Kitap 5
14.14
There is no difference between the epicheireme and the syllogism, except that the latter has a number of forms and infers truth from truth, whereas the epicheireme is frequently concerned with statements that are no more than credible. For if it were always possible to prove controversial points from admitted premises, the orator would have little to do in this connexion.
14.15
For what skill does it require to say, The property is mine, for I am the only son of the deceased, or I am the sole heir, since possession of the testator's estate is given by the law of property in accordance with the terms of his will: the property therefore belongs to me ?
14.16
But when the reason given is itself disputable, we must establish the certainty of the premises by which we are proposing to prove what is uncertain. For example, if our opponent says You are not his son or You are illegitimate or You are not his only son ; or, again, You are not his heir or The will is invalid or You are not entitled to inherit or You have co-heirs, we must prove the validity of the reason on which we base our claim that the property should be adjudicated to us.
