Home / al-Ṣughrā / Les 9 van 10
Voorproefje
Een blik op les 9 van level 1. Level 1 gaat open na level 1; tot die tijd kun je deze les lezen, maar de toets en de weg verder blijven dicht.
Op slot
The conjunctive syllogism and the four figures
Terug naar al-ṢughrāIndiaas pad · level 1 · al-Ṣughrā · Les 9 van 10
The conjunctive syllogism and the four figures
Proof · al-qiyās al-iqtirānī wa-l-ashkāl al-arbaʿa · pp. 16–17
القِياسُ الاقْتِرانِيُّ وَالأَشْكالُ الأَرْبَعَةُ
Concept · nog niet nagekeken
Tekst in het Perzisch naar de druk van Kanpur 1279/1862–63 · vertaling door The Mantiqi, concept
Over deze tekst
al-Ṣughrā الصُّغْرَى
al-Sayyid al-Sharīf al-Jurjānī (d. 816/1413)
- Tekst
- Perzisch, door The Mantiqi overgeschreven uit de lithografie, zonder de randglossen: Majmūʿa-yi manṭiq, Maṭbaʿ-i Alṭāfī, Kanpur 1279/1862–63, pp. 1–8 of the Ṣughrā, after the Kubrā Bekijk de scan
- De lessen volgen
- al-Manṭiq al-manhajī li-l-mubtadiʾīn: al-Ṣughrā wa-l-Awsaṭ wa-l-Kubrā, Arabic version and arrangement by Muḥammad Anwar al-Badakhshānī (Jāmiʿat al-ʿUlūm al-Islāmiyya, ʿAllāma Banūrī Town), Islam Insight, Karachi 1420/1999, pp. 5–18. De lessen zijn de eigen uitleg van The Mantiqi in de volgorde van deze editie; de tekst ervan is auteursrechtelijk beschermd en wordt niet overgenomen.
- Vertaling
- Van The Mantiqi zelf, in het Engels en in gevocaliseerd Arabisch; een concept. Het Arabisch is uit het Perzisch vertaald, niet overgenomen uit een gedrukte Arabische versie.
- Controle
- Concept, wacht op controle door Ustadh Muhammad Yusuf.
De tekst
Een andere taal nodig? “Google Translate” opent een passage in de machinevertaling van Google — handig voor een eerste indruk, maar niet door ons gecontroleerd. Of kopieer de tekst naar een vertaler naar keuze.
Lees de hele tekst in het Perzisch →
Origineel in het Perzisch, Majmūʿa-yi manṭiq, Kanpur 1279/1862–63
و دلیل چون مرکب شود از حملیات صرف آن را قیاس اقترانی خوانند و در وی چهار شکل منعقد گردد، و بیان این معنی آنست که چون در قضیهٔ حملیه نسبت محمول با موضوع مجهول باشد احتیاج باشد بمتوسطی که او را بهر یک ازین موضوع و محمول قضیهٔ مطلوبه نسبتی باشد تا بواسطهٔ معرفت این دو نسبت، نسبت محمول با موضوع که مطلوبست معلوم شود؛ مثلاً نسبت ج که محمول است با ب که موضوع است چون مجهول باشد، ا متوسط شود. پس اینجا سه جزو است: اول موضوع قضیهٔ مطلوبه، دوم محمول قضیهٔ مطلوبه، سوم متوسط. پس اگر متوسط محمول شود موضوع مطلوب را و موضوع شود محمول مطلوب را آن را شکل اول گویند چون کل ب ا و کل ا ج فکل ب ج، و اگر عکس این باشد آن را شکل چهارم گویند و این بعید از طبع است چون کل ا ب و کل ج ا فبعض ب ج، و اگر متوسط محمول شود هر دو را آن را شکل ثانی خوانند چون کل ب ا و لا شیء من ج ا فلا شیء من ب ج، و اگر هر دو را موضوع شود آن را شکل ثالث گویند چون کل ا ب و کل ا ج فبعض ب ج.
When a proof is made of categoricals alone, it is called a conjunctive syllogism (qiyās iqtirānī), and four figures arise in it. The explanation is this: when in a categorical proposition the relation of the predicate to the subject is unknown, there is need of a middle term that has a relation to each of the subject and the predicate of the proposition sought, so that through knowing these two relations the relation of the predicate to the subject, which is what is sought, becomes known. For instance, when the relation of C, the predicate, to B, the subject, is unknown, A becomes the middle. So there are three parts here: first, the subject of the proposition sought; second, its predicate; third, the middle. If the middle is the predicate of the subject sought and the subject of the predicate sought, it is called the first figure: every B is A, and every A is C, so every B is C. If it is the reverse, it is called the fourth figure, and it is far from nature: every A is B, and every C is A, so some B is C. If the middle is the predicate of both, it is called the second figure: every B is A, and no C is A, so no B is C. And if it is the subject of both, it is called the third figure: every A is B, and every A is C, so some B is C.
Arabische vertaling
وَالدَّلِيلُ إِذَا تَرَكَّبَ مِنَ الْحَمْلِيَّاتِ الصِّرْفَةِ سُمِّيَ قِيَاسًا اقْتِرَانِيًّا، وَتَنْعَقِدُ فِيهِ أَرْبَعَةُ أَشْكَالٍ. وَبَيَانُ ذٰلِكَ أَنَّ نِسْبَةَ الْمَحْمُولِ إِلَى الْمَوْضُوعِ فِي الْقَضِيَّةِ الْحَمْلِيَّةِ إِذَا كَانَتْ مَجْهُولَةً احْتِيجَ إِلَى مُتَوَسِّطٍ لَهُ نِسْبَةٌ إِلَى كُلٍّ مِنْ مَوْضُوعِ الْقَضِيَّةِ الْمَطْلُوبَةِ وَمَحْمُولِهَا، لِيُعْلَمَ بِمَعْرِفَةِ هَاتَيْنِ النِّسْبَتَيْنِ نِسْبَةُ الْمَحْمُولِ إِلَى الْمَوْضُوعِ الَّتِي هِيَ الْمَطْلُوبُ؛ مَثَلًا إِذَا كَانَتْ نِسْبَةُ ج، وَهُوَ الْمَحْمُولُ، إِلَى ب، وَهُوَ الْمَوْضُوعُ، مَجْهُولَةً صَارَ أ مُتَوَسِّطًا. فَهُنَا ثَلَاثَةُ أَجْزَاءٍ: مَوْضُوعُ الْقَضِيَّةِ الْمَطْلُوبَةِ، وَمَحْمُولُهَا، وَالْمُتَوَسِّطُ. فَإِنْ كَانَ الْمُتَوَسِّطُ مَحْمُولًا لِمَوْضُوعِ الْمَطْلُوبِ وَمَوْضُوعًا لِمَحْمُولِهِ سُمِّيَ الشَّكْلَ الْأَوَّلَ، كَقَوْلِنَا: كُلُّ ب أ، وَكُلُّ أ ج، فَكُلُّ ب ج، وَإِنْ كَانَ بِالْعَكْسِ سُمِّيَ الشَّكْلَ الرَّابِعَ، وَهُوَ بَعِيدٌ عَنِ الطَّبْعِ، كَقَوْلِنَا: كُلُّ أ ب، وَكُلُّ ج أ، فَبَعْضُ ب ج، وَإِنْ كَانَ الْمُتَوَسِّطُ مَحْمُولًا لَهُمَا سُمِّيَ الشَّكْلَ الثَّانِيَ، كَقَوْلِنَا: كُلُّ ب أ، وَلَا شَيْءَ مِنْ ج أ، فَلَا شَيْءَ مِنْ ب ج، وَإِنْ كَانَ مَوْضُوعًا لَهُمَا سُمِّيَ الشَّكْلَ الثَّالِثَ، كَقَوْلِنَا: كُلُّ أ ب، وَكُلُّ أ ج، فَبَعْضُ ب ج.
Google Translate ↗pp. 7–8
De les
A proof made only of is called the (qiyās iqtirānī). Suppose we do not know how the of a sought proposition relates to its : we want to know whether every man is a body. We need a (wasaṭ) that is tied to both. Take “animal”: every man is an animal, and every animal is a body, so every man is a body. The proposition that is sought is the (natīja).
The that contains the of the is the (ṣughrā); the one that contains its is the (kubrā). Where the stands in them decides the (shakl).
If the middle is the of the and the of the , it is the first : every man is an animal, every animal is a body, so every man is a body. If it is the subject of the minor and the predicate of the major, it is the fourth figure, which is far from the mind: one reaches the only after reversing the order or the . If it is the predicate of both, it is the second figure: every man is an animal, no stone is an animal, so no man is a stone. If it is the subject of both, it is the third figure: every man is an animal, every man is rational, so some animal is rational.
Begrippen
- القِياسُ الاقْتِرانِيُّ al-qiyās al-iqtirānī
- conjunctive syllogism: made of categoricals
- الوَسَطُ al-wasaṭ
- middle term, tied to both sides of the conclusion
- النَّتِيجَةُ al-natīja
- conclusion: the proposition sought
- الصُّغْرَى al-ṣughrā
- minor premise: holds the subject of the conclusion
- الكُبْرَى al-kubrā
- major premise: holds the predicate of the conclusion
- الشَّكْلُ al-shakl
- figure: set by where the middle term stands
Voorbeelden
كُلُّ إِنْسانٍ حَيَوانٌ، وَكُلُّ حَيَوانٍ جِسْمٌ، فَكُلُّ إِنْسانٍ جِسْمٌ
first figure
كُلُّ إِنْسانٍ حَيَوانٌ، وَلا شَيْءَ مِنَ الحَجَرِ بِحَيَوانٍ، فَلا شَيْءَ مِنَ الإِنْسانِ بِحَجَرٍ
second figure
كُلُّ إِنْسانٍ حَيَوانٌ، وَكُلُّ إِنْسانٍ ناطِقٌ، فَبَعْضُ الحَيَوانِ ناطِقٌ
third figure
Test jezelf
3 vragen over deze les. Met 6 of meer van de 10 (twee sterren) gaat de volgende les open.
Vraag 1
“Every man is an animal; every animal is a body; so every man is a body.” Which is the middle term?
“Animal” is tied to both sides of the conclusion and drops out of it: it is the middle term.
Vraag 2
In which figure is the middle term the predicate of both premises?
Predicate in both is the second figure, as in “every man is an animal; no stone is an animal; so no man is a stone”.
Vraag 3
Why does the Ṣughrā call the fourth figure far from the mind?
In the fourth figure the middle is the of the minor and the predicate of the major; the mind gets to the conclusion only after rearranging or converting the premises.
Volgende les: The exceptive syllogism
Verder →