Page:Critique of Pure Reason 1855 Meiklejohn tr.djvu/100
predicate to a possible judgment; for example, “Every metal is a body.” All the functions of the understanding therefore can be discovered, when we can completely exhibit the functions of unity in judgments. And that this may be effected very easily, the following section will show.
Sect. II.—Of the Logical Function of the Understanding in Judgments.
§ 5.
If we abstract all the content of a judgment, and consider only the intellectual form thereof, we find that the function of thought in a judgment can be brought under four heads, of which each contains three momenta. These may be conveniently represented in the following table:—
| I. Quantity of judgments. Universal. |
||
| II. Quality. Affirmative. |
III. Relation. Categorical. | |
| IV. Modality. Problematical. |
As this division appears to differ in some, though not essential points, from the usual technic of logicians, the following observations, for the prevention of otherwise possible misunderstanding, will not be without their use.
1. Logicians say, with justice, that in the use of judgments in syllogisms, singular judgments may be treated like universal ones. For, precisely because a singular judgment has no extent at all, its predicate cannot refer to a part of that which is contained in the conception of the subject and be excluded from the rest. The predicate is valid for the whole conception just as if it were a general conception, and had extent, to the whole of which the predicate applied. On the other hand, let us compare