Return to St. Albert the Great, Logic
Prelection
In this chapter, St. Albert the Great explains why logic is not merely helpful for philosophy, but absolutely necessary for every science and for the perfection of human understanding itself. Logic teaches the mind how to move from what is known to what is unknown, how to ask questions rightly, how to reason from proper principles, and how to judge whether conclusions are true or false. Without logic, a person may possess opinions or even certain truths, but he cannot fully understand why they are true, defend them against objections, or teach them clearly to others. St. Albert therefore presents logic as the foundation of all learning and even as an aid to human happiness, since the highest act of man is the contemplative activity of the intellect seeking truth. Students of the Classical Liberal Arts Academy should read this chapter carefully, because it reveals why the study of logic has always stood at the beginning of the liberal arts tradition: it disciplines the mind, frees it from error and confusion, and prepares it for the right contemplation of truth in every science.
Chapter 03. De Utilitate Dialecticae
1. Summe autem necessaria et utilis est logica philosophiae.
Literal Translation:
“Most-of-all however necessary and useful is logic to-philosophy.”
Translation:
Logic, however, is especially necessary and useful for philosophy.
Explanation:
This sentence states very plainly the high importance of logic for the whole philosophical enterprise. Albert is not treating logic as a minor or optional discipline, but as something especially necessary and beneficial to philosophy because it guides the mind in reasoning well, distinguishing truth from error, and proceeding in an orderly way toward knowledge. For students, this line serves as a kind of programmatic claim: if philosophy seeks wisdom and truth, logic is one of its chief instruments.
2. Ex quo enim logica docet qualiter ignotum fiat notum, patet quod in nulla philosophia aliquid notum fieri potest nisi per logicae doctrinæ facultatem.
Literal Translation:
“From which for logic teaches how unknown may-be-made known, it-is-clear that in no philosophy anything known to-be-made can-be unless through of-logic’s doctrine’s faculty.”
Translation:
For since logic teaches how the unknown becomes known, it is clear that in no part of philosophy can anything be made known except through the power of the teaching of logic.
Explanation:
Albert is explaining why logic is so necessary for philosophy. Logic teaches the mind the way to move from what is not yet known to what is known, and therefore every philosophical discipline depends upon it. His point is not that logic supplies the subject matter of all the sciences, but that it provides the power or method by which the mind comes to know anything in them. For students, this means that logic is the common instrument of philosophical learning: without it, philosophy would not be able to advance from ignorance to knowledge.
3. Est enim, ut dicit Boetius in Topicis, ratio disserendi, hoc est, docens qualiter de quolibet disserendum est, quae in duas, ut dicit, distribuitur partes, scilicet scientiam inveniendi, quam topicam Graeci vocaverunt: et scientiam judicandi, quam Graeci analyticam, Latini autem resolutoriam nuncupaverunt.
Literal Translation:
“Is for, as says Boethius in (the) Topics, method of-disputing, this is, teaching how concerning anything-to-whatever it-must-be-disputed, which into two, as he says, is-distributed parts, namely science of-finding, which topical Greeks have-called: and science of-judging, which Greeks analytic, Latins however resolutory have-named.”
Translation:
For it is, as Boethius says in the Topics, the method of disputation, that is, the discipline that teaches how one ought to reason about any subject. This method is divided into two parts, as he says: the science of discovery, which the Greeks called topical, and the science of judgment, which the Greeks called analytic and the Latins called resolutory.
Explanation:
Albert is here giving a classic definition of logic from Boethius. Logic is the art or method of rational discourse, the discipline that teaches a person how to argue or reason well about any matter. He then divides it into two principal parts. The first is the art of finding arguments, called topical, which concerns discovering lines of reasoning and possible premises. The second is the art of judging arguments, called analytic or resolutory, which concerns testing, resolving, and evaluating whether the reasoning is sound. For students, this is an important distinction: logic does not only help us come up with arguments, but also helps us examine them carefully to see whether they truly lead to knowledge.
4. Constat autem quod sine dissertione et inquisitione non venitur de noto ad ignotum: quae dissertio non est nisi inquisitio disserens qualiter notum comparatur ad ignotum, qualiter se habet ad illud, ut causa, vel principium, vel signum, vel conjectura ad illud: vel contrario modo ut repugnans ad ipsum, sine quo in nulla scientia aliquid sciri potest.
Literal Translation:
“It-is-established however that without disputation and inquiry not it-is-come from known to unknown: which disputation not is unless inquiry discoursing how known is-compared to unknown, how itself it-has to that, as cause, or principle, or sign, or conjecture to that: or in-a-contrary mode as repugning to it, without which in no science anything to-be-known can-be.”
Translation:
It is clear, however, that without disputation and inquiry one does not come from what is known to what is unknown. And this disputation is nothing other than an inquiry explaining how the known is compared to the unknown, how it stands in relation to it, whether as a cause, a principle, a sign, or a conjecture in relation to it, or in a contrary way as something opposed to it, without which nothing can be known in any science.
Explanation:
Albert is explaining more fully how the mind moves from what it already knows to what it does not yet know. This movement requires inquiry and rational discussion, because knowledge does not arise by accident. One must examine how a known thing is related to the unknown thing one is trying to understand. That relation may be positive, as when the known serves as cause, principle, sign, or probable indication of the unknown, or negative, as when it stands in opposition to it. In either case, science depends upon grasping these relations correctly. For students, the central point is that logic is necessary because it teaches the mind how to trace these ordered relations and so advance from prior knowledge to new knowledge.
5. Quoad hoc ergo, quod scientia est docens disserere de omni re, non tantum est utilis in se, sed etiam necessaria est ad omne quod scire intendimus.
Literal Translation:
“As-to this therefore, that science is teaching to-dispute concerning every thing, not only is useful in itself, but also necessary is to every thing which to-know we-intend.”
Translation:
Therefore, insofar as it is a science that teaches one to reason about every subject, it is not only useful in itself, but also necessary for everything that we intend to know.
Explanation:
Albert is drawing a practical conclusion from his account of logic. Because logic teaches a person how to reason about any subject whatsoever, it is not merely one helpful discipline among others. It is universally needed wherever knowledge is sought. Its usefulness lies not only in its own subject matter, but in the fact that it serves every other inquiry by directing the mind in right reasoning. For students, this means that logic is a foundational art of learning itself: whatever we hope to know well, we must approach through the habits and methods that logic provides.
6. Propter quod Aristoteles frequenter dicit in diversis libris suis, quod causa erroris antiquorum fuit, quia scientiam logicam non invenerunt sive habuerunt.
Literal Translation:
“On-account-of which Aristotle frequently says in diverse books of-his, that cause of-error of-(the) ancients was, because science logical they did-not-discover or have.”
Translation:
For this reason Aristotle frequently says in his various books that the cause of the error of the ancients was that they did not discover or possess the science of logic.
Explanation:
Albert is stressing again how fundamental logic is for sound thought. He says that Aristotle often attributes the mistakes of earlier thinkers to their lack of logic, that is, to their not having a developed science of reasoning by which truth could be distinguished from error. The point is not simply historical criticism, but a philosophical lesson: when the mind lacks the proper method for inquiry, argument, and judgment, it is much more likely to fall into confusion. For students, this reinforces Albert’s larger claim that logic is not an optional ornament of philosophy, but a necessary instrument for avoiding error and attaining knowledge.
7. Docet enim logica principia qualiter hoc et quibus principiis et quibus argumentis de quolibet scibili disserendum est: qui modus nisi sciatur, scibile inveniri non potest; quia is qui quaerit modum invenienda scientiam scibilis illius non habet propter quid.
Literal Translation:
“For logic teaches principles how this and by-which principles and by-which arguments concerning each knowable-(thing) it-must-be-discoursed: which mode unless it-may-be-known, knowable-(thing) to-be-found not can; because he who seeks (the) mode of-finding, (the) science of-that knowable-(thing) not has, (the) because-why.”
Translation:
For logic teaches the principles of how one must reason about each knowable thing, and by what principles and by what arguments this must be done. Unless this method is known, the knowable object cannot be discovered, because the person who is still seeking the method of discovery does not yet possess scientific knowledge of that knowable thing, that is, knowledge of the reason why.
Explanation:
Albert’s point is that logic does not merely tell us that we should reason; it teaches the actual principles and arguments by which reasoning must proceed in each case. Without knowing that method, one cannot truly arrive at knowledge of the thing in question. The last clause makes an important scholastic distinction: someone who is still looking for the right method has not yet attained scientia, because he does not yet know the propter quid, the reason why the thing is so. Logic is therefore necessary not only for beginning inquiry but for reaching genuine science, which requires ordered knowledge through causes. The wording of the sentence is a little compressed, especially near the end, but that is the clear sense of the passage.
8. Etiam Aristoteles dicit quod modus sciendi ante scientiam quamlibet discendus est ut per illum modum scientia cuiuslibet scibilis inveniatur.
Literal Translation:
“Also Aristotle says that mode of-knowing before science whatever to-be-learned is, so-that through that mode science of-any knowable-(thing) may-be-found.”
Translation:
Aristotle also says that the mode of knowing must be learned before any science, so that through that mode the science of any knowable thing may be discovered.
Explanation:
Albert continues to emphasize that logic must come first in the order of learning. Before a person can master any particular science, he must first learn the method by which knowledge is properly attained. That is what is meant by the “mode of knowing”: the disciplined way the mind proceeds to truth. Logic provides that method, and therefore it serves as a kind of introduction to all the sciences. For students, the point is simple but important: if one does not first learn how to think, argue, and inquire rightly, one will not be well prepared to discover the truths belonging to any particular field of study.
9. Cum enim scientia habitus sit conclusionis, oportet quod concludere sciat ille qui scientiam accipit.
Literal Translation:
“Since for science a habit is of-conclusion, it-behooves that to-conclude may-know that-one who science receives.”
Translation:
For since science is a habit of conclusion, the one who receives science must know how to draw a conclusion.
Explanation:
Albert is saying that scientific knowledge is not merely a collection of facts, but a stable intellectual habit by which the mind grasps conclusions properly derived from principles. Because of that, anyone who is to receive or acquire science must already know how to conclude, that is, how to reason from premises to a demonstrated result. This continues his larger argument about the necessity of logic: if science consists in rightly formed conclusions, then logic is needed because it teaches the mind how such conclusions are made.
10. Non autem concludere scit, qui nescit quod concludere debeat.
Literal Translation:
“Not however to-conclude knows, who not-knows what to-conclude he-ought.”
Translation:
However, he does not know how to draw a conclusion who does not know what he ought to conclude.
Explanation:
Albert is making a very precise point about the nature of reasoning. It is not enough merely to go through the motions of argument; a person truly knows how to conclude only if he knows what conclusion properly follows from the premises. In other words, good reasoning requires not just the act of concluding, but judgment about the right conclusion to draw. This fits his larger argument that logic is necessary for science, because logic teaches the mind not only to reason, but to reason correctly and to recognize what ought to be concluded.
11. Et cum nihil concludi debeat nisi quaestio, oportet* quod sciat quid et qualiter quaerendum est id quod concludi intenditur.
Literal Translation:
“And since nothing to-be-concluded ought except (a) question, it-behooves that he-may-know what and how to-be-sought is that which to-be-concluded is-intended.”
Translation:
And since nothing ought to be concluded except a question, he must know what is to be asked and how that which is intended to be concluded is to be sought.
Explanation:
Albert is moving backward from conclusion to inquiry. If a conclusion properly answers a question, then anyone who wants to conclude rightly must first know what question is being asked and how to investigate it. In other words, sound reasoning depends on sound questioning. Logic therefore does not only govern the final step of drawing conclusions; it also governs the earlier step of framing the issue correctly and pursuing it in the right way. The asterisk after oportet suggests there may be a textual note or editorial mark in the source, but it does not change the basic sense of the sentence.
12. Adhuc concludere se nescit qui nescit ex quibus et qualibus et qua conclusione concludendum est.
Literal Translation:
“Still to-conclude himself he-knows-not who not-knows out-of which-things and of-what-sort and by-which conclusion it-must-be-concluded.”
Translation:
Further, he does not know how to conclude who does not know from what things, of what sort, and by what conclusion one must conclude.
Explanation:
Albert continues to show that sound reasoning requires more than merely arriving at some ending statement. A person does not truly know how to conclude unless he knows the materials from which the conclusion should be drawn, the kind or quality those premises must have, and the kind of conclusion that ought to follow from them. In other words, proper reasoning requires judgment about premises as well as about the conclusion itself. This strengthens Albert’s larger argument that logic is necessary for science, because logic teaches not just that conclusions exist, but how they must be formed from fitting principles in an ordered way.
13. Haec autem omnia nulla docet philosophia nisi tantum logica.
Literal Translation:
“These however all things no philosophy teaches unless only logic.”
Translation:
But no philosophy teaches all these things except logic alone.
Explanation:
Albert is summing up the argument he has been making about the necessity of logic. All the matters just mentioned, how to ask rightly, how to reason from proper premises, and how to draw fitting conclusions, are not taught by the other branches of philosophy as such. Logic alone teaches them. The point is that logic has a unique role within philosophy: it is the discipline that forms the mind in the very methods of inquiry and reasoning that every other science presupposes. For students, this sentence is a concise statement of why logic is foundational. Other sciences teach truths about their subjects, but logic teaches how the mind must proceed in order to discover and judge truth at all.
14. Non ergo tantum utilis est et adminiculans ad omnes scientias, sed etiam necessaria.
Literal Translation:
“Not therefore only useful is and helping toward all sciences, but also necessary.”
Translation:
Therefore, it is not only useful and assisting for all the sciences, but also necessary.
Explanation:
Albert is drawing the conclusion of the argument developed in the preceding sentences. Logic is not merely a helpful support that makes the sciences easier to pursue; it is something genuinely required for them. Since every science depends on asking rightly, reasoning rightly, and concluding rightly, and since logic alone teaches these things, logic stands as a necessary instrument for all the sciences. For students, this sentence is a strong summary of Albert’s view: logic is foundational because without it the sciences would lack the method by which knowledge is properly attained.
15. Propter quod nescientes logicam, etiam id quod scire videntur, nesciunt se scire: quia nesciunt qualiter unumquodque sciri oportet, et qualiter probandum vel improbandum est.
Literal Translation:
“On-account-of which not-knowing logic, even that which to-know they-seem, they-know-not themselves to-know: because they know-not how each-thing to-be-known it-behooves, and how to-be-proved or to-be-disproved it is.”
Translation:
For this reason, those who do not know logic, even when they seem to know something, do not know that they know it, because they do not know how each thing ought to be known, and how it ought to be proved or disproved.
Explanation:
Albert is making a subtle but important point. A person may happen to possess some true opinion or even some real knowledge, but without logic he does not fully understand the mode by which that thing is known. He cannot judge whether it has been properly demonstrated, nor can he tell how it should be defended or refuted. So his grasp remains incomplete and unstable. For students, the lesson is that logic gives not only knowledge, but reflective command over knowledge: it teaches a person to know why he knows, how a thing should be established, and how error against it should be answered.
16. Adhuc autem tales in scitis suis nullam habent potestatem, dum nesciunt propter quod scitis suis assentiunt, nec qualiter contradictionibus respondere debeant.
Literal Translation:
“Further however such-(men) in known-things their no power have, while they know-not on-account-of what to-known-things their they-assent, nor how to-contradictions they-ought to-respond.”
Translation:
Further, such men have no command over the things they know, since they do not know why they assent to the things they know, nor how they ought to answer objections.
Explanation:
Albert continues his argument about the necessity of logic by saying that those who lack it do not truly possess mastery over their knowledge. Even if they hold true conclusions, they do not understand the reason why they assent to them, and so their knowledge is weak and unsteady. Because they also do not know how to respond to contradictions or objections, they cannot defend what they know against challenge. For students, the point is that logic gives not just possession of truths, but intellectual command of them: it enables a person to know the grounds of his assent and to answer opposing arguments well.
17. Hoc autem scit logicus, si perfecte scientiam disserendi de quolibet sit adeptus.
Literal Translation:
“This however knows (the) logician, if perfectly (the) science of-disputing concerning anything he-may-have-attained.”
Translation:
The logician, however, knows this, if he has perfectly attained the science of reasoning about anything whatever.
Explanation:
Albert is concluding the point he has been making about the superiority of the trained logician. The one who has truly mastered logic knows why assent should be given, how arguments are formed, and how objections should be answered, because he has acquired the science of reasoning in a complete way. The phrase “about anything whatever” shows the universal scope of logic: it is not restricted to one subject matter, but gives the mind a method that can be applied across all fields of inquiry. For students, this means that the accomplished logician has not merely learned a few argumentative tricks, but has gained a disciplined habit of thought that enables him to handle questions, proofs, and objections with real intellectual command.
18. Adhuc autem nesciens logicam, etsi scire aliquid videatur, nescit tamen, sicut jam supra diximus, cum rationem sui sciti nesciat: et se habet ad scitum et ad actum sciendi, sicut ignis ad comburere lignum.
Literal Translation:
“Further however not-knowing logic, even-if to-know something he-may-seem, he-knows-not nevertheless, just-as already above we-have-said, since (the) reason of-his known-(thing) he-knows-not: and himself he-has toward (the) known-(thing) and toward (the) act of-knowing, just-as fire toward to-burn wood.”
Translation:
Further, one who does not know logic, even if he seems to know something, nevertheless does not truly know, as we have already said above, since he does not know the reason for what he knows. And he is related to the thing known and to the act of knowing as fire is related to burning wood.
Explanation:
Albert deepens his point here by saying that someone without logic may appear to know, but does not possess knowledge in the fullest sense, because he does not know the reason why what he knows is true. The comparison to fire is striking. Fire really does burn wood, but it does so by natural power, not by understanding what it is doing. In the same way, a person without logic may arrive at something true, but he does not have reflective command of that truth or of the act by which he knows it. For students, the point is that logic gives not just possession of conclusions, but conscious intellectual mastery of them.
19. Et ideo scientis est (ut in prima philosophia docet Aristoteles) posse docere.
Literal Translation:
“And therefore of-(the) knower it-is, (as in first philosophy teaches Aristotle) to-be-able to-teach.”
Translation:
And therefore it belongs to the one who knows, as Aristotle teaches in the First Philosophy, to be able to teach.
Explanation:
Albert is drawing an important consequence from the nature of true knowledge. If someone really knows, he does not merely hold a true conclusion privately, but understands it well enough to communicate it to another. That is why the ability to teach is taken as a sign of genuine science. Aristotle’s point, which Albert repeats, is that real knowledge includes grasp of causes and reasons, and such grasp makes explanation possible. For students, this means that teaching is not an accidental extra added onto knowledge; it is one of the clearest signs that a person truly understands what he claims to know.
20. Docere autem non potest, qui rationem sciti nescit exponere.
Literal Translation:
“To-teach however not he-is-able, who (the) reason of-(the) known-(thing) knows-not to-explain.”
Translation:
However, he cannot teach who does not know how to explain the reason for what is known.
Explanation:
Albert is stating the complement of the previous sentence. If true knowledge belongs to one who can teach, then a person who cannot explain the reason for what he knows does not yet possess that knowledge in a fully scientific way. The issue is not merely having the right answer, but being able to set forth the cause or account that makes the answer intelligible. For students, this reinforces Albert’s larger argument that logic is necessary for science: logic trains the mind not only to hold conclusions, but to unfold the reasoning by which they can be explained and taught.
21. Nescit autem exponere sui sciti rationem, qui causas et principia logicae non novit.
Literal Translation:
“Knows-not however to-explain of-his known-(thing) (the) reason, who causes and principles of-logic knows-not.”
Translation:
However, the man who does not know the causes and principles of logic does not know how to explain the reason for what he knows.
Explanation:
Albert continues linking true knowledge with the ability to give an account of it. A person may hold something true, but if he does not know the causes and principles of logic, he cannot unfold the reasoning by which that truth is established. That means he cannot adequately explain why it is so. For students, the point is that logic provides the underlying principles that make rational explanation possible. Without those principles, knowledge remains inarticulate and cannot rise to the level of fully scientific understanding.
22. Erit igitur talis etiam in his quae scire videtur, sicut idiota se habet ad habentem litteram.
Literal Translation:
“Will-be therefore such-(a man) even in these things which to-know he-seems, as (an) unlearned-man himself has toward (one) having learning.”
Translation:
Therefore such a man, even in the things he seems to know, will be as an unlearned man is in relation to one who has learning.
Explanation:
Albert is concluding the comparison very sharply. A person who lacks logic may appear to know certain things, but his relation to true science is like that of an unlearned person standing before someone who is genuinely educated. The contrast is not merely between having some information and having more information, but between lacking the principles of understanding and possessing them. For students, the point is that logic gives intellectual literacy. Without it, even apparent knowledge remains crude and dependent, because the person does not grasp the reasons, causes, and order by which true learning is established.
23. Talis etiam neque suum neque alterius deprehendit errorem, quia non habet habitum per quem dijudicet utrum recte sciat quod scit, vel non recte.
Literal Translation:
“Such-(a man) also neither his own nor of-another’s he-detects error, because not he-has (the) habit through which he-may-judge whether rightly he-may-know what he-knows, or not rightly.”
Translation:
Such a man also detects neither his own error nor that of another, because he does not have the habit by which he may judge whether he knows rightly what he knows, or not rightly.
Explanation:
Albert continues describing the weakness of someone who lacks logic. Such a person cannot recognize error, whether in himself or in someone else, because he lacks the intellectual habit by which judgments about knowledge are rightly made. The important point is that logic gives a person not only the ability to reason, but also the power to evaluate reasoning. Without that habit, one may possess opinions or even some truths, but one cannot reliably judge whether they are well grounded or badly held. For students, this shows that logic is necessary not just for discovering truth, but also for discerning truth from error.
24. Adhuc autem per hoc quod inveniendi de quodlibet scitum scientia est per habitudines unius ad alterum, quae topicae sive locales vocantur, quibus intellectus vel opinio vel fides vel existimatio vel suspicio locatur in alio, quod iam intus habetur in animo quaerentis.
Literal Translation:
“Further however through this that of-finding concerning whatever known-(thing) science is through relations of-one to another, which topical or local-(things) are-called, by-which intellect or opinion or faith or estimation or suspicion is-placed in another, which already within is-held in (the) soul of-(the) seeker.”
Translation:
Further, because the science of discovering something about any knowable matter proceeds through the relations of one thing to another, and these are called topical or local relations, by them intellect, opinion, faith, judgment, or suspicion is directed toward another thing by means of what is already held inwardly in the mind of the one seeking.
Explanation:
Albert is now explaining the art of discovery more precisely in terms of the Topics or “places” of argument. The mind does not discover truth at random, but by moving from one thing to another through recognized relations or connections. These relations are called topical or local because they are like intellectual places from which arguments are drawn. By means of them, the mind can extend what it already has within itself, whether knowledge, opinion, belief, judgment, or even suspicion, toward something further that it is trying to understand. The sentence is a little compressed in wording, especially around de quodlibet scitum, but the main point is clear: logic supplies ordered paths by which the mind advances from what it already possesses to what it seeks to know.
25. Sine logica nec ad inquirendum, neque ad inveniendum aliquid procedi potest, nec etiam quando quaesitum invenitur, sciri potest an inventum vel non inventum sit.
Literal Translation:
“Without logic neither to inquiring, nor to finding something it-can-be-proceeded, nor even when (the) sought-(thing) is-found, to-be-known it-can-be whether found or not found it may-be.”
Translation:
Without logic, one can proceed neither to inquiry nor to discovery of anything; nor even when what has been sought is found can it be known whether it has been found or not found.
Explanation:
Albert is insisting again that logic is necessary at every stage of knowing. Without logic, a person cannot even begin inquiry properly, nor can he carry it through to discovery. More than that, even if he happens upon the right answer, he still cannot judge whether he has truly found what he was seeking. The point is that logic does not merely help us arrive at conclusions; it also gives the mind the power to recognize and judge its own success in inquiry. For students, this shows how deeply foundational logic is: it governs the search for truth, the discovery of truth, and the judgment that the truth has in fact been found.
26. Manifestum est igitur, quod etiam quoad hoc logica non tantum utilis est, sed necessaria etiam est ad omnem philosophiam.
Literal Translation:
“Manifest is therefore, that also as-to this logic not only useful is, but necessary also is to every philosophy.”
Translation:
Therefore it is clear that, even in this respect, logic is not only useful, but also necessary for all philosophy.
Explanation:
Albert is drawing yet another conclusion from the argument he has been developing. Logic is not merely a helpful aid to philosophy; it is required for philosophy’s work itself. In this context, “even in this respect” points back to the whole process of inquiry, discovery, and judgment: logic is needed not only to seek and find truth, but also to recognize that truth has in fact been found. For students, this sentence reinforces Albert’s central claim that logic is universally necessary because every branch of philosophy depends on the mind’s being guided rightly in its movement toward truth.
27. Adhuc autem etiam per hoc quod judicandi scientia est (quia id quod inventum est, dijudicatur an recte per sua principia scitum sit) necessaria ad omnem philosophiam est logica scientia.
Literal Translation:
“Further however also through this that of-judging science it-is (because that which found is, is-judged whether rightly through its principles known it-may-be) necessary to all philosophy is logical science.”
Translation:
Further, also because it is the science of judging, logic is necessary for all philosophy, since what has been discovered is judged as to whether it has been rightly known through its proper principles.
Explanation:
Albert now adds another reason why logic is necessary for every part of philosophy: logic does not only help us discover things, but also judge them. Once something has been found, it still remains to determine whether it has truly been known in the right way, that is, through its proper principles. Logic supplies this power of judgment. For students, this is an important refinement in Albert’s argument. Philosophy needs logic not only to move from ignorance to discovery, but also to test whether that discovery really amounts to science. Logic is therefore necessary both for finding truth and for judging whether what has been found is genuinely known.
28. Hoc autem docet logica dupliciter, resolvere docens scitum in principia, scilicet consequentiae quae sunt in figuris et modis consequentiarum syllogisticarum: et in principia realia eius quod sequitur sicut in causas immediatas et essentiales et convertibiles cum eo quod scitum est per conclusionem: quo judicio omne quod scitur, quasi ponderatur, ad aequilibrium rationis reducens omne quod in omnibus physicis quaeritur ad sciendum.
Literal Translation:
“This however teaches logic doubly, to-resolve teaching (the) known-(thing) into principles, namely of-consequence which are in figures and moods of-consequences syllogistic: and into principles real of-that which follows just-as into causes immediate and essential and convertible with that which known is through conclusion: by-which judgment every-(thing) which is-known, as-if is-weighed, to equality-of-reason reducing every-(thing) which in all physical-(things) is-sought for knowing.”
Translation:
Logic teaches this in two ways: by teaching one to resolve what is known into principles, namely into the principles of consequence found in the figures and moods of syllogistic inference, and into the real principles of what follows, that is, into the immediate, essential, and reciprocal causes of that which is known through the conclusion. By this judgment, everything that is known is, as it were, weighed, since logic reduces to the balance of reason everything that is sought for knowledge in all natural matters.
Explanation:
Albert is explaining that logic judges what has been discovered in two distinct but related ways. First, it analyzes the reasoning itself, resolving a conclusion back into the formal principles of valid inference, especially the figures and moods of syllogisms. Second, it resolves the conclusion into the real principles of the thing known, that is, into the immediate and essential causes that truly explain it and correspond to it. So logic tests both the correctness of the argument and the soundness of the causal account. That is why he says that what is known is “weighed” by this judgment: logic serves as a kind of rational measure, bringing inquiries, even in natural philosophy, under the balance and order of reason.
29. Est autem non tantum necessaria, sed etiam utilis haec scientia: sicut bonum est felicitas hominis secundum optimae partis animae hominis perfectissimum actum, hoc est, secundum intellectum contemplativum: nec contemplari potest intellectus, nisi noverit contemplationis principia, et sciat invenire quod quaerit contemplari, et dijudicare idipsum quod jam contemplatur inventum.
Literal Translation:
“Is however not only necessary, but also useful this science: just-as good is happiness of-man according-to of-(the) best part of-(the) soul of-man (the) most-perfect act, this is, according-to intellect contemplative: nor to-contemplate is-able intellect, unless it-may-have-known of-contemplation (the) principles, and may-know to-find that which it-seeks to-contemplate, and to-judge the-very-same thing which already it-contemplates found.”
Translation:
This science, however, is not only necessary but also useful. For the good of man is happiness according to the most perfect act of the best part of man’s soul, that is, according to the contemplative intellect. And the intellect cannot contemplate unless it knows the principles of contemplation, knows how to find what it seeks to contemplate, and can judge that very thing which it now contemplates as having been found.
Explanation:
Albert now connects logic not only with philosophy in general, but with man’s highest good. Human happiness lies in the highest act of the soul’s best power, namely the contemplative intellect. But contemplation does not happen blindly or by accident. The intellect must know the principles from which contemplation proceeds, must be able to discover the object it seeks to contemplate, and must be able to judge rightly what it has found. Logic is useful, then, because it serves this highest human activity. It helps the mind reach truth, recognize truth, and hold truth in an ordered way, and for that reason it supports the very perfection of human intellectual life.
30. Patet conclusio, quod prae omnibus utilis est ad felicitatem haec scientia, sine qua non attingitur felicitatis actus, et per quam ipse felix actum non impeditae recipit operationis.
Literal Translation:
“Clear (is the) conclusion, that before all-(things) useful is to happiness this science, without which not is-attained (the) act of-happiness, and through which the very happy-(man) (the) act of-unimpeded operation receives.”
Translation:
The conclusion is clear: this science is useful for happiness above all things, since without it the act of happiness is not attained, and through it the happy man himself receives the act of unimpeded operation.
Explanation:
Albert is drawing the practical conclusion of his whole argument about logic. Logic is not merely one helpful discipline among others, but is especially useful for attaining happiness, because happiness consists in the soul’s highest intellectual act. Without logic, that act cannot be properly reached, since the mind would lack the principles for discovering and judging truth. Through logic, however, the happy man receives an operation that is not impeded, that is, an intellectual activity able to proceed rightly and freely toward contemplation. For students, the main point is that logic serves the highest end of human life by helping the intellect attain its proper and most perfect act.
31. Haec enim scientia a phantasiis (quae videntur et non sunt) liberat, errores damnat, et ostendit falsitates, et lumen dat rectae contemplationis in omnibus.
Literal Translation:
“For this science from phantasies (which seem and are not) frees, errors condemns, and shows falsehoods, and light gives of-right contemplation in all-(things).”
Translation:
For this science frees one from appearances that seem to be and are not, condemns errors, reveals falsehoods, and gives the light of right contemplation in all things.
Explanation:
Albert is here praising logic by describing its effects on the mind. Logic frees us from mere appearances, from things that look true but are not, and so protects us from deception. It also condemns errors and exposes falsehoods, meaning that it not only helps us find truth but also teaches us to reject what is false. The final phrase is especially important: logic gives the light of right contemplation in all things. That means it orders the intellect so that it can see clearly and judge rightly across the whole range of inquiry. For students, the point is that logic is not just a technical art of argument, but a discipline that purifies and illumines the mind for the sake of truth.
32. Prae omnibus igitur consideranda est haec scientia.
Literal Translation:
“Before all-(things) therefore to-be-considered is this science.”
Translation:
Therefore, this science ought to be considered before all others.
Explanation:
Albert is drawing the practical conclusion of his praise of logic. Since logic frees the mind from error, exposes falsehood, and gives the light needed for right contemplation, it deserves to be studied before every other science. The point is not merely that logic is one important subject among many, but that it has priority because it prepares the intellect for all the rest. For students, this means that logic comes first in the order of learning, because it equips the mind with the discipline needed to pursue every other branch of philosophy well.
Notes:
- oportet: text actually reads porteto, which is assumed to be an error.
Return to St. Albert the Great, Logic
