The Second Part of Logick

    Cap 1. of complex terms or proposition; of the definition and parts of a proposition

    A Proposition is a sentence declaring somthing true or false without Ambiguity [or Equivocation]

    ¶ If there be in it an Equivocall word it must be distinquished, & the sense wherein you take it declared; else it is no Proposition bec: it dos not signifie any thing certain, and therefore not true or false, hence you must distinquish, ere you can define of things.

    In propositions are signs and parts.

    1. 1. Signs [consignificative, cald parts syncategorematicall] which signifie nothing of themselves, but only the quantity of quality of A Proposition, Such as all, none, some, this.
    2. 2. parts [significative of themselves, cald categorematicall or Predicamentall bec: they belong to some Predicament.] these proper parts are nouns and verbs.
      1. 1. nouns signifie without time, as man, dog, horse, &c.
      2. 2. verbs signify with time—

    1. Thus the parts are expressed in grammaticall notions but in Logical they are called
    2. 1. Subject that of which something is predicated and it goes before the verb.
    3. 2. the Predicate, that which is predicated [and in sense at least] it follows the verb.
    4. 3. Copula, the verb substantive joyning the other 2 together in affirmation or disjoyning them in negation by a no or not, So Socrates, the subject; is, the copula; Learned, the predicate. The copula or verb substantive [am, is, art] is sometimes

    Syn. cap. 1.


    Prop: is divided as to substance, quantity, quality.

    1. 1. Substance is categoricall and hypotheticall.

      ¶ there is no proper substance in a prop: [for it is but a Logicall notion, and no Real thing such as substance, in the 1st Predicament, Signifies] but Analogicall or by way of resemblence, with an [as it were] and notes but the cheif constitution of it, such phrases are [the substance of a sermon or discourse; the fulness of the Godhead bodily] not that the Godhead has body, or a sermon substance, but only because [like substance] to answer the Question [What?] as what is christ? Ans: God. What did Paul preach? or what was the substance of his Epistles? Ans: Justification by faith, here, what is the main substance of the cheif matter of a Prop:? A. something categoric or hypoth.

    1. 1. A categoricall [or simple Prop.]
    2. of but one as Socrates is Learned,
    3. God is to be worshiped.
    1. 2. hypotheticall [or compound] Prop: consists of most categoricalls conjoyn’d by some conjunction [as in grammar they are called] and, that, either.
      1. 1. conditional [if] as if Socrates is Learned, he is to be honored, if there be a God, he is to be worshiped.

        ¶ this is the proper hypotheticall

      2. 2. copulative [and] as Socrates is Learned and Brutus unlearned or Socrates wise and honest.
      3. 3. disjunctions [either, or] as Socrates either learned or unlearned

    1. 2. Quality, showing what kind of Prop: ’tis: & that in Respect of.
      1. 1. the thing signified; and so tis either true or false.
        1. 1. true, when the words agree with the thing, being represented by them as it is as man is Rational.
        2. 2. false, when they agree not: as a Stone is Rational.

          ¶ those 2 are manifest in the 3d part of Logick, and therefore do not so properly belong to the second part.

      2. 2. the words signifying; and so it is either affirmative or negative.
        1. 1. affirmative, when the predicate is affirmed of [or conjoyned to] the subject as Socrates is Learned, God is truth.
        2. 2. negatives, when the predicated is denied of [or divided from] the subject as Socrates is not Learned. Man is not Justified by works.

          ¶ the particle [not] must be put before the copula, else the Prop: Remains affirmative; this is true in the Latin Tongue where [nonest] is the phrase of negation; but the manner of speech in English is otherwise; for we say not when we would deny a thing [it not is so] but [it is not so] the {English} useth [not] Immediately after the copula, but then it must be joyned in signification with the copula, as if [is not] were but one word, and signify but one thing namely [negation] but if [not] be separted from the copula and joyned in sense with the predicate, it renders the predicated an infinite [or indefinite] term and leaveth the Prop: affirmative.

    1. 3. Quantity, showing how much or how many are contained in the Proposition, in this respect tis divided

    1. 1. Universall, whose subject is a common term [Genus or species] enlarged by an universall signe.

    1. ¶ that the negation—not—is contained in the word [not] which includes negation and universality too.
    2. 2. particular, when the common term is contracted by a particular sign, [some] this signe maketh the subject an Individuall Indetermined, and the Proposition to be particular, as some man is Learned.
    3. 3. indefinible, when the subject has no signe.

    1. The Jansenists Logick23 will have it universall in doctrinalls [true or false] and particularly in historicalls but I see no great Reason for it.
    2. 4. Singular, when the subject is determined Individuall

    1. ¶ That those 3 distinctions of propositions manifest themselves by

    Syn. cap. 2.

    Cap. 3. of the affections of Prop: oppos: Equiv: conversion.

    Propositions as one is refer’d to another have 3 affections or Accidents Opposition is a Repugnans of 2 Propositions

    this is of 4 kinds, contraries, subcontraries, subalternates, contradictories

    1. 1. Contraries, are 2 universalls Repugnant in quality also.

    1. 2. Subcontraries, 2 particulars Repugnant in quality also.

    1. 3. Subalternates, differing only in quantity. Such may be

    1. 4. Contradictories, Repugnant both in quantity & quality & this is the greatest opposition.

    Equivalence, [or equipollence] is Reconciling those opposites by putting in a negative [not] & this is

    1. 1. before the sign & subject and it Reconcileth

    1. 2. after— — — — —contraries &c subcontraries.

    1. 3. both before and after and it Reconcileth subalternates

    1. Hitherto also referr this Translation of these 4 usuall verses.

    not all, is some; but all not, is as none

    not none, is some; but none not, every one

    not any, one; not some, not all is this

    not either, neither; neither, not both is

    1. Conversion, is a shifting of the subject and predicate, the same quality Remaining.
    2. 1. Simple is shifting without change of quality as no man is a stone, i.e. no stone is man.
    3. 2. by Accident— —with change— —as every man is an Animal, id est, some Animal is a man.
    4. 3. by contraposition— —with changing the finite terms into infinite, as man into not man, So every man is an Animal, i.e. every not Animal is not man [or whatsoever is not an Animal is not a man.

    1. ¶ All kinds of Prepositions will not lawfully be turned by every end of those ways so as both shall be true; by every Preposition will turn by some so as to admit the [ergo]

    1. A, is aff: e, neg: both univeralls are
    2. I, is aff: o, neg: but both particular24

    Syn. cap. 3.