbr^j ke ts^ur par yib bat nikalti bai, ki is ka bbi anjfim 
bura boga. Patras Rasul ne, jo gimahgar fiiisbton ki bala- 
kat ka, [2 Pat. 2, 4-9.] anr qabl tufan i Nub, jo log dimy£ 
men dbad tbe, un k^ aur Sadum o Gramura ke logon k4 
hawala diya hai, taid sabit bo jawe, ki sbarlr badzat, sazd 
pdwenge, wub dalll i tamsil hai. Yih tariqa dalU lane kd, 
bahut saf aur sahib hai, kuehh hajat aur misal lane ki ya- 
han par nabin hai. 


1. — Xmm muhaware ke mutabiq, qarine ke m^ne 
mushabahat ke bain, aur mushabahat is men khdss do 
tarah par hai, ya swrt hai, yd mqnaici, Misal auwal, qarina 
i siiri, jaise zamin aur chand donon ka gol bond aur donon 
ka apne apne mihwaron par ghumnd. Misdl doyum, qnrina 
i mqnawi ki, jaise bazti machhli ka aur parand ka, ki do- 
non waste ek hi niatlub ke bane bain, yane waste urne aur 
daurne ke, aur jaise mulk kd sadr maqam dar-us-saltanat 
hai, isi tarah jism ka sadr maqam dil hai. Dekho, yahan 
par jo nisbat mulk ko apne dar-ns-saltanat se hai, wuhi 
jism ko apne dil se hai, pas yih bhi misdl mushabahat ki 

Qarine ki ru se dalil Idne men is tarah par natija ni- 
kalte bain, ki jab ek chiz dusri chlz se chand bdton men 
mushdbahat rakhti hai, to aur baton men bhi inushabih 
hogi. Aur besba^^k jis qadr musljabahat hogi usi qadr da- 
lll pukhta hogi. Ek- dalil qarina ki mundarija e misal i zail 
hai. Maslan ham dekhte bain, ki yih zamin jis par ham 
rahte hain, saiydron \Jtdrid, Muslitari, Zuhl wg. se bahut 
baton men mushdbahat rakhti hai. Sab, zamin kl misl 


by Google 


Saturn and other planets. They all seem to be com- 
posed of matter like the earth. They revolve around 
the sun and derive their light from him as the earth 
does. They revolve on their axes^ and hence must have 
day and night like our earth. So in many particulars 
they resemble the earth. Now^ as the earth is inhabit^ 
ed, it may be inferred that they are also. 

2. Reasoning from analogy resembles both in- 
duction and reasoning from example. It differs from 
induction thus :— • 

In induction we reason from several cases or in- 
dividuals to the whole class^ but in analogy we reason 
from one case to another. In induction we see that 
the several things are like each other, but in analogy 
the evidence is indirect and we infer that they are alike 
in some particular or particulars in question, because 
they are alike in others. Analogy differs from example 
in this, that in example we are supposed to see that the 
one case is like the other, the evidence being thus 
dir3ct, while in analogy we see but in part and infer 
the rest from resemblance in what we do see. 

As another illustration of this form of argument, 
we may meet the objection against the Bible that it 
contains doctrines inexplicable by reason, by a reference 
to the analogy between nature and revelation Both 
are the work of the same infinite Being. In this they 
are alike. Now as nature presents to us many inex- 
plicable things, from analogy we may 'expect that revel- 
ation also may contain things inexplicable. And we 
may further infer that as time and study remove many 
of the mysteries of nature, so it will be in regard to 
revelation ; as indeed we do find that time and study 
often clear up apparent difficulties in God's word. 

3. Analogy can always be reduced to the syllot- 
gistio form^ as we see is the case with all reasoning! 


by Google 


sl-jirm m^luin hote bain ; sab &ftab ke dspas gardish karte 
hain, anr us se roshnf hdsil kaxte bain jaise zamin k& hal 
hai; anr jaise zamln ke apne mihwar par ghumne se din 
aur rat bote rabte hain, isi tarah un men bhi din aur rdt 
bote rabte hain. Peis jab ham ne dekhd, ki yih saiyare bahnt 
bdton men zamin se mushdbahat rakhte bain to qarine se 
ham natija nikdlte hain, ki jaise zamin dbdd hai, waise we 
bhi db&d honge. 

2. — ^Daiil i qarina, dalil i istiqrd aur tamsil, donon se 
mnshdibahat rakhti bai, magar istiqra se mukhtalif is bdt 
men hai, ki istiqrd men juziyat se knUiyat par dalil Idi jdti 
hai, lekin qarine men ek bdt se dusri bdt s^bit ki j&ti hai. 
Istiqra men kai chizon ko ek dusre ke mush&bih dekhkar 
natija nik^d jdtd hai, anr is men ek chiz ko dusri chiz se 
ohand bdton men mushabahat dekhkar qarine se yih 
nik^l liyd jatd hai, ki aur b&ton men bhi mushdbih, honge. 
Qarina, tamsil se is bdt men mukhtalif hai, ki tamsil men 

ek chiz ko ddsri chiz se mush&bih dekhkar ham dalil lUte 
hain ; lekin qarine men ek chiz ko dusri chiz se kuchh b^ton 
men mush&bih dekhkar qarine se m^ltim kar lete hain, ki 
b&qi aur b&ton men bhi mushabahat rakhti hai. Is qism 
ki dalil ki ek aur mis&l yih hai. Agar koi shakhs iatir&z 
kare, ki Baibal men aise masle hain, jo samajh men nahin 
ate hain, to us ke jaw&b men ham yih bUt kahen, ki khilqat 
aur ilhdmi kitdben donon us ld-intih4 Khudd se hain. To 
is bdt men khilqat aur ilhdmi kitdb, donon ek hue. Ab 
cihunwi khilqat men bahuteri bdten aisi hain, ki samajh men 
nahin dti hain, isi sabab se gdlib hai, ki ilhdmi kitdb men 
bhi bahuteri bdten aisihon, jo samajh men na dwen ; aur jaisd 
zamdna ba zamdna gaur kame se bhed khilqat ke, khulte jdte 
hain, isi tarah Baioal kd hdl hogd. aur haqiqat men ham 
dekhte hain, ki zamdna ba zamdna gaur kamese wuh bdten 
Kaldm i Ildhi ki, jo ba zdhir mushkil m?dum hoti thin, roshan 
hoti jdti hain. 

3.— Dalil i qarina bhi, ba surat i qiyds ho sakti hai, 
iaisd ki aur sab dalilon kd hdl hai. Haslan farz karo, kisi 


Thus, suppose we find tbe skeleton of an animal we have 
never seen alive, and observe that it has sharp teeth and 
claws like a tiger. From analogy we infer that this 
animal lived on prey, eating the flesh of other animals. 
The argument put in the syllogistic form would be, — 

All animals with sharp teeth and claws, prey on other 

This animal has sharp teeth and claws. 
Therefore, It preys on other animals. 

Thus, also the example just given on the Bible. 

The work of an infinite Being, as proved hy nature 

may contain things inexplicable by man. 
Revelation is the work of an infinite Beiyg. 
Therefore, Revelation may contain some things inexplicable 
by man. 

4. Eeasoning from analogy must be used with 
caution. The evidence is indirect, and is often liable to 
objection. There may be resemblance in some par- 
ticulars, without suflBcient resemblance in other particu- 
lars, to justify the conclusion we wish to draw. Thus, 
although the planets, as Mars, Jupiter and Saturn, do 
resemble the earth in many particulars, we cannot infer 
with absolute certainty that they are in like manner in- 
habited. For in respect of temperature, water, and the 
general conditions of life, these planets may not be like 
the earth, hence may be incapable of supporting life. 

Some have supposed that because there is a re- 
semblance between the growth, decay, and death of 
Tegetation and that of animals, the latter perish entirely 
like the former, and man with them. But this conclu- 
sion is not vvarranted; for animals are sentient creatures, 
capable of voluntary action, in which plants do not resem- 
ble them. There is between the existence of each, such 
a wide difference that no one is justified, from faint 
resemblances, in inferring a like destruction. 

.,..., „oogle 


aise janwar ki kMnkar, jis ko ham ne kabhl na dekh& ho 
kahin par mile, aur ham dekhen, ki us khankar ke tez d&nt 
hain aur tez panje, to qarine se darydft i<arlenge ki yih jan- 
war shikari tha. Agar yih dalil i qarina, ba surat i qiy&s 
likhi jawe, to ylin hogi : — 

Jin jinwaroQ ke tez ddnt aur tez panje hote hain, we shi- 
kari bote hain. 
Is 3§nwar ke tez d^gt aur tez panje the. 
Pas, Yih j^inwar shikari tha. 

Isi tarah ek misdl Baibal ki, jo abhi ho chuki hai, ba 
sfirat i qiyas ho sakti hai. 

?hilqat ke dekhne se malum hot^ hai, ki us l&-intiha 
]B[h^liq se baz baten aisi boy, jo ins&n ki samajb men 
nabiu ki\ hon. 
Kal&m i ilahi us l&-intib& J^h^liq se bai. 
Pas, Kalam i ilahi men b^ baten aisi bon, jo ins&ii ki samajb 
mes na 4ti bog. 

Dalil i qarina ban hoshydri se land chahiye, kyunki 
bagair dekhi bat men, aksar gunjaish iatiraz ki hoti hai, 
aur bahuteri ehizen aisi hain, jo baz bdton men b^ham- 
digar mushabahat rakhti hain, magar itni baton men nahin 
ki ham natija nikalen. Maslan agarchi Zamin, saiydron 
ytdrid, Mushtari, Zuhal wg. se bahut baton men mushdba- 
hat rakhti hai, taham ba yaqln i kamil ham yih natija nahin 
nikdl sakte hain, ki we zamin ki misl dbad hain, kyunki 
shdyad hdlat i garmi o sardi, aur pani, aur jo jo chizen zin- 
dagi ke liye chdhiy en, zamin ki misl, un saiyaron men na hon 
to wahan parwarish jan ki gait mimikin hai. 

B^e yih samajhte hain, ki ehunki haiwandt aur na- 
b^tdt ke darmiyan men barhne aur ghatne aur mame 
men mushabahat hai, haiwandt maa insdn aur nab&tdt, 
donon ek hi taur par nest ho jdte hain. Lekin yih 
natija nikalnfi gair j^ hai, kyunki haiwandt zi-hiss o har- 
kat jism hain, aur is Idt men haiwdn&t, nab&tdt se mnsbd 



Hence, analogy must be used with caution. It may 
generally be used as a strengthening and confirming 
argument rather than as absolute proof. 

EeASONING "a priori/^ '^ A POSTBRIOEI," AND ^* A 

The above names are used to designate particular 
forms of argument, the manner and use of which we here 
explain. An argument is called. — 

.1. '^ilj^riori/' when we infer effects from known 
causes^ or when we deduce consequences from defini- 
tions formed, or principles assumed. Thus, from the 
existence of the cause we infer the existence of the effect. 
For instance, if the sun has risen we know that it is day, 
because the sun, as a source of light, must produce day. 
If the moon has come between the sun and the earth, 
there must be an eclipse, because such a conjunction of 
the sun, moon, and earth, would produce an eclipse as 
an effect. If we hear that a man has been bitten by 
a mad dog, we naturally infer that he will die from 
hydrophobia. Believing that God is a merciful, all- 
wise, and infinitely holy Euler, we infer that his deal^^ 
ing with man will be marked by mercy and that he can- 
not be the Author of sin. 

In mathematics we find many instances of '' a 
priori^* reasoning, where from oeitain definitions or 
general principles, we infer ceitain results, or deduce 
the impossibility of wrong assumptions. For instance 
from the definition that parallel lines never meet, we may 
infer, in any demonstration, that two certain lines can- 
not meet, because they are parallel ; or because they have 
not met, we infer that they are not parallel. In like 


bahat nahfn rakhte hain. In do wujud men bara farq 
hai, zara si musli4bahat dekhkarnatija nikabia, ki we marte 
bhi isi tarah honge, kisi tarah jaiz nahin hai. Pas bari 
hodiyari se qarine ka isti^mal kama chahiye. Dalil i qa- 
rina, aur dalllon ke istibkam ke waste late bain, aisa kam 
bota bai, ki wub bajae kbud dalil bo. 


"adnX se iLi Ko sXbit KARNA." 

Yib tinon, dalU ki suraton ke nam bain. In suraton 
ka, aur nn ke tariqae istiamal ka bayan, bam yab^n par 
likbte bain : — 

1. — ^*' latidldl i limmi^* yqne Illat se mqlul sdbit kamd^ 
us ko kabte bain, ki sababon malnma se musabbab dar- 
yaft kiye jawen, aur qawaid ya qawanin i muqarrara se 
natije nikdle jawen. Garaz ki wujud i illat se yrujud 
malul ka natija nikabie ko "«7W se mqlul sdbit kamd^^ 
kabte bain. Maslan jis waqt aftab tulu boga, bam jante 
bain ki din zarur boga, kyunki aftdb cbasbma rosbnf ka 
bai. Tuld bona aftab k4 jlfat bai, jis se wujud malul 
ka, ygpie din kd bond sabit bota bai. Ya agar cMnd aftab 
aur zamln ke darmiyan d jawe, to zartir gaban paregd. Pas 
dekbo yabdn par bail bond cbdnd kd, illat bai, jis se wujud 
malul kd, yane gaban kd parna botd bai, yd agar bam 
sunen, ki kisi sbakbs ko bdole kutte ne kdt kbdyd bai, to 
bam jdn lenge, ki wub sbakbs kutte ki bimdri se mar jdwe- 
gd. Isi tarah jab ham ne jdnd, ki Khudd rahira aur karim 
quddus Hakim i Haqiqi hai, to ham natija nikalte bain, 
ki Khudd Tadid insdn par rahmat ki nazar rakhtd hai, aur 
Bdni gundh kd nahin bai. 

Ilm i Kiydzi men is qism ki dalil ki bahut misdlen 
pdi jdti hain, kyunki ilm i riydzi men chand qawdid i mu- 
qarra jb. usul i mauz^a se natdij sdbit kiye jdte bain, yd yib 
sdbit kiyd jdtd hai. Id fuldn ddwd galat hai. Maslan eU qaida 
yib bai, ki khutut i mutawdziyd kabbi nahin milte hain, 
par jabdn kahin kisi dawe men aisd sabab dke pare to ham 
sdbit karenge, ki yib khutut kabhi na milenge, kjrunki 
mutawdziya hain, yd yih sdbit karenge, ki yib khutut mil 
jdwenge, kyunki mutawdziyd nabin. Qaraz isi tarah par 


manoer we infer numerous otler results or conclusions. 
And we reason in the same way in all sciences. 

2. Seasoning *' a posteriori,' ^ is just the reverse of 
"apriori^' reasoning. In this, causes are deduced from 
effects. JPor instance, from the round shadow of the 
earth on the moon in a lunar eclipse, we infer that the 
earth is round. We reason that a round shadow as an 
effect, must come from a round substance as a cause. 

Other familiar examples of reasoning " a poste- 
riori^^ may readily be found in cases, where from effects 
produced, we try to find out their cause. In cases of 
murder, often the cause and manner of death, are thus 
traced up and the murderer detected. 

By reasoning " a posteriori,'^ we infer the existence 
and attributes of God, from our own existence and the 
existence of nature and manifestations of design and 
goodness, &c. around us. Thus also, from the sublime 
teachings and superhuman spirit of the Bible, we infer 
that it has a divine Author. In the same way, from 
the evil tendency of a book claimed to be inspired, wo 
might infer that it is simply a human production. 

This kind of reasoning should be used with cau- 
tion. An inference should not be drawn till some clear 
relation of effect and cause is established, otherwise the 
error of "non causa pro causa" will be committed. 
The cautions against that error should be observed here. 

3. ^^ A fm^tiori/' ;3 a form of argument in which 
from an admitted case or proposition, we proceed to prove 
another case of the same nature, for the acceptance of 
which, the reasons seem even stronger than for the 
admitted case. 

The form of the argument is, — 

A is equal to, or greater than B. 
C is greater than A. 
Therefore, C is greater than B. r" T 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


bahut aur nataij saMt kar lete hain, aur sab ilmon se isi 
tariq par bahs Id jdti hai. 

2. " Istidlnl i innff^^ yqne mglul se illat snhit kamd. 
Tib auwal ke baraks hai. Is men maliil se illat sabit ki jati 
hai; maslan jab chand gahan parta hai to chand ka ^ks 
zarain par gol parta hai, pas is se malum hota hai, ki zamin 
gol hai. Aks gol parn^ maliil hai, jis se illat, yane zamfn 
ka gol bond malum hota hai. Is qisra ki dalil ki bahuteri 
misalen us mauqa par dti hain, jahan ki wujud i malul se 
wujud i illat ka sabit kama chahte hain. Khun kemuqad- 
dama men aksar is amr ki tahqiqat, ki kis chiz se mara gaya 
aur kis kis tarah par hua, isi tariq se qatil malum ho jata 

Isi dalil ki ru se ham apnd wujud, aur khilqat ka 
wujud, aur tarah tarah ki hikmaten wg. dekhkar, Khuda 
ka wujud, atir ns ki zat o sifat sabit Warte hain. Isi tarah 
ham dekhte hain, ki Baibal ki talim nihayat umda hai, aur 
aisi baton us men pai jati hain, ki insan ki taqat o liyaqat 
se bahar hai; pas is se sa'it hota hai, ki Baibal ilhami 
kitab hai. Ala-haz-al-qiyas agar kisi kitab ki tallm bun 
ho, aur us ki nisbat l<oi dawa Ware, ki yih kitdb dsmdni hai, 
to haraen sabit ho jawega, ki yih sirf ddmi ki banai hai. 

Is qism ki dalil ko bari hoshydri aur khabardari se is- 
tiamal kama chahiye. Jab tak illat aur malul ke 
darmiyan koi ilaqa qarar waqai na payd jawe, us waqt 
tak kuchh natlja nikalna nahin chahiye, wama surat 
" mugalta i wajh gair muwajjih" ki paida ho jaegi. Jo 
jo baton mugalta i waih gair muwajjih se mahfiiz rahne 
ke waste lipar bayan ho chuki hain, un ka lihaz yahan 
par bhi rakhna chahiye. 

3. " Adnd se did ho sdbit karndT — Is dalil men kisi 
amr yd dawa e musallam se, usi qism ke kisi aur amr, yd 
dg,we ko sabit karte hain. Aur jo amr ya dawd ki sdbit 
kiya jdta hai, us ko taslim kame ke wdste us se bhibarh- 
kar subut hote hain, jitna ki us amr j& dawa e musallam 
ke subtit ke liy e hote hain. Tih dalil is siirat ki hoti hai : — 

A. bar^bar hai B. ke, y&^us se bar^ hai. 
J. A. 86 bari iiai. 
Pas, J. £. se bapi hai. 

Digitized by VjOOQIC 


Christ reasoned thus with his disciples and others, 
in many instances. For example (Mat. vi. 28-30,) 
'* And why take ye thought for raiment ? Consider the 
lilies of the field, how they grow, they toil not, neither 
do they spin, and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all 
his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Where- 
fore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to- 
day is and to-morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not 
much more clothe you, O ye of little faith ?** 

This put into the form of a syllogism would stand 

The lilies and grass of the field, are clothed by God: 
You are much greater than they. 
Much more will you be clothed by God. 

A^in : *' And behold there was a man which had 
his hand withered. And they asked him saying is it 
lawful to heal on the sabbath days ? that they might 
accuse him. And he said unto them, what man shall 
there be among you that shall have one sheep, and if 
it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold 
on it and lift it out ? How much then is a man better 
than a sheep ? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the 
sabbath days.'' [Mat xii : 10-12.] 

This then is the argument " a fortiori/^ in which we 
reason from a less obvious but admitted proposition to 
one with stronger reasons for its adoption. 


An argument according to the mode of its reason- 
ing may be : 

1. — Inductive. 
2.— Deductive. 
3.— By example 
4.— By analogy. 
5, — A priori. 
6.— A posteriori. 
7. — ^A fortiori. 

Digitized by VjOOQ iC 


Maadh apne Bhagirdon, aur aur logon ke sath baraha is 
qism Id dalil layd. Maslan (dekho Mati 6 : 28-30.) " Aur 
posMk ki kytin fikr karte ho, jangli sosan ko dekho, kaise 
barhte hain, wuh na raihnat karte na katte hain. Par 
main tumhen kahtd hiin, ki Sulaim^n bhi apni sari shan 
shaukat men un men se ek ki m^nind pahine na tha. 
Pas jab Khndd maiddn ki gh&s ko, jo dj hai, aur kal 
tanur men jhonM j4ti, yun pahindtd hai, to kyd turn ko 
ai sust-i^tiq&do, zvydda na pahinawegd. P'' 

Agar yih dalil ba suxat i qiyls q4im ki j&we, to 
yun hogf : — - 

l^huda ne jangli sosan aur ghas ko poshik df. « 
Tom im se ba£at bare ho. 
Pas, Yaqin ziydda hai ki wuh turn ko poshak ba^jihshega. 

Dfisri misal, (Mati 12 ; 10-12.) " Aur dekho, wahan 
ek shakhs thd, jis kd hdthsukh gayatha. Tab unhon ne 
is irade se, ki us par n&lish karen, us se ptichha, ki £ya 
sabt ke din changa kama rawd hai ? Us ne unhen kaha, 
ki Turn men se aisd kaim hai, ki jis ke pds ek bher ho, 
agar wuh sabt ke din garhe men gire, mih use paka^ke 
na nikdle ? Pas admi bher se kitni bihtar hai ? Is liye 
sabt ke din neki kama rawd hai." 

Garaz, isi qism ki dalil ko ^^ adnd se did ko sdbif 

karnd'^ kahte bain, jis men qaziya i musallama aisa saf 

nahin hotd, jaisd ki us qaziye ki, jo musallama se sdbit 

hotd hai, taslim kame ki dalilen pukhta hoti hain. 


Dalil kai tarah par hai : — 

1. — ^Istiqrdi. 

2.— Istikhrdji. 

3. — Tamsili. 

4. — Qarina. 

5. — Jllat se malul sdbit kama. 

6. — ^Malul se illat sd' it kama. 

7.— Adnd se $ld ko sdbit kama. 


by Google 


Wo have now gone over the subject of Logic, and 
it only remains to add a word by way of conclusion. 
The subject of logic, as generally taught, has been pre- 
sented in these pages. The student need not be per- 
plexed by the pretensions of any one who may, by way 
of mag^iifying his own learning, claim that the subject 
has not been fully treated in this book, being too vast to 
be comprehended in a volume of this size. The sub- 
stance of logic, as taught by the ancients and moderns, 
is presented in compact form in this book. If it be 
mastered, a correct and practical outline of this science, 
as far as it may be gained from a book, will be obtained. 
The work& on logic found in this country, should be 
studied in order to be familiar with the diflferent modes 
of treating the subject, and with the various terminology 
and phraseology in use. 

But the learner must not imagine that the mere 
reading of any book or number of books on logic, how- 
ever complete, will make him a logician. If this book 
be thrown aside when read, or even when its terms, 
rules, and phraseology are memorissed, and the subject 
be left there, the learner will not be a logician. " Prac- 
tice makes perfect," in every science and art. It is 
the daily use of tools that makes the artisan a skillful 
workman. after he has learned what is taught in books. 
Thus also, an application must be made of the science 
of logic, before one can earn a just reputation as a 
logician. The principles, terminology, and rules of the 
science should be well understood, and then an effort 


by Google 


Mantiq ke bayan se f aragat pal ; ab sirf itna aur raha 
bai, ki ek a Ih bat khatime ke taur par likhen. Mantiq 
ka hal jis qxdr ki aksar sikhlaya jata hai, is kitab men 
maujud bai. Agar koi sbakhs az r»li i dhokha-dihi, apna 
ilm jatane ko, kisi talib i ilm se yih dawa kare, ki "is kitab 
men knll bal ibn i mantiq ka nabin likba bai ; mantiq 
babut bara ilm bai, is zara si Idtab men nabin sama sakta 
hai," to is bat par hargiz yaqln na lana cbabiye. Baz 
maqamat men Arab! o Farsi kitabon se farq hai, lekin 
matlab ek hi bai, aur bahut se maqamat, kutub-i-jjirabi o 
Farsi se ziyada mukammal hain. 

Matalib aur mane sahib mantiq ke, jaisa l<i muta- 
qaddamin aur mutaakhkhirin sikhlate ehale de bain, is 
kitab men niaujiid bain. Jo knehh hal iln» i mantiq k4 
aur kitabon ke parhne se ata hai, w ih sab is kitab se 
mnkhtasar basil hai. Jo kuchh kitaben jlm i mantiq ki 
ismiilk men inurauwaj hain, un ka parhna is garaz s^ 
chahiye, ki mukhtalif tarz i i ayan anr istilahat wg. se ki 
har kitab Ui mukhtalif hoti hain, waqif ho jawe, aur istia- 
malmen lawe. 

Magar koi talib i ilm yih na samjhe, ki ek ddh kitab ya 
bahut si kitaban ilmi mantiq ki agarohi wuh kamil hi 
kyun na hon, parh lene se mantiqi ho jawega. Agar koi 
is kitab ko parhkar us ke istilahat a'»r qawajd aur alfaz 
har zaban yad karke us ko tab kar rakhe, aur us ko istia- 
mal men na lawe, to mantiqi na ho ,awega, kydnki " kar ba 
kasrat hai." Har ilm o hunar uen maliht chahiye. 
Karigaron ko dekho, ki auwal ha h\ aron ke nam, aur un 
ke istiamal karne ke tariqon se waqif hokar badahu roz 
marra un hathyaron ko kam me j late hain, to kahin ek 
mnddat men j^ke hoshyar ho late hain. Isi tar-ih pai- 
n^aisbi ko dekho, ki bad janne qawaid paimaish ke ek 
muddattak us ka mashq karta hai, to pairaaish men pukh- 
ta ho jata hai. Ala-uaz-al-qi^as har shakhs ko qabl is se, 
ki wuh apne ko mantiqi kahlawQ, is jlm ke istiamal ise 


by Google 


should be made to practice correot reasoning in every 
day life. An effort should be made to detect and 
name our own, and the errors of others. We should 
accustom ourselves to scrutinize the arguments^ oral or 
written, which we meet. Their form, and strength^ 
or weakness, should be observed. Models of correot 
and powerful reasoning when met with should be 
studied. In this way, same true claim may be earned 
to the title of logician. Such a course cannot fail to 
have a very beneficial effect on the mind, in the marked 
improvement of the reasoning faculties. To specify, 
greater cleamesa of thought will be gained. Through 
want of clearness in thought, men are apt to impose on 
themselves and others. Where the mind is properly 
trained by the study of logic, thought is much clearer 
in the comprehension and expression of truth, than it 
can be without this study. The faculties are also 
quicker in the detection and exposure of error. Again, 
by the course recommended in this study, greater 
mental strength will be gained. When not properly 
trained, the mind is feeble and uncertain in the pur- 
suit of truth, and wavering in its grasp of what is 
obtained. The study of logic trains the mind to 
a more vigorous pursuit, and firmer grasp of truth. 
Finally, the course recommended will give greater 
heauty to the mind. The mind of man is the noblest 
creation of God, with which we are acquainted. But 
what is more pitiable than a mind full of ignorance 
and wandering in error, and what is more beautiful than 
a mind built up in strength and symmetry, and radiant 
with truth ! One of the most powerful aids to secure 
all these results, is the study of Loaic. 

Tm End. 

Digitized by VjOOQ IC 


w&qif bona zarur hai. Usui anr istildhat, aur qaw&id is 
ilm ke, auwal khub samajbn^ chdhiye ; aur phir roz marra 
sihhat ke sath, bahs karne ke liye malika paid4 kame ki 
kosbish kami obabiye. Hamesba apni, aur auron ki galati 

Sakarne ki, aur mugalton ke janne ki kosbisb karta rahe. 
o dalil ki pesb awe, khwab wuh zabdni bo j& tabriri, 
khtib gaur ke satb dekbne ki $dat dahii cbdbiye. Har 
dalil ki stirat aur pukbtagi aur kbami par bamesha nazar 
rabe. Jabdn koi pukbta aur qawi dalil deUbne men awe, 
us ko apne waste ek namuna samabn^ ebdbiye. Jo sbakbs 
in sab bdton par libdz rakbe, wub mantiqi bo jdwegd. Pas 
garaz ^'i3cl bai, jo sbakbs aisd kare, us k^ zibn barb jawega; 
maslan, auwaly us ^Qkhiydldt men khub aafdi aur roshni d 
jdtoegi. Agar zibn men safdi aur rosbni na bo, to andesba 
bai ki wub sbakbs ap dbokba kbde, aur auron ko dbokbe 
men dale. Jo sbakbs ilm i mantiq men malii< a i k ^mH bdsil 
kar le, us k^ socbbabut durust ho jdweg^. Har bat ki 
rag o pai ko kbub safai ke sdtb samajb lega aur bay an kar 
deg&. Qawde zibni men aisirasdi & jdwegi, Vi fauran kisi 
tarab kd mugalta bo, darjdft kar legd aur-batld. dega. 

Dusre, in sab bdton mazkura i h&l6, par libdz rakbne se, 
Sfihn men bari quwat d jdti hai. Jo ddmi kbub tarbiyat- 
ydfta na bo, us k& zibn kamzor boga, aur is laiq na 
boga, ki kisi baqiqat ko darydft kar sake, aur agar koi 
baqiqat darydft bo bbi gai, to us par qdim rabnd musbkil 
parta bai. Mantiq ke parbne se tabiat insdn ki, zor par & 
jdti bai, aur is laiq bo jatd bai, ki musbkil se musbkil bdt 
bo, us ko ball kar le. 

Tisre^ in sab baton mazkura i bala par libdz rakbne se, 
zihn drdsta pairdsta ho jdtd hai. Kbudd ki bandi bui jin 
jin cbizon se bam wdqif bain, nnmen sab se umda ebiz, bam 
dekbte bain ki zibn hai ; lekin is se barbkar afsoso biqd- 
rat ki bdt kyd bai, ki zibn kisi kd, jabdlat se bbard bo, aur 
kbatd galati ki rdbon men bhatak rabd bo ; aur is se 
barbkar aur kyd kbtibsurati bai, ki zibn kisi kd, tez o durust 
bo, aur nur i saddqat aur baqiqat se munauwar bo. In 
sab bdton mazkura i bdld ke bdsil kame ke wdste, jo jo 
wasdil i qawi bain, un men se ek |lm i Mantiq bai. 


Digitized by VjOOQ IC 



by Google 




by Google 





What is Logic] 

When is Logic a Science and when an Art f 

Is there more than one mode of reasoning ] 

What is the effect of the true study of logic on the mind in 

regard to truth ? 
Point out an error into which many fall 1 
Among what ancient ttfttidns is the science of logic first found? 
Among what people did the science of logic originate f 
Among what nations -aod^om whora'tlid this science spread? 
Name different writers on the science and the time in which 

they lived ? 
What is the concKlion of the science of logic among Mahom^ 

What among Hiiidfis ? 


What is the real province of logic ? 

What is mind ? 

With what three operations of mind is logic concerned ? 

l>efine and illustrate each of these ? 

What is attention as a mental state P 

What is comparing, ahstraction, generalization ? 

What is language) 

What are words? 

Sectxon I. 

Define and illustrate simple apprehension? complex apprehendon ? 
Wherein does a notion or idea formed by an act of apprehensioii 
differ from a term ? 


by Google 





Mantiq kis ko kahte hai© ? 

Mantiq ko ilm kab kahni ch&hiye, aur /ann kab ? 

Ky^ aql f aqat ek hi taur ae natija sahih mk^l sakti hai ? 

Jim i Mantiq k© alkhne s© ^ql mee kyi kaiiayat paid& hoti hai ? 

Ilm i Mantiq ke haqq meo baz ^dmi kjk Bamajhte hain ? 

Ilm i Mantiq ibtida meg kin logos men thk ! 

Auwal yih Jim kis qauin men ijltd h(ia ? 

Yih jlm silsilaw^r is zam^ne tak kis tarah pahnnoh^ ? 

Is jlm ke mashhur musannifon k^ nam, aur nn ka zamana bay&n 

Filhll ahl i Islam men yih ilm kis surat par ply& j^t^ hai ? 
Aizan, KinduOQ mes^ 

Ilm i Mantiq zihn se kaun si surat men ilaqa rakht4 hai 
Zihn kyi shai hai ? 
Hawas i khamsa kk nam lo ? 

Mahsus kis ko kahte haiQ ; maqul ki» ko kahte hai^ ? 
Ilm i Mantiq zihn ke kaun se tin amarofi se muta^Uiq hai ? 
Tasauwur kis ko kahte haig ? 
Tasdiq kis ko kahte haio ? Tasdiq ko qaziya kis halat mei^ kahte 

hain ? 
I>alil aur burhan kis ko kahte hain ? 
Haur, aur muq^bala karna, quwat i tafriqa, aur quwat i jinsi kaun 

si zihnl quwaton ko kahte hain ? 
Q(iwat natiqa k^ kuchh h&ykn karo? 
Laf z kl tarif karo ? 
Dal^lat k^ bayan karo ? 

Pahxp Fasi. 
Tasauwur ki tarif aur us ki qismen bay^n karo ? 

Digitized by VjOOQ iC 


Sectiok n. 

What is a simple term?— a complex term?— proper term?— singu- 
lar term P-— <x>mmo2i term F — coUectiYe term ? — abstract termP — 
concrete term p— absolute term J^— relative termP— univocal 
termP — equivocal termP — synonymous terms? — contradictory 
terms p— compatible terms P— -opposite terms. 

What is the meanixig of << significates P" 

Sbctiok III. 

What is genusy species, differentia p 

Name and define the different kinds of genera, &c« 

On what does correct classification depend P 

What are property and accidentp 

How is property divided, — accident alsoP 

Section IV. 

Of what is a definition made up? 

How many kinds of definition are given? 

What are the rules for definitions P 


Sectiok I. 

What is a proposition P 

How are propositions formed P 

What is the subject?— predicate P — copula ? 

What is a simple proposition — a compound proposition P — an 
afGumative proposition? — a negative proposition?— a universal 
proposition ?— a particular proposition P — a categorical proposi- 
tion? — a hypothetioal proposition ? — ^a disjunctive proposition ? — 
a conjunctive proposition. 

What is meant by the matter of a proposition ? 

What is necessary matter, — ^impossible matter,— contingent 

Give the rules for the three kinds of matter. 


by Google 


Du'SKF Fasl. 

Tasauwur aur lafz mee ky& farq hai ? 

Lafz i muf rad, aur murakkab, aur kulli^ aur jmH, kis ko kahte 

Lafz kaun si halat merj " tamam" aur " na-tamam" kaha jata 

Afrad kis^ko kahte haigl 
Lafz bin-nisbat, kis halat men kaha jata hai? 
Lafz i mushtarak, aur gair-mushtarak, aur mutaradif ki tarif 

bay^n karo ? 
Lafz i mutanaqiza, aur mutaz^dda men kya farq hai ? 

TrsKF Fasl. 
Jins aur nau ki tarif bay^ karo ? 
Aqsam i jins bay^n karo, aur un ki mifl41 do ? 
Taqsim i ajnas aur ^nw^ kis bat par munhaaM hai ? 
Fasl kis ko kahte hain ? 
Arz kis ko kahte hain ? 
Us ki qismen maa misalon ke batl^o ? 
tJmum khusus kis ko kahte hain ? 

Muarrif kis ko kahte hain ? 

Muarrif ki tarkib men kaun kaun chizen d&khil hain I 
Muarrif kai taur par ho sakt& hai ? 
Qa-w^Jd i muarrif bay^n karo ? 


Pahlp Fasl. 
Qaziya kis ko kahte hain, m^ mis&l ke bay^ karo ? 
Mauzu aur mahmai aur nisbat i hukmiya kis ko kahte haig ? 
Qazion ki qismeg bay^ karo ? 
M^dda kis ko kahte hain P 
M§idda meg kai surateg hain ? 
Midda i nisbat ke qaw^jd bayln karo t 


by Google 


Section II. 

What is meant by the distribution of terms ? 

Onwhat does the distribution of the subject depend?— of tho 

A re there any exceptions in the distribution of terms ? 

Give the four rules -for the distribution of terms. 

What iinprovenj^t did Sir Wm, Hamilton propose ? 
Section III. 

What is the conversion of a proposition ? 

What is meant by exposita and converse ? 

When is conversion illative; when apparent? 

In how many ways may conversion be illative? Illustrate them. 

Wijat is the rule for conversion. 

Section IY. 

What is opposition ? 

What are contraries ? — sub-contraries? — subalterns ? — contradic- 
tories ? 


Section I. 
What is reasoning ? 
When is the same called an argument ? 
What are premisses? 
What is the conclusion? 
Define an argument ? 
What is a syllogism? 
Of what is the syllogism made up ? 
Which is the major premiss, and which the minor ? 
What is the major term ? — ^the minor ? — ^the middle ? 
What is ** Aristotle's dictum" ? 
Give the axioms for the syllogism. 
Give the eight rules for testing syllogisms. 

Section II. 
What is figure ? 

What constitutes the first figure ?— the second ?— the third ?— the 

fourth ? 
Illustrate the special use of the different figures. 

Section III. 
What is mood ? 

What is the numbers of valid moods in each figure ? 


by Google 


Du'Esp Fasl. 
Ilm i Mantiq men lazf i kam kis ko kahte haiy ? 
Mauzii ki kulliyat aur juzijat kis b&t par mauquf hai ? 
Kaun se char qaw^id kam ke waste hain ? : 

Tf sEr Fasl, 
Aks kis ko kahte bain ? 
Makusa aur gair-m^kusa kis ko kahte haig ? 
Aks kaun si surat men sahih hoga ? 

Aks kai qism ke hain ; un ke nam maa misal ke bay an karo ? 
Aks karne k^ q^jda kyi hai ? 

, Chauthi' Fasl. 
Naqiz kis ko kahte hain ? 

Naqiz kai tarah par hota hai, maa misal bayan karo ? 
Naqiz ke qawaid bayan karo % 


Pahlf Fasl. 
Balil ki tarif bay^n karo ? 
Dalil men kaun se do juz i ala hain, bar ek ka nam maa tarif aur 

misal bay^n karo ? 
Qiyas kis ko kahte hain ? 
Natija kis ko kahte hain ? 
Qiyas ke juzoQ k^ baydn karo 

Akbar aur asgar aur hadd i ausat kis ko kahte hain ? 
Qaul i Arastatalls kis ko kahte hain ? 
Qiy^a ke qan6n i badihl hayin karo ? 
Ath qaide jo waste j^nchne qiy^s ke hain, bay^in karo. 

Du'SEF Fasl. 
Shakl kis ko kahte hain ? 
Oh^rOn shaklon k^ bay^n karo ? 
Charon shakloQ ke q^de hatl^o ? 
Har ek shakl ke istiam^l ki surat bayan karo. 

TrsBF Fasl. 
Zarb kis ko kahte haig ? 
Har shakl meg kitni sahih zarben haig? 


by Google 


Whicli are called the perfect moods and why ? 

Wliatis reduction 1 

How many kinds of reduction are there ? 


What is a hypothetical argument ? 

What is a hypothetical syllogism? 

What is the antecedent? the consequent? 

What is a conjunctive syllogism ? 

Xjive the three rules for the conjunctive syllogism. 

What is a constructive argument ? 

What is a destructive argument ? 

How may a conjunctive syllogism he reduced to a simple categor- 
ical one ? 

What is a disjunctive syllogism ? 

Give the rule for disjunctives ? 

What is the dilemma? 

What is a simple dilemma ? a complex dilemma ? 

What is the difference between the dilemma and any conjunctive 
syllogism ? 

How may the dilemma be tested? 

Section V. 

What is an enthymeme ? 

How may the syllogism be constnlcted from the enthymeme ? 

Oive the rule. 

What is the sorites? 

What is the form of the argument in the sorites ? [page 196.] 

Give the rule for testing the sorites. 

Give the rule for resolving the sorites. 

What is the " Goclenian sorites V^ The hypothetical sorites ? 

How is the hypothetical sorites reduced ? 


What is meant by applied logic ? 
Illustrate this subject. 

Section I. 
What is a fallacy? 

In what part of the syllogism may fallacies occur ? 
How are fallacies divided ? 


by Google 

imtihjlN ke lite S UWAXATT. 289 

Zurub i k^mila kin ko kahte hain ? 
Khulf kis ko kahte hain ? 
?hulf kai taur par hota hai ? 

Chatjthi' Fasl, 

Qiyka i shartiya kis ko kahte hain ? 

Usko ittisali kab kahte hain, anr infisali kab ? 

Muqaddam aur t^i kis ko kahte hain ! 

Qijks i ittisali ke tin q&ide batlao. 

Qiy^s i ittisali ko musbita kab kahte aur man£ya kab ? 

Qiyks i ittis^l ko hamliya ki taraf kaise pherte hain ? 

Qiyks i infisall kk ky^ q^ida hai ? 

Cliyas murakkab i shartiya kis ko kahte hain ? 

Is qiy4s ki kai sfiraten haio ? 

Is qiyis ki sihhat daryaft kame ke waste kann qajda hai ? 

PA'NCHwrN Fasl, 

Qiy&s i mukhaffaf kis ko kahte hain ? 

Is qiyis se pur& qiy^s kyCiQkar ban sakt4 hai ? 

Is k^ q^Jda bayln karo. 

diyas i musalsal kis ko kahte hain ? 

Qiy^s i musalsal men dalll ki kya surat hai ? 

Qriy^s i musalsal ke jlnchne ke liye ky^ q^iida hai ? 

Qiyas i musalsal ko pure qiyasog men lane ke liye kya qaida hai? 

Qiy§is i musalsal kk ^ks bay^n karo. 

Qiyas i musalsal i shartiya kis ko kahte hain ? 

Qiyas i musalsal i shartiya, hamliya kyugkar ban^te hain ? 


Mantiq i isti^m^i se kya mur^d hai ? 
Is b^t ki mis^ do. 

Pahlp Fasl. 

Mug^ta kis ko kahte hain ? 

Mugalton ki taqsim karo ? 

In muglltoQ k^ ma^ mis^l bay&n karo, yane hadd i ausat juzi, 


by Google 


State the number and f onns of fallacy that may occur under the 
first division. 

Illustrate the undistributed middle — the illicit process ! — ^negative 
premisses — ^affirmative conclusion from a negative premiss and 
vice versa — ^more than three terms in the argument. 

What is the ambiguous middle ? 

State the ways in which the ambiguous middle may arise? 

What is the rule for detecting and removing this error 1 

What is the fallacy of composition P — of division ? 

What are non-logical fallacies p 

How are they divided ? 

Define and illustrate the petito principii — arguing in a circle — 
non causa pro causa. 

State how each of these fallacies is to be met. 

What is the argumentum ad hominem P The argumentum ad 
populum. The fallacy of shifting ground ? The fallacy of 
objections ? The fallacy of proving only a part ? 

How may each of these fallacies be met ? 

Give the rules for the examination of an argument. 

Section II. 

What is induction ? 

On what is the inductive process founded ? 

On what does the completeness of the induction depend ? 

How is science formed ? 

Show how inductions can be reduced to syllogistic forms. 

What is deduction, and show how it differs from induction ? 

What is reasoning from example ? 

Give the meaning of the word analogy and illustrate its various 

What is reasoning from analogy ? 

Show wherein reasoning from analogy resembles and wherein it 
differs from deduction and reasoning'frpm example. 

Show how reasoning from analogy can be reduced to the syllogis- 
tic form- 
Illustrate how reasoning from analogy may be misused. 

What is reasoning a priori ? 

Give some illustrations of this form of reasoning. 

Pefine reasoning a posteriori and illustrate its use. 

Define reasoning a fortiori and illustrate its use. 

Name now the various modes of reasoning. 

What is required to make one a logical reasoner ? 

State some of the special benefits derived from the study of bgic^ 


by Google 


kttlUyat i n&j&iz akbar yk asgar ki,--muqaddam4t i s^libe, 

natija i mu jiba muqaddame salibe se, ya baraks is ke,— ek qiyas 

men tin juzon se ziy^da k^ bona. 
Hadd i ausat i mushtarak kis ko kahte hain ? 
Alf ^ mushtarak ky6nkar ho jite hain ? 
Hadd i ausat i mushtarak ke liye kjk q^ida hai ? 
Mug^lta e ^zl kis ko kahte hain ; is kl misal do ? 
Mugalta e taqsim aur jama kk maa misal bayan karo ? 
Mug^lta e manawi kis ko kahte hain ? 
Us kl taqsim kaisl hai ? 
In miigalton ka maa mis^ bay^n karo ; yane muqaddama aur 

natije ek hi hona^ — daur i tasalsul, — wajh i gair muwajjih 

mugalta e tamalluq-amez, — mugilta e tagaiyur i mazmun 

mugalta iatirdzon ka, — mug&lta subiit juzl k^. 
In mug^ton ke z^hir kame ke liye kaun kaun qaide hain, bar 

ek kk bay4n karo ? 
Un qawaid i $mm kk, jo wiste daryaft kame sihhat dalilon ke 

hain, bayan karo. 

Du'SEF Fasl. 

Istiqra kis ko kahte hain ? 

Wuh kis yaqin par mauq6f hai ? 

Istiqr^ kis halat meg k^mil hai F 

Eaun se ilm, istiqra se h&sil bote hain ? 

Istikhraj kis ko kahte hain, aur wuh istiqra ke kis batmen k:hilaf 

hai ? 
Dalil me|2 tamsU kaise late hain ? 
Mantiq men qarlna kis ko kahte hai^ ? 
Uarlna kai taur par hoik hai ? 
Qarlne se dalll lana, kis b^t men istikhraj aur tamsil ke khilaf 

Is bit k! misil do, ki qarlne kl dalll qiyis kl siirat men k jawe ? 
Qarlne ki dalll meg kaisl kbabarddrl ch^ye ? 
jQlat se maliil sibit keunk kis ko kahte haig ? 
Is kl mis&l do. 

Malul 86 jllat sabit kamIE kis ko kahte hain ? 
Is kl misil do. 

Adnk se &k ko s4bit kaxnk kis ko kahte haig ? 
Jim i mantiq meg pu^itagi h4sil kame ke liye kaun sa tarlaa 
chihiye ? ^ 

pm i mantiq sezihn ko kaun ise fawiid h&sil bote haig ? 


by Google 


by Google 



Logical terms and Technical words. 

Absolute terms. Alfaz bila nisbat . . .32 

Ab.'rcission infinite. Maniat ul-khuld . . 34 

Abstract terms ...... 30 

Abstraction. Qdwat i Tafriqi .... 22 

Accident. Xh^ssa . . . . .46 

Affirmative proposition. Qaziya mtijiba . , 60 

A fortiori 272 

Ambignons middle. Hadd i ausat musbtarik . , 120,222 

„ terms. AH£z i mushtarak . . . ► 32,220 

Analogy. Qarina * . , , • 264 

Antecedent. Muqaddam. , , . ,174 

Attention. Dhyan ya gaur . . . .20 

A posteriori reasoning. M^lul se illat sibit kama « 272 
Apprehension. Tasauwur .... 18,26 

A priori reasoning. Illat se m^ltil sabit kama » 270 

Argument. Dalil, burhan .... 102 

Argumentum ad hominem. Mugdlta i tamalluq-^mez 238 
„ adpopulum . . . , 240 

Aristotle's dictum- Qaul i Arastatalfs . . , 112 

Begging the question. Muqaddamaaurnatijaek bi bona 230 . 
Categorematic (words). Tamam ... 28 
Categorical proposition. Qaziya i bamliya . , 66 

Class defined ...... 42 

Classification. Ajnas, anw^ wg. . . .38 

Cognition. Tasauwur . , i , * 18 

Collective term. Kulli 30 

Common term. KuUi ....*„ 
Compatible term ..... 34 

Comparison. Muqdbila kama • , . . ,20 

Composition, fallacy of. Mugalta i jama . . ^. 228 

Compound proposition* Qaziya i mmakkab . ..58 


by Google 



Conception. Tasauwur . 

Conclusion. Natfja 

Concrete terms . 

Constructive argnment. Dalfl i musbit^, 

Consequent. Tali . 

Contingent matter. Nisbat i masaw^t 

Contradictory opposition. Mutanaqiza 

Contradictory terms. Mutanaqiza 

Ccntraposition, conversion by 

Contrary oppo.sition. Mutanaqiza 

n terms. ,, 

Converse. Makiisa 
X/Onversion, simple. Aks i Mustawi 

„ by limitation or per accidens. Aks 

,, by negation. Aksinaqfz 

Copula. Nisbat i Hukmiya 
Deduction. Istikhraj 
Definition. Muanif 
Destructive argument. Dalil i manfiya 
Dictumi Aristotle's. Qaul i Aristatalis. 
Differentia. Fasl 
Dilemnia. Qiyas murakkab sbartiya 
Disjunctive proposition. Qaziya munfasila 
Distribution of terms. Kam . 
Division, fallacy of. Mugall^ i taqsun 
Elencb^s. Matltib, Natija 
Enthynjeme. Qiyas i mukbaffaf . 
Equivocal term. Lafz i mushtarak 
Essence of a species. Zat, Mahiyat 
Example, rea.^oning by. Tamsn 

ExpOSita* ^^^ mak^sa . 

Extension of genus and species. 
Fallacies. Miigalta 

Fallacy of division and composition. M. taqsim o 
, > of obj ections. Mug alt£ iatirdzon ka 

,, fii proving only a part. M. subtit i _ 

,1 of shifting ground. M. 1 tagaiyur i mazamin. 

Fallacia accidentis. Mugdlta i arzi . 

Figure. Shakl ... 

Generalization. ISlhass se amm uikabia . 

Genus. Jins 

Ooclenian sorites. Qiyas i musalsal k& aks 

Hypothetical proposition. Qaziya sbartiya 

Hypothetical ayllogism. Qiy^s i shartiya 














i Mustawi. 84 

jama 223 


by Google 


Ignoratio elenchi. Natija gair matlub . 

Illative conversion. AksisaMh 

Illicit process. Kulliyat i na-jaiz 

Indefinite proposition. Qaziya muhmala 

Jnduction. Istiqra . . . • 

Inseparable accident. Arz i lazim 

Intention and extension- Umum o Khusds kf nisbaten 

Irrelevant conclusion. Naiija gair-maUdb , 

Jndgrment. Tasdiq . • • • 

Language. Boli, zuban . ' , „ ' 

Logic, defined. Ilm i mantiq ki tan± . 

Lowest species. Navisafll • . * 

Major and minor terms. Akbar aur Asgar 

premisses. Kubriosugra . 
Material fallacies. Mugaltaimd^awi . 

Matter of propositions. Mddda 

Middle term. * Hadd i ausat 

Minor term- -^gar . . • • 

Mood. Zarb . • / .. • 

Necessary matter. Nisbat zaxun bil ijab. 
Negation, conyersion by. Aksinaqiz 
NominaA definition / * " ' 

Notion. Tasauwur, mafhum . • ^ • 

Oyections, fallacy of. Mugalta iatirdzen ka . 
.Opposite terms . . • • • 

Opposition. Naqiz 

„ table of . 

Ostensive reduction . * ^ . 

Particular Proposition. Qaziya i juziya , 

premisses, fallacy of ^ '. . 

Petition Prineipii. Maqaddama aur natija ek hi bona 
Per accidens, Gonveraon by . 
Predicables, classes of. Pancb kulH , 
Predicate. Mabmul .... 
distribution of. Mabmiil ka kam. . 
Premisses. Maqaddamat . . • 

Proper names* Ism i khass aur marifa. 

Property. Arz 

Proposition, definition of. Qaziya ki tarff , 

„ kinds of. Aqsam i qazaya . 

„ quality of. Qazio^ ka kaif. 

,, quantity, of. Qaziogkakam 

Quantification of the Predicate. Mahmdi ka kam 
Beasoning. l^^lil l^ama. . • 

Beal definition . . . t • 























by Google 



Reduction. Khulf : 

Helative terms. AIf£z bin nisbat 
Separable accident. Arz i nmfariq 
Significates, Afr^d (Pi. of fard.) 
Simple apprehension. Tasauwur kama 

,, terms. Alf az i mufrad 
Singular terms. . 

,, proposition- Qaziya mufrada 
Sorites- Qiyas i musalsal . 

„ Goclenian. Qiyas ka aks 
Species. Anwa. (PI. of naij.) 
Subaltern ganus . 

„ opposition- Mutanaqiza 
Subcontrary. Mutanaqiza 
Subject, of propositions. Mauzu 
Subordinate genus- Jins i adna 
Syllogism, defined. Qiyas ki tarff 
„ conjunctive ,, Ittisali 
„ disjunctive. InfisaJi 
» hypothetical shartiya 
Summum genus. Jins nl ajnas . 
Syncategorematic. Lafz na-tamam 
Synonyms. Alfaz mntaradif 
Terms, absolute. Alfdz i bila nisbat 

y, abstract 

,y common „ KulH . 

„ compatible 

„ complex „ Murakkab 

„ concrete 

,, contrary- Mutazadda 

,, contradictory- Mutanaqiza 

,, equivocal. Musbtarak . 

,, proper- u l^bass ya marifa 

„ opposite . 

J, simple. Mufrad . 

J, singular Mufrad. 

j» synonymous- Mutaradif 

>» universal. Kullf. 

J, uni vocal- Gair musbtarak 
Unli&tributed middle. Hadd i ausat juzi 
Universal Proposition. Qaziya i Kulliya. 

», term. Kullf. . 
Univocal term. Mufrad ya gair musbtarak 
Words, what. Alfaz kf tarlf 
























30 . 
















by Google 


-Adna se aid ko sabit kama, 


Ajnas aur anwd, 



'„ i Sahih, 

,, i ^Mustawi, 

„ iNaqiz^ 

,, Bila nisbat, 

,, Bin iiiiri)at, 

, , G air musUtarak^ 

,, Juzi, 

,, Khass, marifa^ 

„ KuUi, 

>, Mufrad, 

,, Murakkab, 

,, Mushtarak, 

,, Mutauaqiza, 

,, Mutazaddj, 

,, Mutaradif, 

,, Na-tamam> 

,, Tamam, 

,, i Lazim, 

,, i Mufariq, 
Boll, zuban, 
J, wazaf, 
,, iltiztmi 
,, miitabiqf, 
,, tazammuni, 



... 273 

Dalil manfia, musbita, 

.. 179 

... 31 

Daur i tasalsul, 

... 233 

... 39 

Dhyan ya gaur, 

... 21 

... 107 


... 45 

... 83 

Gair makusa, 

... 83 

Gair mushtarak, 

... 33 

... 85 > 

Iladd i ausat, 

... 107 

... 87 

„ „ JllZl, 


,.. 23 

„ „ Mushtarak, 

... 121 

... 33 

Hadd i tarn, 

... 53 


„ i naqis, 


... 33 

Easm 1 tarn, 


... 31 

,, i naqis, 


... 31 

Hawass i Kt.amsa, 

... 17 

... 31 

Illttt se maKil sabit kama, 

... 271 

... 29 


... 263 


... 255 

'..'. 33 


... 39 

... ff 

„ i adnd. 

... 43 

... 35 

„ i aid. 


... 33 

„ i baid, 


... 29 

,, ul ajuas, 

... ,, 

• .. )} 

,, i Mutasawia, 


... 39 

„ qarib, 


... 45 

liaif i qaziya, 

... 63 

... 47 


... 73 


... 105 

... 107 


... 31 

... 23 

Kulli, paocli 

... 47 


Kulliyat i najdiz, 

... 129 

... 103 


... 47 

... 25 

Khass se dmm nikdlna, 

... 255 

.. 25 

Khdss, lafz, 

... 31 



... 165 

. .. ,, 


... 69 



... 103 

9, 1(3 

Muliiyat, zdt, 

... 45 


by Google 







... 57 

Nisbat i bis salb, 

... 69 

„ kd Kam, 

... ^1 


i tasiiwi, 



... 37 



... 49 


... 83 


Umuin K luisus nratlaq, ... , , 

Moliil s(! |lkt sdbit karad, 

... 273 


Umum ^CLusus mia waj bin, , , 

Miyiti[| tl taJtf, 

... 9 




... 61 



... 67 

Mujibn, qaziya, 

... 61 



... 6:^ 


... 17 



... 63 

MuBktiira^, lafz, 

... 33 



... 59 


... 211 



... 61 

,, itrai,^ 

... 225 



... 67 

J, iatira^on ka, 

... 245 



... 59 

„ ijama, 

... 229 



... 67 

„ i manawf, 




... 61 

5, s>ul)iit i jiiZi, 

... 247 



... 67 

n \mxi, 

... 213 


... 265 

„ i tagaiyurimazmun, ... 243 

Qaul i Arastatalis> 

... li:5 

3, i tufiBim, 

... 229 



... 105 

^j i tiimalluq amez, 

... 239 



... 175 


... 175 


... 183 


... 105 


... 175 


... 57 


... 193 

Muqaddditifi aur natija ek ^ hona, 231 

Murakkab sbartiya, 

... 185 

miiqjibilii karna, 

.. 21 


... 107 

33, 91 
... 35 

ka aks. 

... 175 
... 201 

\, 85 
... S3 

Quwat i tafiiqi, 

... 23 

... 139 

... 91 
... 93 


... 105 
... 175 


... 39 


... 263 

,^ i niTitijaiwia, 

,, i sill 1 J 

... 43 
... 43 




... 105 

LTiiiuni khusLis ki nisbat. 

41, 49 

Nalij-u f;n'r njatlab, 

... 239 


... 159 

Nisbat i liukraiya, 

... 57 

„ i bil ijab, 

... 69 


tiv Google 



This book should be returned to 
the Library on or before the last date 
stamped below. 

A fin© of fivs cents a day is incurred 
by retaining it beyond the specified 

Please return promptly. 


by Google