Compound syllogism, induction and analogy

The syllogism · lawāḥiq al-qiyās · p. 29

لَوَاحِقُ الْقِيَاسِ

Draft · awaiting review

Arabic text after the print of Jakarta 1434/2013 · translation by The Mantiqi, draft

About this text

al-Sullam al-munawraq السُّلَّمُ الْمُنَوْرَقُ

ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Akhḍarī (d. 983/1575)

Text: Arabic, transcribed by The Mantiqi from this print: Mutūn al-manṭiq wa-l-ḥikma: Īsāghūjī wa-l-Sullam al-munawraq, Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, Jakarta 1434/2013, pp. 20–32 View the scan
Lessons follow: The lessons are The Mantiqi's own explanations, chapter by chapter of the text itself.
Translation: The Mantiqi's own; a draft.
Review: Draft, awaiting review by Ustadh Muhammad Yusuf.

The text

Need another language? “Google Translate” opens a passage in Google's machine translation — handy for a first idea, but not checked by us. Or copy the text into a translator of your choice.

Read the whole Arabic text →

Arabic original, Mutūn al-manṭiq wa-l-ḥikma: Īsāghūjī wa-l-Sullam al-munawraq, Jakarta 1434/2013

وَمِنْهُ مَا يَدْعُونَهُ مُرَكَّبَالِكَوْنِهِ مِنْ حُجَجٍ قَدْ رُكِّبَا

فَرَكِّبَنْهُ إِنْ تُرِدْ أَنْ تَعْلَمَهْوَاقْلِبْ نَتِيجَةً بِهِ مُقَدِّمَهْ

يَلْزَمُ مِنْ تَرْكِيبِهَا بِأُخْرَىنَتِيجَةٌ إِلَى هَلُمَّ جَرَّا

مُتَّصِلُ النَّتَائِجِ الَّذِي حَوَىيَكُونُ أَوْ مَفْصُولَهَا كُلٌّ سَوَا

Another kind they call the compound, because it is built from several proofs. Build it, if you want to know it, and turn a conclusion into a premise: from putting it with another, a conclusion follows, and so on. With its conclusions stated or left out, all is the same.

Google Translate ↗p. 29

وَإِنْ بِجُزْئِيٍّ عَلَى كُلِّيٍّ اسْتُدِلْفَذَا بِالِاسْتِقْرَاءِ عِنْدَهُمْ عُقِلْ

وَعَكْسُهُ يُدْعَى الْقِيَاسَ الْمَنْطِقِيوَهْوَ الَّذِي قَدَّمْتُهُ فَحَقِّقِ

وَحَيْثُ جُزْئِيٌّ عَلَى جُزْئِيٍّ حُمِلْلِجَامِعٍ فَذَاكَ تَمْثِيلٌ جُعِلْ

وَلَا يُفِيدُ الْقَطْعَ بِالدَّلِيلِقِيَاسُ الِاسْتِقْرَاءِ وَالتَّمْثِيلِ

If one argues from particulars to a universal, this is understood among them as induction; the reverse is called the logical syllogism, the one I have set out, so be sure of it. And wherever one particular is judged by another because of something they share, that is made an analogy. Induction and analogy do not give certainty by their proof.

Google Translate ↗p. 29

The lesson

A compound is built of several proofs: the of one becomes a of the next, and so on, whether the intermediate conclusions are stated or left out.

Arguing from to a is (istiqrāʾ); the reverse, from the universal to the particular, is the logical the poem has taught. Judging one particular by another because of something they share is (tamthīl), the qiyās of the jurists. Neither induction nor analogy gives certainty by its proof.

Terms

الْمُرَكَّبُ al-murakkab: compound syllogism: several proofs in a chain
الِاسْتِقْرَاءُ al-istiqrāʾ: induction: from particulars to the universal
التَّمْثِيلُ al-tamthīl: analogy: from particular to particular by a common factor
الْجَامِعُ al-jāmiʿ: the common factor of an analogy

Examples

النَّبِيذُ حَرَامٌ كَالْخَمْرِ لِلْإِسْكَارِ
analogy: nabīdh is judged by wine through intoxication

Test yourself

3 questions on this lesson. With 6 out of 10 or more (two stars) the next lesson opens.

Question 1
Judging one particular by another because of a shared factor is…
Question 2
Which give certainty, according to the Sullam?
Question 3
In a compound syllogism, what becomes a premise?

Next lesson: The kinds of proof and the certain premises

Continue →