NATURE AND AXIOMS OF THE SYLLOGISM. 295 



of the three in point of extension. The middle term is, however, 

 always &quot; middle &quot; in the sense that it is a mediating term, or 

 common standard of reference, with which two other terms are 

 compared, and is thus the means by which we pass from 

 premisses to conclusion. When it has fulfilled the function of 

 intermediary, or middle term of comparison, in the premisses, we 

 let it fall or drop out, as it were, from the mind, retaining only 5 

 and P in our conclusion. This shows that the conclusion is not 

 a mere summing up of the premisses ; and, furthermore, it ex 

 plains why mediate reasoning is called Discursive Reasoning: 

 for we run on, as it were \discursus\ to the conclusion, dropping, 

 or leaving behind, the premisses with their common element. 



Passing from remote to proximate matter, the student must 

 note that the Major Premiss [sometimes called the Principle} is 

 that which contains the major term, P ; and the Minor Premiss 

 [sometimes called the Assumption or the Reason], that which con 

 tains the minor term, S. The order in which the premisses are 

 expressed has no influence whatever on the force or validity of 

 the reasoning. The minor premiss may be expressed first. But 

 it is usual to express the major in the first place. 



Of course, if two premisses are given, without a conclusion, the question 

 as to which premiss is major and which is minor will be determined by 

 the conclusion drawn from them. For instance, the two premisses, &quot; Some 

 honest men are poor; no highwaymen are honest&quot; yield no conclusion about 

 highwaymen in terms of poor, but only a conclusion about poor people in 

 terms of highwaymen, viz. that Some poor people are not highwaymen. 

 Hence it is the minor premiss (i.e. the one which contains the subject of the 

 conclusion} that is expressed in the first place. Were we to symbolize poor 

 people by P, and highwaymen by S, our conclusion would be Some P s are 

 not S, thus showing that the premiss stated in the first place contains the 

 subject of the conclusion, and is therefore the minor premiss. 



When two premisses are given as true, the reasoning in the syllogism 

 will consist in drawing a consequence or conclusion from them. But some 

 times it is a conclusion that is proposed, for which premisses are wanted, i.e. 

 an assertion is made for which proof or disproof is sought. The assertion 

 here presents itself not as a consequence or conclusion from given premisses, 

 but as a question or problem, for determining the truth or falsity of which 

 premisses are wanted. The construction of a syllogism for such a purpose 

 is a process of finding a proof (or a refutation}. Even here, however, the 

 premisses discovered for the purpose are themselves assumed to be true, and 

 not proved to be true in the syllogism itself (cf. 167). 



The form of the syllogism, as distinguished from its matter, 

 consists simply in the necessity with which the conclusion follows 

 from the premisses. This necessity constitutes the formal force or 



