34. Etymology and Structure of the Four Arguments

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Etymology and Linguistic Analysis #

• Induction (ἐπαγωγή/epagoge): From Greek “ἐπί” (upon) + “ἄγω” (to lead)—literally “a leading in”

  • Leads the mind into universal statements from particular instances
  • Related to “introduction” (σαγωγή/sagogi) in Latin: also means “a leading in”
  • Key distinction: induction leads into a universal whole; introduction leads through composite parts
  • Both proceed from parts to whole, but differ in the type of whole

• Greek vs. Latin Terminology:

  • Greeks and Romans used native words for the first two arguments (example and induction)
  • Romans borrowed Greek words (ἐνθύμημα/enthymeme, συλλογισμός/syllogism) for the latter two
  • Reflects historical fact: “The Greeks were the teachers of the Romans”

• Etymology of Enthymeme (ἐνθύμημα):

  • Composed of “ἐν” (in) + “θυμός” (mind/spirit)
  • In Plato and Aristotle, thymos typically means anger or courage
  • In earlier Greek, thymos meant “mind” more broadly
  • En-thymos: “in the mind”—something not fully universal but present in the mind

• Related Words:

  • Metaphor (μεταφορά) vs. Translation (translatio): same etymology, but metaphor carries over the word; translation carries over the meaning
  • Metaphor and translation are reverse applications of the same principle

The Four Arguments and Necessity #

Necessity vs. Causal Dependence:

• A conclusion can follow necessarily from premises without being because of them
• Shakespeare’s Hamlet: “This above all to an own self be true, and it must follow as the night of the day, thou canst not then be false to any man”
  • Night follows day necessarily, but not because of day
  • The earth’s rotation causes both; day and night are not causally related to each other
  • Learning necessarily follows ignorance, but ignorance does not cause learning

The Definition of Syllogism Requires Three Elements:

1. Statements are “laid down” (positio)—something lays them down with firmness
2. The statements have a firm order—they are not floating or changeable
3. Crucially: the conclusion follows because of those premises (propter illa)

• This last element distinguishes syllogism from mere logical sequence
• Without this causal element, the argument may follow necessarily but not demonstratively

Consequences of Unclear Premises:

• If one premise is not necessarily true, the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises but is not necessarily true itself
• Analogy to calculation: multiplying numbers correctly doesn’t yield correct result if starting numbers are merely habitual or assumed

Example vs. Induction #

Example (Exemplum):

• Argument from one singular to another singular of the same kind
• “Give a guy an inch and he’ll take a mile”—but Jim in the story refused to take the full advantage, showing an exception
• Example goes from part to part
• Conclusion does not follow necessarily

Induction (Ἐπαγωγή):

• Argument from many particulars to the universal
• Etymology emphasizes “leading in” through multiple instances
• Does not produce necessary conclusion
• Important: some universals known by induction alone; others understood through comprehension of the terms themselves
  • “Every whole is greater than its part”—known through understanding what whole and part are, not induction alone
  • “Snow is white”—known primarily through induction

Key Arguments #

The Problem of Generalizing from Experience #

The Frog Example:

• Dissect one thousand frogs; each has a three-chambered heart
• Can one conclude necessarily that all frogs have three-chambered hearts? No.
• With sufficient instances and no exceptions, one makes a reasonable guess
• But Romeo and Juliet warns: “Wisely and slow, they stumble that run fast”—a caution against jumping to conclusions

Signs and Probable Reasoning #

Definition of Sign (according to St. Augustine):

• That which strikes the senses and brings something other than itself to mind
• Examples:
  • Staggering is a sign of drunkenness (but not necessary—could be exhaustion or neurological condition)
  • Long, unkempt hair as a sign of disorder (student who had accident; police mistook appearance for drug charges)
  • Red eyes as sign of intoxication (could indicate tired eyes after 8-9 hours of driving)

Non-Necessary Signs:

• Most signs used in practical reasoning are more general than what they are taken to sign
• Sign alone does not guarantee the conclusion
• Refusal of honor is a sign of lack of ambition, but not a necessary sign (as shown in Richard III)

Antony’s Argument in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar #

Three Enthymematic Arguments:

1. First Enthymeme: “He hath brought many captives home to Rome, whose ransoms did the general coffers fill. Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?”

   • Implicit likelihood: ambitious men care only for themselves and enriching themselves, not benefiting their country
   • This universal premise is not stated but understood “in the mind” (enthymeme)

2. Second Enthymeme: “When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept. Ambition should be made of sterner stuff.”

   • Stated likelihood: if a man is ambitious to the point of becoming dictator, trampling freedom, would he be mild and pitiful, moved to tears?
   • Implied: no—ambitious men are ruthless, not compassionate
   • Contrast: “Nice guys finish last”

3. Third Enthymeme: Caesar refused the crown three times

   • Sign that he is not ambitious
   • “‘Tis certain he was not ambitious, right? Because he refused the crown”
   • This sign is not necessary; refusal of honor can be a political strategy (as in Richard III)

Antony’s Rhetorical Strategy:

• Repeats “Brutus is an honorable man” while subtly providing reasons suggesting otherwise
• Uses irony: the contrary of what is actually meant
• The universal premises are implicit, relying on audience to supply them

Important Definitions #

Positio (“laying down”) #

• Has three interrelated elements:
  1. Something lays it down (an agent places it firmly)
  2. There is firmness—the laid-down law is firm and fixed
  3. There is order—the laid-down statements are arranged in order toward a conclusion
• Analogy: “I’m going to lay down the law”—shows expectation of compliance and order
• Modern example: automatic speed-limit cameras in Washington, D.C. represent a “laying down” of law with firmness

Syllogism (συλλογισμός) #

• From Greek root meaning “reckoning” or “calculating”
• Requires: (1) at least two statements to get a third statement, (2) rigor in procedure
• Conclusion follows necessarily because of the premises
• Distinguished from mere logical sequence: the premises must be the cause/producer of the conclusion
• Analogy: two numbers produce a third (in calculation); two dogs produce a third dog (in reproduction)

Enthymeme (ἐνθύμημα) #

• Often called “rhetorical syllogism”
• Argument from something universal or probable (but not strictly universal) to a particular conclusion
• Frequently omits the universal premise, leaving it “in the mind” of the audience
• Conclusion does not follow necessarily because the universal is only probable
• Dependent on audience’s acceptance of implied likelihood

Examples & Illustrations #

Personal Anecdotes #

The Student’s Haircut:

• Student with long hair appears in class with neat haircut
• Student explains: out-of-car accident, needed to defend himself in court
• Police at courthouse mistook his appearance (long hair) as sign of drug charges
• Illustrates how signs are fallible in human affairs

Late-Night Drive:

• Berquist driving 8-9 hours from Quebec, slightly over speed limit at late night
• State trooper notices red eyes
• Trooper initially suspects intoxication based on sign (red eyes)
• Trooper gives warning after explanation
• Shows practical use of signs and the non-necessity of conclusions from signs

Jim and the Girl:

• Story about Jim (a good Catholic) and a girl who invited him to “go as far as you’d like”
• Jim refuses and says he’ll “go all the way home”
• Illustrates exception to likelihood “Give a guy an inch and he’ll take a mile”
• Shows that general truths about human behavior are not necessary but probable

Historical Examples #

Mussolini Anecdote:

• Reporter driving with Mussolini hits a child
• Mussolini says “don’t look back” and speeds away
• Illustrates likelihood: men who seize power tend to be ruthless
• Supports Antony’s argument about ambitious men lacking compassion

American History Quote:

• Someone said “I’d rather be right than president”
• Historian’s cynical response: probably someone who had no chance
• Illustrates how statements about human behavior have humor and exceptions
• Shows political and moral complexity of ambition

Questions Addressed #

Why do the Greeks and Romans use different terms for different arguments? #

• Romans borrowed Greek terminology for arguments the Greeks developed
• Reflects the historical fact that “the Greeks were the teachers of the Romans”
• Unlike grammar (where Romans struggled to understand their own language), in logic Romans adopted Greek distinctions

How is enthymeme different from the other arguments in its use of premises? #

• The universal premise is often not stated explicitly
• It is left “in the mind” (ἐν-θύμημα) for the audience to understand and accept
• The speaker assumes audience will supply the likelihood based on shared opinion or custom
• This makes it particularly useful in rhetoric and persuasion

What makes a sign non-necessary? #

• Most signs in human affairs are more general than their conclusions
• The same sign can have multiple causes
• A sign indicates probability but not certainty
• Example: refusal of crown could indicate lack of ambition, but could also be a political strategy

How does “following necessarily” differ from “following because of”? #

• Night necessarily follows day (temporal sequence)
• But night does not follow because of day
• A third cause (earth’s rotation) produces both
• This distinction is critical for understanding why Aristotle includes “because of” (propter illa) in the definition of syllogism

Notable Quotes #

Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet (Friar Lawrence): “Wisely and slow, they stumble that run fast”

• Warning against jumping too quickly to conclusions from limited experience
• Relevant to inductive reasoning and the temptation to generalize

Shakespeare, Hamlet (Polonius): “This above all to an own self be true, and it must follow as the night of the day, thou canst not then be false to any man”

• Used to illustrate that something can follow necessarily without being causally related
• Night necessarily follows day, but day is not the cause of night

Shakespeare, Julius Caesar (Mark Antony): “But Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man.”

• Repeated throughout speech despite providing hints to the contrary
• Example of irony in enthymematic argument

Modern Saying: “Nice guys finish last”

• Expresses the likelihood used in Antony’s second enthymeme
• General statement about ambitious/ruthless men vs. compassionate men