CHAPTER TWELFTH.

CONDITIONAL AND DISJUNCTIVE SYLLOGISMS.

178. A conditional or hypothetical syllogism is one, whose major proposition is conditional. Thus,

If men have vicious propensities, they need the restraints of government;

But men have vicious propensities;

Therefore they need the restraints of government.

The major premise consists of two entire propositions, which make an enthymeme. The minor premise and the conclusion constitute another enthymeme, expressing the same meaning as the other, with only this difference, that what is stated hypothetically in the first is expressed absolutely in the last. The first part of the major, containing the condition, is called the antecedent; and the last, which contains the conclusion, the consequent. If the antecedent be admitted in the minor premise, the consequent must be admitted in the conclusion; for the condition, stated in the antecedent, must always be such as necessarily to require the truth of the consequent. By the same necessity it will follow, that, if the conse

quent be contradicted in the minor, the antecedent must be contradicted in the conclusion. Thus,

If death be an eternal sleep, the Scriptures are not true; But the Scriptures are true;

Therefore death is not an eternal sleep.

179. In conditional syllogisms then there are two ways of reasoning, which lead to certain conclusions. The first is called arguing from the position of the antecedent to the position of the consequent; and the other, arguing from the removal of the consequent to the removal of the antecedent. These are the only modes of true reasoning in this sort of syllogism; for we are not at liberty to adopt the contrary course, and argue from the admission of the consequent to the admission of the antecedent, nor from the removal of the antecedent to the removal of the consequent. This will be man

ifest in the following example :

If W. were a general, he would have power;
But W. is not a general;

Therefore he has not power.

If W. be a general, he must be obeyed;

But W. must be obeyed;

Therefore he is a general.

The falsehood of the consequent will not follow from the falsehood of the antecedent, nor the truth of the antecedent from the truth of the consequent. The one may be true, and the other may be false, for different reasons from those, which are assigned.

180. A disjunctive syllogism is one, whose major premise is disjunctive. Thus,

The world is either self-existent, or the work of some finite, or of some infinite Being;

But it is not self-existent, nor the work of any finite

Therefore it is the work of an infinite Being.

The business of the major proposition of this syllogism appears to be to enumerate several predicates, of which one only can belong to the subject. If then the minor establishes one of these predicates, the conclusion must remove all the rest; or if, in the minor premise, all the predicates but one are removed, the conclusion must establish that, which remains. This procedure has been denominated arguing from the assertion of one to the rejection of the rest; or, from the denial of one, two, or more, to the establishment of the remainder. But the term arguing is applied to it without any good

reason, since it is nothing more than a formal and circuitous method of stating a fact.

CHAPTER THIRTEENTH.

COMPOUND SYLLOGISMS.

181. A compound syllogism consists of more than three propositions, and may be resolved into two or more syllogisms. Of these the principal kinds are the Epichirema, Dilemma, and Sorites.

The Epichirema is a compound argument, of which the major and minor premises are separately proved, before the conclusion is drawn. Example.

Unjust laws endanger the stability of government; for they create discontent among the people;

Laws, which restrain the freedom of conscience, are unjust; for they require people to abandon their dearest concerns;

Therefore laws, which restrain the freedom of conscience, endanger the stability of government.

The major and minor premises, with their respective proofs, form two enthymemes, which may readily be reduced to regular syllogisms. Discard these proofs, and a regular syllogism will remain.

182. The epichirema is much used in conversation, publick harangues, and oratorical discourses. Cicero's defence of Milo is an argument of this sort. His first position is, that it is lawful for one man to kill another, who lies in wait to kill him. This he proves from the laws of nature and the customs of mankind. His second position is, that Clodius lay in wait for Milo, with a murderous intent; which he proves by his equipage, arms, guards, and other circumstances. Then he infers the conclusion, namely, that it was lawful for Milo to kill Clodius.

183. The Dilemma* is a compound argument, which establishes a general conclusion, either directly by proving its necessity, or indirectly by showing the impossibility or absurdity of its contrary, in every supposable case. Thus,

Every magistrate must either execute the laws, or suffer them to be violated;

If he execute them, he will be hated by the vicious and profligate :

If he suffer them to be violated, he will be hated by the wise and virtuous;

Therefore, every magistrate is exposed to hatred from his

fellow men.

* Ais, bis, and λaμßávw, capio.