71 On Rules for Determinate Supposition
On Rules for Determinate Supposition something is absent that was present in the universal proposition and it is neither a common term nor a sign distributing a common term; it is the exceptive expression with its object. Thus, it is not possible to descend in the same way in the case of 'Every man except Socrates runs' and 'Every man runs', nor is it even possible to descend to the same propositions. The first case of confused and distributive supposition is called confused and distributive mobile supposition; whereas, the second is called confused and distributive immobile supposition.
71: On Rules for Determinate Supposition Next we shall see when a common term has one kind of personal supposition and when it has another. First we shall consider the case of names and then the case of relative pronouns, for different rules apply in the two cases.
First it should be noted that when in a categorical proposition no universal sign distributing the whole extreme of a proposition is added to a term, either mediately or immediately (i.e., either on the part of the same extreme
° or on the part of the preceding extreme), and when no negation or any expression equivalent to a negative or a universal sign is added to a common term, that common term supposits determinately. For example, in the proposition 'A man is an animal', no universal sign or any negation or any expression involving a negation or a sign of universality is added to the constituent terms; therefore, both terms supposit determinately. The same should be said in the case of 'Some man runs'; for whether the sign of particularity is added or not does not alter the personal supposition of a term, although it frequently does make the term stand personally. In the same way, although
'An animal is not a man' exhibits a negation, the negation does not precede the term 'animal'; therefore, 'animal' has determinate supposition. Likewise, although the universal sign is present in 'An animal is every man', it does not precede the term 'animal'; therefore, 'animal' supposits determinately.
But in 'Every man is an animal', 'man' does not have determinate supposition since it is distributed by the universal sign. Neither does 'animal' have determinate supposition; it mediately follows the universal sign. But because, in the Latin sentence 'Videns omnem hominem est animal', the term 'omnem' does not distribute the whole subject, the predicate supposits determinately.
Thus, the following inference is valid: videns omnem hominem est hoc ani-