David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Topoi 23 (1):101-112 (2004)
In the Posterior Analytics (I 6, 75a18–27) Aristotle discusses a puzzle which endangers the possibility of inferring a non-necessary conclusion. His solution relies on the distinction between the necessity of the conclusion's being the case and the necessity of admitting the conclusion once one has admitted the premisses. The former is a factual necessity, whereas the latter is meant to be a normative or deontic necessity that is independent of the facts stated by the premisses and the conclusion. This paper maintains that Aristotle resorts to this distinction because he thinks that, as long as it is conceived as a factual relation, logical consequence cannot exist independently of the facts expressed by the premisses and the conclusion. As a corollary, the necessity of such a consequence relation always requires the necessity of these facts. Aristotle holds this factual conception of logical consequence responsible for the puzzle, since it cannot account for valid syllogisms with contingent or false premisses. The alternative conception of necessity is then introduced by him in order to make good this deficiency. The distinction between the necessity of being and the necessity of saying was revived by the Oxford logician E. W. B. Joseph, and taken over by Frank Ramsey in his seminal Truth and Probability, but has not received attention from recent interpreters of Aristotle's logic. This paper, however, argues that, in spite of its intrinsic interest, the distinction bore no significant fruit in Aristotle's logical doctrine.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Ulrich Nortmann (2002). The Logic of Necessity in Aristotle--An Outline of Approaches to the Modal Syllogistic, Together with a General Account of de Dicto - and de Re -Necessity. History and Philosophy of Logic 23 (4):253-265.
Marc Lange (2005). A Counterfactual Analysis of the Concepts of Logical Truth and Necessity. Philosophical Studies 125 (3):277 - 303.
Milton Fisk (1970). Are There Necessary Connections in Nature? Philosophy of Science 37 (3):385-404.
Fabrice Correia (2012). On the Reduction of Necessity to Essence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 84 (3):639-653.
José Hierro Pescador (1985). Mundos imposibles. Theoria 1 (1):143-157.
Royce P. Jones (1985). The Logical Status of Brain Death Criteria. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 10 (4):387-396.
José Hierro Pescador (1985). Mundos Imposibles. Theoria 1 (1):143-157.
Ross P. Cameron (2010). The Grounds of Necessity. Philosophy Compass 5 (4):348-358.
Sundar Sarukkai (2011). Possible Ideas of Necessity in Indian Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (5):563-582.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads22 ( #76,903 of 1,098,992 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #287,293 of 1,098,992 )
How can I increase my downloads?