الرئيسية / Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullam / الدَّرْسُ 16 مِنْ 18
مُقْفَل
Compound syllogism, induction and analogy
العَوْدَةُ إِلَى Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullamالمَسارُ المَغارِبِيّ · المُسْتَوَى 2 · Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullam · الدَّرْسُ 16 مِنْ 18
Compound syllogism, induction and analogy
The syllogism · lawāḥiq al-qiyās · ص 104–107
لَواحِقُ القِياسِ
مسوّدة · بانتظار المراجعة
دُرُوسُنا الخاصَّةُ مَعَ نُقُولٍ مِنْ طَبْعَةِ Cairo 1324/1906 · تَرْجَمَةُ The Mantiqi، مُسَوَّدَة
عَنْ هٰذا النَّصّ
Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā al-Sullam حاشِيَةُ الباجُورِيِّ عَلَى السُّلَّمِ
Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī (d. 1276/1860)
- النَّصّ
- العَرَبِيَّة: المَقاطِعُ المَنْقُولَةُ فِي الدُّرُوس، نَقَلَها The Mantiqi مِنْ هٰذِهِ الطَّبْعَة (وَلا يُنْقَلُ النَّصُّ كُلُّه): Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā matn al-Sullam, with al-Anbābī's taqrīr in the margin, al-Maṭbaʿa al-Azhariyya al-Miṣriyya (2nd printing), Cairo 1324/1906, pp. 26–112 (passages) اعْرِضِ الصُّورَة
- تَتْبَعُ الدُّرُوس
- الدُّرُوسُ شَرْحُ The Mantiqi الخاصُّ لِلسُّلَّمِ بَيْتًا بَيْتًا، عَلَى أَثَرِ Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī؛ وَيُنْقَلُ كَلامُهُ حَيْثُ يَكُونُ أَهَمّ.
- التَّرْجَمَة
- مِنْ عَمَلِ The Mantiqi؛ مُسَوَّدَة.
- المُراجَعَة
- مُسَوَّدَة، بِانْتِظارِ مُراجَعَةِ Ustadh Muhammad Yusuf.
بِكَلامِ Ibrāhīm al-Bājūrī
تَحْتاجُ لُغَةً أُخْرَى؟ «تَرْجَمَةُ Google» تَفْتَحُ المَقْطَعَ فِي التَّرْجَمَةِ الآلِيَّةِ مِنْ Google — مُفِيدَةٌ لِفِكْرَةٍ أُولَى، لٰكِنَّنا لَمْ نُراجِعْها. أَوِ انْسَخِ النَّصَّ إِلَى مُتَرْجِمٍ تَخْتارُه.
مَنْقُولٌ مِنَ النَّصِّ بِاللُّغَةِ العَرَبِيَّة فِي Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā matn al-Sullam, with al-Anbābī's taqrīr in the margin, Cairo 1324/1906
(فَصْلٌ فِي لَواحِقِ القِياسِ) الإِضافَةُ جِنْسِيَّةٌ لا اسْتِغْراقِيَّةٌ، لِأَنَّ المُصَنِّفَ لَمْ يَتَكَلَّمْ إِلّا عَلَى ثَلاثَةٍ مِنْها، وَهِيَ القِياسُ المُرَكَّبُ وَقِياسُ الاسْتِقْراءِ وَقِياسُ التَّمْثِيلِ، وَأَهْمَلَ رابِعًا وَهُوَ قِياسُ الخُلْفِ، وَضابِطُهُ أَنْ يُسْتَدَلَّ عَلَى ثُبُوتِ المَطْلُوبِ بِإِبْطالِ نَقِيضِهِ.
(Chapter on what follows the syllogism): the possessive here names the kind, not all of its members, for the author speaks of only three of them — the compound syllogism, induction and analogy — and leaves out a fourth, the reductio (qiyās al-khulf), whose rule is to prove what is sought by refuting its contradictory.
ص 104
… لِأَنَّهُ يُفِيدُ القَطْعَ بِالَّذِي اسْتُدِلَّ عَلَيْهِ بِهِ، كَما إِذا تَصَفَّحْتَ جَمِيعَ جُزْئِيّاتِ الحَيَوانِ فَوَجَدْتَ المَوْتَ لازِمًا لَها، فَاسْتَدْلَلْتَ بِذٰلِكَ عَلَى أَنَّ كُلَّ حَيَوانٍ مَيِّتٌ، وَأَمّا الثّانِي فَلِأَنَّهُ لا يَلْزَمُ مِنْ تَشابُهِ الأَمْرَيْنِ فِي شَيْءٍ أَنَّهُما كَذٰلِكَ فِي شَيْءٍ آخَرَ.
… for [complete induction] gives certainty of what it is used to prove: as when you go through all the particular kinds of animal, find death bound to them, and conclude that every animal dies. As for the second [analogy], it is because two things being alike in one respect does not mean that they are alike in another.
ص 107
الدَّرْس
The Sullam ends its account of the with “what follows it”: the compound syllogism, whose becomes a of the next; (istiqrāʾ); and (tamthīl). Al-Bājūrī remarks that the poem names only three of these and leaves out a fourth, the reductio (qiyās al-khulf): proving what is sought by refuting its .
His example of a reductio is from kalām: to prove that God is eternal, one argues that if He were not eternal He would be originated; that if He were originated an absurdity would follow; and that what leads to an absurdity is false. So His being originated is false, and what is sought is proved.
On he distinguishes the complete and the incomplete. Complete induction gives certainty: one goes through all the kinds of animal, finds death bound to each, and concludes that every animal dies. Incomplete induction gives only probability, as does , because two things being alike in one respect does not make them alike in another.
المُصْطَلَحات
- الاسْتِقْراءُ al-istiqrāʾ
- induction: going through the particulars
- التَّمْثِيلُ al-tamthīl
- analogy: from one particular to another
- قِياسُ الخُلْفِ qiyās al-khulf
- reductio: proving by refuting the contradictory
الأَمْثِلَة
لَوْ لَمْ يَكُنْ قَدِيمًا لَكانَ حادِثًا
“if He were not eternal, He would be originated”: the start of a reductio
اخْتَبِرْ نَفْسَك
عَدَدُ الأَسْئِلَةِ عَلَى هٰذا الدَّرْسِ 3. بِسِتَّةٍ مِنْ عَشَرَةٍ فَأَكْثَرَ (نَجْمَتَيْن) يُفْتَحُ الدَّرْسُ التّالِي.
السؤال 1
Which of “what follows the syllogism” does al-Bājūrī say the poem leaves out?
The poem speaks of three, “and leaves out a fourth, the reductio, whose rule is to prove what is sought by refuting its contradictory”.
السؤال 2
Which kind of induction gives certainty?
Complete induction “gives certainty of what it is used to prove”, as when all kinds of animal are found to die.
السؤال 3
Why does analogy not give certainty?
“Two things being alike in one respect does not mean that they are alike in another.”
الدَّرْسُ التّالِي: The kinds of argument and their premises
تابِع ←