by being expressed in one form more than in another. The advantage gained is in point of clearness, or in adaptation to the party to whom the argument may be addressed. The same form is not suitable for all occasions. The form which gives clearness and adaptation in one case may in another case be attended with obscurity and unsuitableness. The case in which syllogism may be used with advantage is, as we have said, in natural relations of genus and species. In many other cases we think it unsuitable, and in some, probably injurious.*

SECTION V.

REASONING BY COMPOUND SYLLOGISM.

"WE properly call those compound syllogisms, which are made of two or more single syllogisms, and may be resolved into them. The chief kinds are these: epichirema, dilemma, prosyllogismus, and sorites.

"I. Epichirema is a syllogism which contains the proof of the major or minor, or both, before it draws the conclusion.

"This is often used in writing, in public speeches, and in common conversation; that so each part of the discourse may be confirmed and put out of doubt, as it moves on toward the conclusion which was chiefly designed. Take this instance:

"Sickness may be good for us; for it weans us from the pleasures of life, and makes us think of dying;

"But we are uneasy under sickness, which appears by our impatience, complaints, groanings, &c.;

Therefore, we are uneasy sometimes under that which is good for us.

"Another instance you may see in Cicero's oration in defence of Milo, who had slain Clodius. His major proposition is, that 'it is lawful for one man to kill another who lies in wait to kill

* With reference to the system of scholastic logic, Mr. Bailey observes :"Such an artificial system is needless, because the natural method is ready of application and sufficient of itself. It does not substitute compendious processes for long ones, nor such as are easy for such as are difficult; nor those which are more certain for those which are less to be relied upon. And it has not the slightest pretensions to the power of conducting us to results which we could not reach without its assistance; while, on the other hand, the study of it requires a great expenditure of time and labour, and is attended from its very nature with intellectual evils of no inconsiderable moment."-Page 146.

him;' which he proves from the custom of nations, from natural equity, examples, &c. His minor is, that Clodius laid wait for Milo; which he proves by his arms, guards, &c.; and then infers the conclusion, that it was lawful for Milo to kill Clodius.'

"II. A Dilemma is an argument which divides the whole into all its parts or members by a disjunctive proposition, and then infers something concerning each part which is finally inferred concerning the whole.

"Instances of this are frequent; as, In this life we must either obey our vicious inclinations, or resist them: to obey them will bring sin and sorrow; to resist them is laborious and painful: therefore, we cannot be perfectly free from sorrow or pain in this life.

"A dilemma becomes faulty or ineffectual three ways: First, When the members of the division are not well opposed, or not fully enumerated; for then the major is false. Secondly, when what is asserted concerning each part is not just; for then the minor is not true. Thirdly, when it may be retorted with equal force upon him who utters it.

There was a famous ancient instance of this case, wherein a dilemma was retorted. Euathlus promised Protagoras a reward when he had taught him the art of pleading; and it was to be paid the first day that he gained any cause in the court. After a considerable time Protagoras goes to law with Euathlus for the reward, and uses this dilemma: Either the cause will go on my side, or on yours: if the cause goes on my side, you must pay me, according to the sentence of the judge; if the cause goes on your side, you must pay me according to your bargain; therefore, whether the cause goes for me or against me, you must pay me the reward.' But Euathlus retorted this dilemma, thus: Either I shall gain the cause, or lose it if I gain the cause, then nothing will be due to you, according to the sentence of the judge; but if I lose the cause, nothing will be due to you, according to my bargain; therefore, whether I lose or gain the cause, I will not pay you, for nothing will be due to you.'

"This sort of argument may be composed of three or more members, and may be called a trilemma.

"III. A Prosyllogism is when two or more syllogisms are so connected together, that the conclusion of the former is the major or the minor of the following:

Example

"Blood cannot think; but the soul of man thinks; therefore, the soul of man is not blood: but the soul of a brute is his blood,

according to the Scripture; therefore, the soul of man is different from the soul of a brute.

"IV. A Sorites is when several middle terms are chosen to connect one another successively in several propositions, till the last proposition connects its predicate with the first subject.

"Thus : All men of revenge have their souls often uneasy; uneasy souls are a plague to themselves; now to be one's own plague is folly in the extreme; therefore, all men of revenge are extreme fools. The Apostle (Rom. viii. 29) gives us an instance of this sort of argument, if it were reduced to exact form: 'Whom he foreknew those he predestinated; whom he predestinated he called; whom he called he justified; whom he justified he glorified; therefore, whom he foreknew he glorified."

"To these syllogisms it may not be improper to add Induction, which is, when from several particular propositions we infer one general; as, The doctrine of the Socinians cannot be proved from the Gospels, it cannot be proved from the Acts of the Apostles, it cannot be proved from the Epistles, nor the Book of Revelation; therefore, it cannot be proved from the New Testament."— Watts' Logic.

We shall here give an example of each of these compound syllogisms :

I. THE EPICHIREMA.

Happiness is the result of certain habits;

Man has the power of acquiring those habits;

Therefore, man has the power of making himself happy.

The first and second of these propositions require to be separately proved. Here is the proof:

1. Happiness is the result of certain habits.

"We find ourselves making a part of an existing universe, which neither ignorance nor wisdom, doubting nor confidence can alter. If we know the order of which we are the subjects, and conform to it, we are happy.

"The natural laws of this system are universal, invariable, unbending that physical and moral tendencies are the same all over our world; and we have every reason to believe over all

:

other worlds. Wherever moral beings keep in harmony with these laws, there is no instance in which happiness is not the result. Men never enjoy health, vigour, and felicity in disobedience to them. The whole infinite contrivance of everything above, around, and within us, appears directed to certain benevolent issues; and all the laws of nature are in perfect harmony with the whole constitution of men."

"In all positions man finds himself called upon, by the clear indications of the organic laws, to take that free and cheerful exercise, which is calculated to develope vigorous muscular, and nervous and mental action. The peasant digs, and the hunter chases for subsistence; and each finds at the same time health and cheerfulness. The penalty of the violation of this organic law by the indulgence of indolence is debility, enfeebled action both bodily and mental, dyspepsia with all its painful train, and finally death. On the other hand, the penalty of over exertion, debauchery, intemperance, and excess of every species, comes in other forms of disease and suffering. These laws, though not so obviously and palpably so, are as invariable and inevitable, as those of attraction or magnetism."

"If then, by any process of instruction, discipline, and mental force, we can influence our circumstances, banish grief, create cheerfulness, we can, in the same degree, reduce rules for the pursuit of happiness to a system; and make that system a matter of science. Can we not do this ?"-Art of being Happy.

2. Man has the power of acquiring these habits.

"The elements upon which we should operate are circumstances, habits, and modes of thinking and acting. The impulse of all our actions from birth to death, the spring of all our movements, is a conviction that, by the blessing and help of the Most High, we can alter and improve our condition. We have a consciousness stronger than our reason, that we can control our circumstances. We can change our regimen and habits; and, by patience and perseverance, even our temperament. Every one can cite innumerable and most melancholy instances of those who have done it for evil. The habit of indulging in opium, tobacco, ardent spirits, or any of the pernicious narcotics, soon reduces the physical and mental constitution to that temperament in which those stimulants are felt to be necessary. A corresponding change is produced in the mind and disposition. The frequent and regular use of medicine, though it may have been wholly unnecessary at first, finally becomes an inveterate habit. No phenomenon of physiology is more striking than the facility with which the human constitution immediately commences a conformity to whatever change of circumstances, as of climate, habit,

or aliment, we impose upon it. It is a most impressive proof, that the Creator has formed man capable of becoming the creature of all climates and conditions.

"If we may change our temperament both of body and mind for evil, as innumerable examples prove that we may, why not also for good? Our habits certainly are very much under our control: and our modes of thinking, however little the process may have been explained, are in some way shaped by our voluntary discipline. We have powers of self-command, as every one who has made the effort to exercise them must be conscious. We have inexhaustible moral force for self-direction, if we will only recognise and exert it. We owe most of our disgusts and disappointments, our corroding passions and unreasonable desires, our fretfulness, gloom and self-torment, neither to nature nor fate; but to ourselves, and our reckless indifference to those rules that ought to guide our pursuit of happiness. Let a higher education and a truer wisdom detach us from our passions, dispel the mists of opinion, aud silence the authority of example. Let us commence the pursuit of happiness on the right course, and seek it where alone it is to be found. Equanimity and moderation will shed their mild radiance upon our enjoyments; and in our reverses we shall summon resignation and force of character; and, according to the sublime ancient maxim, we shall, in some useful degree, become masters of events and of ourselves."-Ibid. The conclusion follows, that man has the power of making himself happy.

II. THE DILEMMA.

The following are examples of the dilemma :

:

"And there were four leprous men at the entering in of the gate and they said one to another, Why sit we here until we die? If we say, We will enter into the city, then the famine is in the city, and we shall die there and if we sit still here, we die also. Now therefore come, and let us fall unto the host of the Assyrians: if they save us alive, we shall live; and if they kill us, we shall but die."-2 Kings vii. 3, 4. See also Luke xx. 3-7; John xviii. 23.

"I will always place restrictive laws in this dilemma: Either you agree that you do produce scarcity, or you do not agree to it. If you agree to it, you confess, as a consequence, that you inflict upon the people all the harm you can. If you do not agree to it, then you deny having restricted supply and raised prices, and, consequently, you deny having favoured the producer. You are either hurtful or inefficient; you cannot be useful.”—Bastiat's Popular Fallacies regarding General Interests.