Cicero writes, “ Haec ex pluribus perveniens quo vult appellatur inductio, quae Graece ἐπαγωγὴ nominatur.” Topica 10.42
What weight should we give to “vult appellatur”?
Is Cicero suggesting the appellation is common? unfamiliar? introduced here for the first time?
John
I think that quo vult, as a block, depends on perveniens. He’s giving the definition of inductio.
Commentators often say that Cicero coined the term in-ductio on the pattern of Greek ἐπ-αγωγὴ. But I wonder if the Latin supports that.
But I now see that the text is disputed. There are very few manuscripts and one has the subjunctive vult appelletur.
Editors are now saying the subjunctive is preferable. Would that support a reading in which Cicero claims to introduce the term?
Thanks @bedwere.
What then is vult doing there? Doesn’t vult need an object—in subjunctive or accusative-infinitive?
The haec is the subject of vult, right? What then does haec want to do (vult)? Or does here vult mean “works [to do what it tries to do]”?
How, literally, do you read haec ex pluribus perveniens quo vult?
This [induction] that from many [starting points] comes whither it wants
perveniens quo vult lit. “getting to where it wants” i.e. reaching its objective.
No doubt it’s clear from the context just what haec refers to, and pluribus likewise.