SYLLOGISM. 
wise the conclusion could not follow. For 
instance, in the major of the above-men- 
tioned syllogism, vis. “ every creature pos- 
sessed of reason and liberty is accountable 
for his actions,” if the connection between 
the subject and predicate could not be per- 
ceived by a bare, attention to the ideas 
themselves, the proposition would require a 
proof itself; in which case, a new middle 
term must be sought for, and a new syllo- 
gism formed to prove the said major : and 
should it so happen, that in this second 
essay there was still some proposition whose 
truth did not appear at first sight, recourse 
must be had to a third syllogism fo prove 
it. And when, by conducting our thoughts 
in this manner, we at last arrive at some 
syllogism, where the premises or previous 
propositions are intuitive, or self-evident, 
truths, the mind then rests in full security, 
as perceiving that the several conclusions it 
has passed through stand upon the immove- 
able foundation of self-evidence, and when 
traced to their source terminate in it. The 
great art lies, in so adjusting our syllogisms 
to one another, that the propositions seve- 
rally made use of as premises may be mani- 
fest consequences of what goes before, so 
as to form one connected demonstration. 
With respect to the different forms or 
figures of syllogisms, it frequently happens 
that the middle term is the subject of the 
major term, and the predicate of the minor: 
bnt though this disposition of the middle 
term be the most natural and obviotis, it is 
not, however, necessary ; since the middle 
term is often the subject of both the pre- 
mises, or the predicate in both; and some- 
times it is the predicate in the major, and 
the subject in the minor proposition. Now 
this variety in the order and disposition of 
the middle term, constitutes what logicians 
call the forms or figures of syllogism. 
But besides this distinction of syllogisms 
into different figures, there is also a further 
subdivision of them in every figure, called 
modes, or moods. See Mood. 
Tiiese distinctions of syllogism, accord- 
ing to figure and mood, respect chiefly 
simple syllogisms, or those limited to three 
propositions, all simple ; and where the ex- 
tremes and middle term are corinecied im- 
mediately together. But as the mind is not 
tied down to any one form of reasoning, 
bnt sometimes makes use of more, some- 
times of fewer premises, and often takes in 
compound and conditional proposition', 
there hence arises other distinctions of syl- 
logisms. r 
When in any syllogism the major is a 
conditional proposition, the syllogism itself 
is termed conditional. Such is the follow'- 
ing one : 
If there is a God, he ought to be wor- 
shipped ; 
But there is a God : 
Therefore he ought to be worshipped. 
In syllogisms of this kind, the relation 
between the antecedent, or the conditional 
part “ if there is a God,” and the conse- 
quent “ he. ought to be worshipped,” must 
ever be real and true ; that is the antece- 
dent must always contain some certain and 
genuine condition, which necessarily im- 
plies the consequent; otherwise the propo- 
sition itseif will be false, and therefore 
ought not to be admitted into our reason- 
ings. There are two kinds of conditional 
syllogisms, one of which is called in the 
schools modus ponens-, because from the 
admission of the antecedent they argue to 
the admission of the consequent, as in the 
syllogism above : the other is called modus 
tollens, because in it both antecedent and 
consequent are rejected, as in the following 
syllogism : 
If God were not a being of infinite good- 
ness, neither would he consult the hap- 
piness of his creatures; 
But God does consult the happiness of 
his creatures ; 
Tliereibre he is a being of infinite good- 
ness. 
Again, as from the major’s being a condi- 
tional proposition, we obtain conditional 
syllogisms ; so where it is a disjunctive pro- 
position, the syllogism is also called disjunc- 
tive, as in the following example. 
The world is either self-existent, or the 
work of some finite, or some infinite 
being. 
But it is not self existent, nor the work 
of a finite being: 
Therefore it is the work of an infinite 
being. 
Now a disjunctive proposition is that, 
where of several predicates, we affirm one 
necessarily to belong to the subject, to the 
exclusion of all the rest, but leave that 
particular one undetermined : hence it fol- 
lows, that as soon as we determine the par- 
ticular predicate, all the rest are to be of 
course rejected ; or if we reject all the pre- 
dicates but one, that one necessarily takes 
place. When, therefore, in a disjunctive 
syllogism, the several predicates are enume-r 
rated in the major ; if the minor establishes 
axiy one of these predicates, the conclusion 
