Subject
Re: A syllogism and an epitaph
From
Date
Body
There are real reasons why VN/Shade¹s so-called syllogism¹ cannot be
analysed formally as with, say, Russell¹s Barbara template: ALL X are Y; W
is an X; therefore W is a Y.
Unlike the initial (major) premise ³All men die (are mortal),² the statement
³OTHER men die (are mortal)² does not qualify as a premise for syllogistic
deductions unless ³OTHER² is carefully disambiguated
(although I realize that other¹ has acquired some LitCrit reifications
beyond the range of formal logic ;=))
Similarly, the VN/JS minor premise & conclusion also need work (as the
teacher would say!). Those negations (³I am NOT an X²; ³I will NOT die²)
always toll a warning bell, and the clang is positively, Hemingwavianly
painful (ask not for whom ... !) when coupled with ³OTHER.²
We take another¹ as shorthand for an [Instantiation of] ³OTHER men²; we
next take ³I² as the proposer [author] of the three statements and then
must add the supplementary premise that this ³I/me² belongs to the class
³Men!² The class ³Men² can then be viewed as the UNION of the two
non-intersecting classes ³I² and ³Other men.² (Gender need not distract us
here, although elsewhere on the list several contributors continue to
confuse biological and grammatical genders.¹)
Under this intense (Nabokovian!) scrutiny, the syllogism¹ collapses as an
example of formal logical reasoning. The major premise tells us nothing
about the mortality of the ³I.² The minor premise is tautological (³I²
cannot be ³another² by definition)! The conclusion (³I am not mortal²) may
or may not be true or to MIS-use the nice Scottish legal phrase, the
VERDICT is NOT-PROVEN. (In fact, this verdict means ³not fully tested [Latin
probare] neither innocent nor guilty but open to possible RE-trial.)
As a literary construction, though, the lines can be enjoyably deconstructed
as Jansy and others have shown. Busily buried in VN¹s EO commentaries, I am
ready to believe in VN¹s omniscient (and omnivorous) precision that
there¹s a reason for every word & allusion in PF! (Is this verging an a
personality cult¹ in my studies that VN would rush to discourage? Discuss)
Pseudo-syllogisms abound in the mathematical literature I was (and am)
exposed to:
God is love
Love is blind
Therefore, God is blind.
No cat has five tails
I am no cat
Therefore, I have five tails.
A GENUINE syllogism that deserves your attention has two (factually) false
premises, unimpeachable logic, and a (factually) true conclusion.
Every body made of green cheese orbits the Earth
The Moon is made of green cheese
Therefore, the Moon orbits the Earth.
This is a VITAL reminder that (i) the validity of a syllogism is divorced
from the factual (³real²) content of its premises (ii) folks continue to
assume wrongly that the truth of a deduction implies the truth of its
premises.
Stan Kelly-Bootle
On 10/2/07 12:06, "jansymello" <jansy@AETERN.US> wrote:
> JS: A syllogism: other men die; but I
> Am not another; therefore Ill not die. (l.213-4)
>
> SK:This could be a reference to Leo Tolstoys Death of Ivan Ilyich (1886):
> All men die. Kay is a man. Therefore, Kay will die. But, thinks Ivan Ilyich,
> Im not Kay; therefore, that doesnt apply to me... The first part (about Kay)
> is an example of the type of syllogism called Barbara and Tolstoy probably
> took it from some textbook on logic ...
>
> JM: That's exactly what I was looking for: John Shade's aside was a
> quotation, not a sentence derived from some text-book on Logic. The
> "subjective twist" was maintained. In the case of Duchamp's epitaph,
> "therefore, I won't die", a fresh distortion created his particular brand of
> irony.
> I enjoyed a similar logic play in Arthur Schnitzler but he used the infinite
> regress ( If all drowning men see their lifes flash in front of them, then
> this moment must be also included and in the next flash it will also be
> included... u.s.w ). I often get the impression that some of his short-stories
> with alpine scenes ( I have "Fräulein Elsa" in mind now) are alluded in VN's
> later works, such as "Transparent Things".
>
> //snip
>
Search the archive: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/archives/nabokv-l.html
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
analysed formally as with, say, Russell¹s Barbara template: ALL X are Y; W
is an X; therefore W is a Y.
Unlike the initial (major) premise ³All men die (are mortal),² the statement
³OTHER men die (are mortal)² does not qualify as a premise for syllogistic
deductions unless ³OTHER² is carefully disambiguated
(although I realize that other¹ has acquired some LitCrit reifications
beyond the range of formal logic ;=))
Similarly, the VN/JS minor premise & conclusion also need work (as the
teacher would say!). Those negations (³I am NOT an X²; ³I will NOT die²)
always toll a warning bell, and the clang is positively, Hemingwavianly
painful (ask not for whom ... !) when coupled with ³OTHER.²
We take another¹ as shorthand for an [Instantiation of] ³OTHER men²; we
next take ³I² as the proposer [author] of the three statements and then
must add the supplementary premise that this ³I/me² belongs to the class
³Men!² The class ³Men² can then be viewed as the UNION of the two
non-intersecting classes ³I² and ³Other men.² (Gender need not distract us
here, although elsewhere on the list several contributors continue to
confuse biological and grammatical genders.¹)
Under this intense (Nabokovian!) scrutiny, the syllogism¹ collapses as an
example of formal logical reasoning. The major premise tells us nothing
about the mortality of the ³I.² The minor premise is tautological (³I²
cannot be ³another² by definition)! The conclusion (³I am not mortal²) may
or may not be true or to MIS-use the nice Scottish legal phrase, the
VERDICT is NOT-PROVEN. (In fact, this verdict means ³not fully tested [Latin
probare] neither innocent nor guilty but open to possible RE-trial.)
As a literary construction, though, the lines can be enjoyably deconstructed
as Jansy and others have shown. Busily buried in VN¹s EO commentaries, I am
ready to believe in VN¹s omniscient (and omnivorous) precision that
there¹s a reason for every word & allusion in PF! (Is this verging an a
personality cult¹ in my studies that VN would rush to discourage? Discuss)
Pseudo-syllogisms abound in the mathematical literature I was (and am)
exposed to:
God is love
Love is blind
Therefore, God is blind.
No cat has five tails
I am no cat
Therefore, I have five tails.
A GENUINE syllogism that deserves your attention has two (factually) false
premises, unimpeachable logic, and a (factually) true conclusion.
Every body made of green cheese orbits the Earth
The Moon is made of green cheese
Therefore, the Moon orbits the Earth.
This is a VITAL reminder that (i) the validity of a syllogism is divorced
from the factual (³real²) content of its premises (ii) folks continue to
assume wrongly that the truth of a deduction implies the truth of its
premises.
Stan Kelly-Bootle
On 10/2/07 12:06, "jansymello" <jansy@AETERN.US> wrote:
> JS: A syllogism: other men die; but I
> Am not another; therefore Ill not die. (l.213-4)
>
> SK:This could be a reference to Leo Tolstoys Death of Ivan Ilyich (1886):
> All men die. Kay is a man. Therefore, Kay will die. But, thinks Ivan Ilyich,
> Im not Kay; therefore, that doesnt apply to me... The first part (about Kay)
> is an example of the type of syllogism called Barbara and Tolstoy probably
> took it from some textbook on logic ...
>
> JM: That's exactly what I was looking for: John Shade's aside was a
> quotation, not a sentence derived from some text-book on Logic. The
> "subjective twist" was maintained. In the case of Duchamp's epitaph,
> "therefore, I won't die", a fresh distortion created his particular brand of
> irony.
> I enjoyed a similar logic play in Arthur Schnitzler but he used the infinite
> regress ( If all drowning men see their lifes flash in front of them, then
> this moment must be also included and in the next flash it will also be
> included... u.s.w ). I often get the impression that some of his short-stories
> with alpine scenes ( I have "Fräulein Elsa" in mind now) are alluded in VN's
> later works, such as "Transparent Things".
>
> //snip
>
Search the archive: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/archives/nabokv-l.html
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm