Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
14,697
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 24:
Line 24: − +
→Logical proof: + common sense
4. A premise that is better known than the conclusion has the ''[[genus]]'' (or relevant class to which the subject belongs) of the conclusion's subject for its own subject or appropriately in its predicate, and to be prior to the conclusion means the [[genus]] in the premise is ''not somehow determined'' by the subject of the conclusion that belongs to it.
4. A premise that is better known than the conclusion has the ''[[genus]]'' (or relevant class to which the subject belongs) of the conclusion's subject for its own subject or appropriately in its predicate, and to be prior to the conclusion means the [[genus]] in the premise is ''not somehow determined'' by the subject of the conclusion that belongs to it.
5. Since premises are to be related to their conclusion through cause and effect, they must be as ''necessarily'' true as the desired necessary truth of the conclusion would demand: either ''rigorously proven'' themselves or ''self-evident'', without the truth or its necessity narrowing as it goes down the syllogistic chain to the point where it could no longer apply to the conclusion.
5. Since premises are to be related to their conclusion through cause and effect, they must be as ''necessarily'' true as the desired necessary truth of the conclusion would demand: either ''rigorously proven'' themselves, ''self-evident'' or what is asserted to be ''common sense'' (by definition antecedent to philosophical distinctions), without the truth or its necessity narrowing as it goes down the syllogistic chain to the point where it could no longer apply to the conclusion.
However, a state of "conditional necessity" may exist in the premises, so long as the condition is not determined by the subject of the conclusion as per requirement 4, but is rather an "assumption for a conditional proof", an assumption which would appear somewhere in the validly co-ordinated and soundly applied series of premises.
However, a state of "conditional necessity" may exist in the premises, so long as the condition is not determined by the subject of the conclusion as per requirement 4, but is rather an "assumption for a conditional proof", an assumption which would appear somewhere in the validly co-ordinated and soundly applied series of premises.