And just in the same manner as all may, logically speaking, be only one, so some, or those which are spoken of as some, may be one only, or several, or nearly all, or even all. Some AS are Bs is logically true (such is the convention of the formal part of that science) when there is only one A which is II ; and also when every A is n.
If we look at the specific elements of propositions, we find that, while the subject is defined, as to whether it be universal or particular, by the express addition of words, or by an implication which has the same effect, the character of the predicate follows the nature of the proposition, and depends solely upon whether it be affirmative or negative. In all affirmative propositions the predicate is spoken of particularly ; in all negative propositions, universally. Thus, "As are Bs" in itself does not describe the manner in which A is used : it may be some As or all As; but it does particularise the predicate, n. Here As (so many as are spoken of, be it some or all) are BS ; each one of these As is a II, but other as may or may not exist, about which con sequently nothing is affirmed. "All horses are animals ;" all the horses make up as many of the animals as there are horses : under this form the particular character of the predicate is expressed. But
If we say " AM are not ass," even though only one A should be here spoken of, yet every II is compared with It and rejected. What is meant is, that " this one A is not any one whatsoever of all possible ns." Formal logic, though an excellent exercise, Is in some respects a dead letter unless the student take pains to trace the numerous idioms of language in which the affirmative or negative proposition is conveyed. So very nice are the circumstances, frequently of mere position or of context, by which the universal form is diatinguiehed from the particular, that it would be easy to lay down an isolated sentence, of which no one should be able to any which of the two it Is. For example, "homicides aro justifiable which are committed In self defence," and "homicides which are committed In self-defence are justifiable." Though probably the leaning of a grammatical critic would be to the supposition that the first should stand for "All justifiable homicides are them which are committed in self-defence," and the second for " Among the justifiable homicides are," &c., yet no perenu would be sure of an author's meaning, whichever of time pre ceding forMs lie might use, until he bad examined the context.