The universal negative is sufficiently represented by a single Fig.
But how does Aristotle prove the rule for the universal negative itself?
I would not say that this never happened; because it is not wise to assert a universal negative.
The rule for the simple conversion of the universal negative rests upon the same evidence of Induction, never contradicted.
A single instance to the contrary is enough to break down his universal negative.
Paul's universal negative challenges the contradiction of all the saints, martyrs, and heroes of Israel.
Suppose the thesis set up by the respondent to be an universal affirmative, or an universal negative.
When the Agnostic speaks of the "possibility" of miracles, he only means that we cannot prove a universal negative.
I can no more prove a universal negative about them than I can about the existence of life on the moon.
And the universal negative "nobody calls on her" is well met by the particular affirmative "I called yesterday."