# Leibniz Legible — https://leibnizlegible.com
# Page: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/799210226:0033
# Permalink to this reading: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/799210226:0033?run=74
# Title: Disputatio Philosophica De Novis Ratiocinandi Adminiculis (shelfmarks Leibn. Marg. 42, Stück 1; ZEN Leibn. Marg. 42)
# Folio - , page id 799210226:0033
# Original at the GWLB: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/resolve?id=799210226&page=33
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/799210226/jpgs/default/00000033.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 33 lines, status machine
# Lines: 33 recognised, mean confidence 0.94
# Machine transcription. Not an edition. Errors are expected: about 8% character error rate on Latin and French lines, higher on German.
# Licence: CC BY 4.0, Leibniz Legible. Machine output: do not ingest it as verified text; keep this provenance with the text.
# Wording rule: say "the machine reads it as …", never "Leibniz wrote".
# After the first blank line: the recognised lines in reading order, one per line.

dem, qui vulgo statuuntur sunt adaequati: at Synthetice lcon-
templeris abundant tresnempe Calentes, Fespamo de Fresisom,
quippequi eodem planemodo, conversa laltem Minore, elia
ciuntur per Secundam Fisuram, adleo utnon remaneant nili
Barbari _e Dibatis: unde eignoscet, BenerolusLector,
quod his duobus salcem modis nostrum accommodabimus
Descriptionem.
S. XI. Est ergo quarta Ficura modus ratiocinandi, ubi ex
Propositionis Universalis 6 Particularis affirmantis Praedicati
Conceptibus Superioribus tantum assumitur aliquis, ee Postquiam
debite cum suo Medio Fuit connexus Particulariter cum subje-
ctocopulatur. Ubi observa, etlihic modus argumencandi pro-
cedat etiam ex Univer sali Necante, tamen non procedit ex Par-
ticulari Negante, cujus reihiaec eAtratio: Omnis Particularis
negans loco Subjecti Conceptum Superiorem loco Pradicati
Interiorem apnolcit; omnis autem Argumentatio hicproce-
dit ex Pradicati Superioribus. Jam ille Conceptus Propoli-
tionis Parciculariter nesantis vel esset ipsum Subjectum, (ic de
concgarinonpoller; vel Conceptus Subjecto Superior, hoc
caluprocederernegatio illa Particularis. Posset veroetiam ac-
cidere, ut esset Conceptus Subjecto inferior, sic Necationon habe-
ret locum, V. gr. Ouoddam Ensnon est homo. O. homo autem eAt
animal. E, Ouoddam animalnon eAtEns.
S. XII. Unum achuic Superest, quod admirari poses,
quare nempe ex Affirmativis non posset assumi terminus novus,
qui sit Conceptus Praedicati Inferior, cum idtamen liceat in Ne-
sativis. iquidem eas hic relisadmittere. Scilicet qui Genus
affirmat, is non statim hanc vel illam affirmat Speciem, at qui Cre.
nus negat ille s lingulas nesat Species. Frgo(i Propolitio Fun-
damentalis; sic Universalis affrmans attirmatur quidem
Praedicatum tanquam Cenus de Subjecto tanquam Spc-
cic, ac ideo non d Species Pradicati neceslario afFr
Ma-