ABRIDGED AND CONJOINED SYLLOGISMS 383 



form, or for the form in the third figure, given below. For the 

 sorites in the second figure we must derive them from the special 

 rules of the second figure, applied to the successive constituent 

 syllogisms. The following will be found to result from the rules 

 of the second figure : 



(1) Either the first or the second premiss must be negative &amp;gt; and 

 no other (expressed) premiss can be negative. 



(2) Either the first or the second premiss may be particular \ and 

 no other (expressed] premiss can be particular. 



The following is an example in Bocardo of the third figure 

 (with the suppressed propositions supplied) : 



Major Some Z is not P 



Minor All Z is Y 



[Conclusion and Major] . [. . Some Y is not P] 



Minor All Y is X 



[Conclusion and Major] . [. . Some X is not P\ 



Minor All X is S 



Conclusion . Some S is not P. 



We may have a sorites in Disamis as well as in Bocardo in 

 the third figure. Only \htfirst syllogism can be in any of the 

 remaining moods of this figure. 



The sorites in the third figure is analogous to the Goclenian 

 sorites in the first : a major premiss comes first ; the other ex 

 pressed propositions are minors ; the suppressed conclusions are 

 majors. 



The following rules will be found to secure the validity of the 

 sorites in the third figure : 



(1) Only one premiss , and that the first , can be negative. 



(2) Either the first or the second r , but not both, and not any other 

 (expressed) premiss , can be particular. 



On account of the . multiplicity of middle terms intervening 

 between the first premiss and the ultimate conclusion, the sorites 

 is a form of argument peculiarly liable to the fallacy arising from 

 the employment of an ambiguous middle. Individual variations 

 of shades of meaning may be separately almost imperceptible, but 

 the cumulative effect of such slight variations inevitably leads to 

 considerable deviation from truth. Even a single enthymeme 

 may conceal a fallacy : a long chain of enthymemes will do so 

 much more effectively. 



190. THE EPICHEIREMA. The Epicheirema is a Regressive 

 Poly syllogism abridged by the omission of one of the premisses of 



