Logic and Religion in Major Barbara: The Syllogism of St. Andrew Undershaft

Logic and Religion in Major Barbara: The Syllogism of St. Andrew Undershaft STUART E. BAKER The Syllogism SENSITIVE TO CHARGES that his plays were all logic and no feeling, that his characters were intellects without hearts, or that they were abstract personifications of the author's pet ideas, Shaw often had to defend the humanity of his creations and the realism of their situations, and he drew much less attention to the purely intellectual side of his work. But Shaw has long since won his point, and it should now be possible to discuss the structure of abstract logic which underlies a play like Major Barbara without prejudice to its poignant drama of spiritual crisis. For despite Shaw's justly vehement denial that his plays were "simply" logical demonstrations, just such an illustration of formal logic is at the foundation of the very human story of Major Barbara. Several years ago, Sidney P. Albert suggested that Shaw may have chosen the name of the play for its associations with the terminology of formal logic, pointing out that both "Major" and "Barbara" are words with special significance in logic. I "Barbara," one of the words used as mnemonic devices by medieval schoolmen to designate valid syllogisms, refers specifically to an argument having the form: All M is P; All S is M; therefore, All S is P. Albert failed to mention another striking coincidence which even more strongly supports a logical interpretation of the play. The symbols "S," "P," and "M" are standard in logic and refer to the three "terms" that appear in every syllogism: Subject (or minor term), Predicate (or major term), and Middle term. 241 242 STUART E. BAKER Many logicians, like mathematicians, particle physicists, and other dealers in the intangible, have a tum for whimsy, and they are often fond of illustrating their syllogisms with nouns whose initial letters are the appropriate logical symbols; for example: All Mormons are Polygamous persons; Some Salvationists are Mormons; etc. Examples of this sort have long been common in standard textbooks on logic. Now Major Barbara can be seen as an extended argument concerning the relationship among three important concepts, to wit: Salvation, Power, and Money. They are the three principal topics of conversation throughout the play. Assuming that Shaw did have logic in mind when he chose his title, he may have been thinking of a "Barbara" syllogism based on these three terms. While Shaw was not a trained logician, he was certainly familiar with the basics of logic. A "Barbara" is perhaps the simplest and most obvious form of syllogism, one which would be encountered in the most elementary textbook on formal logic. Fond as Shaw was of giving both his titles and the names of his characters special significance, it is not impossible that Major Barbara received her name when her creator realized that the argument he was presenting in his play followed strict syllogistic form. If so, he has given us a clue that can help to clarify a difficult and often puzzling play. To make a proper syllogism, however, the abstract concepts (Salvation , Power, and Money) with which the play deals would have to be expressed concretely. For the sake of clarity, as well as for other reasons, logicians prefer that the tenns of a syllogism be plural and substantive rather than singular abstractions. Thus, while the statement "All Salvation is Money" would be almost meaningless, it could be clearly translated into plural substantive terms as "All persons who achieve Salvation are persons with Money." Our syllogism will still not be as precise as might be wished simply because two of the terms are given sometimes ambiguous and sometimes clearly different meanings in the play. There is no misunderstanding about the nature of Money, but both Salvation and Power can be given either spiritual or physical meanings, and we are not always sure which interpretation is meant. An added difficulty is that it is not always clear whether one can really possess Power or only be possessed by it. Consequently, it is not certain whether the abstraction "Power" should be translated as "powerful persons" or as "persons possessed by power." Until that question is resolved, perhaps...