Search results for 'Diodorus Cronus' (try it on Scholar)

147 found
Order:
  1.  8
    Diodorus Cronus (1965). Time, Truth and Ability. Analysis 25 (4):137 - 141.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  2.  11
    Diodorus Cronus (1971). The Governance of the Kingdom of Darkness:A Philosophical Fable. Southern Journal of Philosophy 9 (2):113-118.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Theodor Ebert (2006). Art. Diodorus Cronus. In Donald M. Borchert (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2nd edition. vol. 3. Thomson Gale 87.
    The article discusses the biographical and doxographical evidence for Diodorus Cronus, a prominent and influential figure at the start of Hellenistic philosophy. Special emphasis is given to Diodorus’ logic, as well to his controversy with Philo the Dialectician over the truth-criteria for the conditional as to his Master argument, concerning modal notions.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Anton F. Mikel (1992). The Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus. Dissertation, The Florida State University
    My dissertation deals with the Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus, a contemporary of Aristotle's. The argument was one of the most famous pieces of temporal and modal reasoning in ancient philosophy. It purports to prove that a proposition is possible if and only if it is true or will be true. The argument runs as follows: Everything that is past and true is necessary; The impossible does not follow the possible; Therefore, nothing is possible which neither is nor (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  52
    Richard Gaskin (1995). The Sea Battle and the Master Argument: Aristotle and Diodorus Cronus on the Metaphysics of the Future. W. De Gruyter.
    Preliminaries: Terminology and Notation We may make a distinction between temporally definite and temporally indefinite sentences. ...
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  6.  26
    Yehoshua Bar-Hillel (1965). Et Tu, Diodorus Cronus? Analysis 26 (2):54 - 56.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  12
    N. Denyer (2002). Neglected Evidence for Diodorus Cronus. Classical Quarterly 52 (2):597-600.
  8.  34
    Nicholas Denyer (1981). Time and Modality in Diodorus Cronus. Theoria 47 (1):31-53.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  9.  12
    Nicholas Denyer (2009). Diodorus Cronus: Modality, The Master Argument and Formalisation. Humana.Mente 8.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  17
    Frederick Seymour Michael (1976). What Is the Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus? American Philosophical Quarterly 13 (3):229 - 235.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  11.  27
    Rod Bertolet & William L. Rowe (1979). The Fatalism of 'Diodorus Cronus'. Analysis 39 (3):137 - 138.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  11
    Hermann Weidemann (2008). Aristotle, the Megarics, and Diodorus Cronus on the Notion of Possibility. American Philosophical Quarterly 45 (2):131 - 148.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  1
    David Leith (2014). Causing Doubts: Diodorus Cronus and Herophilus of Chalcedon on Causality. Classical Quarterly 64 (2):592-608.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  10
    David Sedley, Diodorus Cronus. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  2
    Ludger Jansen (2011). The Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus. In Michael Bruce & Steven Barbone (eds.), Just the Arguments: 100 of the Most Important Arguments in Western Philosophy. Wiley-Blackwell
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. P. Ohrstrom (1980). A New Reconstruction of the Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus. International Logic Review 21:60.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Susanne Bobzien (1993). Chrysippus' Modal Logic and Its Relation to Philo and Diodorus. In K. Doering & Th Ebert (eds.), Dialektiker und Stoiker. Franz Steiner 63--84.
    ABSTRACT: The modal systems of the Stoic logician Chrysippus and the two Hellenistic logicians Philo and Diodorus Cronus have survived in a fragmentary state in several sources. From these it is clear that Chrysippus was acquainted with Philo’s and Diodorus’ modal notions, and also that he developed his own in contrast of Diodorus’ and in some way incorporated Philo’s. The goal of this paper is to reconstruct the three modal systems, including their modal definitions and modal (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  61
    Susanne Bobzien (1999). Logic: The Megarics. In Keimpe Algra & et al (eds.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press
    ABSTRACT: Summary presentation of the surviving logic theories of Philo the Dialectician (aka Philo of Megara) and Diodorus Cronus, including some general remarks on propositional logical elements in their logic, a presentation of their theories of the conditional and a presentation of their modal theories, including a brief suggestion for a solution of the Master Argument.
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19.  14
    Susanne Bobzien (1986). Die stoische Modallogik (Stoic Modal Logic). Königshausen & Neumann.
    ABSTRACT: Part 1 discusses the Stoic notion of propositions (assertibles, axiomata): their definition; their truth-criteria; the relation between sentence and proposition; propositions that perish; propositions that change their truth-value; the temporal dependency of propositions; the temporal dependency of the Stoic notion of truth; pseudo-dates in propositions. Part 2 discusses Stoic modal logic: the Stoic definitions of their modal notions (possibility, impossibility, necessity, non-necessity); the logical relations between the modalities; modalities as properties of propositions; contingent propositions; the relation between the Stoic (...)
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  20.  30
    Susanne Bobzien (1987). Robert Muller (éd.), Les Mégariques. Fragments et témoignages. [REVIEW] Gnomon 59:648-51.
    ABSTRACT: Discussion (in German) of Robert Muller's "Les Megariques, Fragments et temoignages". Traduit et commentes. Paris, Vrin 1985, with focus on his commentary on ancient paradoxes.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  36
    Tomasz Jarmużek & Andrzej Pietruszczak (2009). The Tense Logic for Master Argument in Prior's Reconstruction. Studia Logica 92 (1):85 - 108.
    In this paper we examine Prior’s reconstruction of Master Argument [4] in some modal-tense logic. This logic consists of a purely tense part and Diodorean definitions of modal alethic operators. Next we study this tense logic in the pure tense language. It is the logic K t 4 plus a new axiom ( P ): ‘ p Λ G p ⊃ P G p ’. This formula was used by Prior in his original analysis of Master Argument. ( P ) (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  14
    John Sutula (1976). Diodorus and the “Master Argument”. Southern Journal of Philosophy 14 (3):323-343.
    Diodorus cronus was a megaric logician who was reputed to have derived from uncontroversial premises the surprising conclusion that the possible is that which either is or will be the case. Versions of his lost argument have been reconstructed recently by prior, Hintikka, And rescher. I analyze and compare these versions and argue that none of them forms a sound argument.
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Michael Anthony Istvan (2014). Es la Respuesta de Aristóteles Al Argumento de Fatalismo En De Interpretatione 9 Exitosa?” / “Is Aristotle’s Response to the Argument for Fatalism in De Interpretatione 9 Successful? Ideas Y Valores 154.
    My aim is to figure out whether Aristotle’s response to the argument for fatalism in De Interpretatione 9 is successful. By “response” here I mean not simply the reasons he offers to highlight why fatalism does not accord with how we conduct our lives, but also the solution he devises to block the argument he provides for it. Achieving my aim hence demands that I figure out what exactly is the argument for fatalism he voices, what exactly is his solution, (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Jules Vuillemin (1996). Necessity or Contingency: The Master Argument. Center for the Study of Language and Inf.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Jules Vuillemin & Fondation Singer-Polignac (1984). Nécessité Ou Contingence l'Aporie de Diodore Et les Systèmes Philosophiques. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
    No categories
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  25
    Susanne Bobzien (2004). Dialectical School. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    The ‘Dialectical school’ denotes a group of early Hellenistic philosophers that were loosely connected by philosophizing in the — Socratic — tradition of Eubulides of Megara and by their interest in logical paradoxes, propositional logic and dialectical expertise. . Its two best known members, Diodorus Cronus and Philo the Logician, made groundbreaking contributions to the development of theories of conditionals and modal logic. Philo introduced a version of material implication; Diodorus devised a forerunner of strict implication. Each (...)
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  27.  71
    Susanne Bobzien (2006). Ancient Logic. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    ABSTRACT: A comprehensive introduction to ancient (western) logic from earliest times to the 6th century CE, with an emphasis on topics which may be of interest to contemporary logicians. Content: 1. Pre-Aristotelian Logic 1.1 Syntax and Semantics 1.2 Argument Patterns and Valid Inference 2. Aristotle 2.1 Dialectics 2.2 Sub-sentential Classifications 2.3 Syntax and Semantics of Sentences 2.4 Non-modal Syllogistic 2.5 Modal Logic 3. The early Peripatetics: Theophrastus and Eudemus 3.1 Improvements and Modifications of Aristotle's Logic 3.2 Prosleptic Syllogisms 3.3 Forerunners (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Theodor Ebert (1991). Dialektiker und fruehe Stoiker bei Sextus Empiricus. Untersuchungen zur Enstehung der Aussagenlogik. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
    This monograph discusses the sources for ancient propositional logic, mainly in Sextus Empiricus and Diogenes Laertius bk. VII. It is argued that most of the sources in Sextus which have hitherto been taken to be sources for Stoic logic either do not report Stoic logic at all or report pre-Chrysippean Stoic logic. These texts report (in the first case) a group labelled the Dialecticians whose most prominent members were Diodorus Cronus and Philo or else (in the second case) (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  29.  6
    Kazimierz Trzesicki (1987). Is Discreteness of Time Necessary for Diodorean Master Argument. Bulletin of the Section of Logic 16 (3):125-131.
    The well known Master Argument of ancient Stoic logician Diodorus Cronus is an argument in favour of the philosophical doctrine of fatalism. Perhaps in antiquity this argument was a subject of the most celebrated controversy about temporal truth and modality. This argument is a subject of logical analysis, especially in connection with temporal logic, also today. 1 The most elegant tense-logical formulation of the Master Argument has been given by A. N. Prior. Discreteness and irreflexivity of time are (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  1
    Michael J. White (1986). What Worried the Crows? Classical Quarterly 36 (02):534-.
    A well-known epigram by Callimachus on the philosopher Diodorus Cronus reads as follows:The question of the third line, while perhaps recondite from a contemporary perspective, was clear in antiquity. The crows are asking ‘What follows ?’, in allusion to the Hellenistic disputes concerning the truth conditions of conditional propositions , disputes in which the views of Diodorus figured prominently.I agree with Sedley that the question of the last line is ‘much more problematic’. The common interpretation has been (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  31.  5
    Paolo Crivelli (1994). The Stoic Analysis of Tense and of Plural Propositions in Sextus Empiricus, Adversus Mathemticos. Classical Quarterly 44 (02):490-499.
    Adversus Mathematicos x is the second book dedicated by Sextus to the discussion of the physical doctrines put forward by dogmatic philosophers. An extensive section deals with Diodorus Cronus' arguments concerning movement.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Richard Gaskin (1999). Tense Logic and the Master Argument. Logical Analysis and History of Philosophy 2:203-224.
    We may distinguish between two ways of understanding tense-logical formulae, depending on whether we construe tense operators as operators on sentences or on predicates. Bearing this distinction in mind helps us formalise the premisses of Diodorus Cronus' Master Argument correctly, and give a formal reconstruction of the Argument itself.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33.  0
    Stamatios D. Gerogiorgakis (2005). Wenn die Moglichkeit in Notwendigkeit umschlagt: Ein Beitrag zur Vorgeschichte modaler ontologischer Beweise. Bochumer Philosophisches Jahrbuch Fur Antike Und Mittelalter 10 (1):21 - 36.
    Aristotle produced several arguments to vindicate the futura contingentia and to refute the conception of modalities which do not allow incidental facts. This conception was coined mainly by Diodorus Cronus and implied the view that whatever may happen, is to happen necessarily. Although Aristotle condemned this view and refuted the theology which it implies, Diodorean modalities were employed by the scholastics to support their theology. Abaelard's Diodorean formula reads: God wishes no more and no less than what He (...)
    Translate
      Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  7
    Vladimír Marko (1995). Callimachus' Puzzle about Diodorus. Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 2 (4):342-367.
    The author tends to emphasize that there are almost the three reasons to analyse Callimachus\' epigram about Diodorus : First of all, the date of this epigram shows us that it represents the earliest information about Diodorus doctrine. Second, another support of its authenticity could be found in fact that this epigram expressing part of the atmosphere following, and also remaining after, discussing the Diodorian topics. Third, its philosophical relevance, usually minimised in classical literature, could be found in (...)
    No categories
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  28
    Harry Ide (1992). Chrysippus's Response to Diodorus's Master Argument. History and Philosophy of Logic 13 (2):133-148.
    Chrysippus claims that some propositions perish. including some true conditionals whose consequent is impossible and antecedent is possible, to which he appeals against Diodorus?s Master Argument. On the standard interpretation. perished propositions lack truth values. and these conditionals are true at the same time as their antecedents arc possible and consequents impossible. But perished propositions are false, and Chrysippus?s conditionals are true when their antecedent and consequent arc possible, and false when their antecedent is possible and consequent impossible. The (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  36.  1
    John A. Barker & Thomas D. Paxson Jr (1985). Aristotle Vs. Diodorus: Who Won the Fatalism Debate? Philosophy Research Archives 11:41-76.
    We develop a modified system of standard logic, Augmented Standard Logic , and we employ ASL in an effort to show that, contrary to prevailing opinion, both Aristotle and Diodorus presented impressive arguments, having valid structures and highly plausible premisses, in their famous fatalism debate. We argue that ASL, which contains standard logic and a full system of modal and temporal logic emanating from a modicum of primitives, should not only enable one to appreciate the sophisticated philosophizing which characterized (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37.  17
    Michael J. White (1980). Diodorus' “Master” Argument: A Semantic Interpretation. [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 15 (1):65 - 72.
    This paper discusses the 'master argument' of diodorus cronos from a semantic perspective. An argument is developed which suggests that proposition (1), 'every proposition true about the past is necessary', May have provided the principal motivation for diodorus denial of proposition (3), I.E., His equation of possibility with present-Or-Future truth. It is noted that (1) and (3) are jointly inconsistent only given the assumption of a linear ordering of time. It is further noted that diodorus' fatalism "could" (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  15
    R. McKirahan (1979). Diodorus and Prior and the Master Argument. Synthese 42 (2):223 - 253.
    On prior's reconstruction, The master argument of diodorus contains an equivocation and so is invalid for one class of diodorean "propositions." but diodorus knew of such "propositions" and an argument in his treatment of motion can be used to bring them under the master argument's sway. Also, Despite the consensus of antiquity, The master argument does not commit diodorus to determinism, Although it commits him to non-Deterministic theses which can be easily misinterpreted as deterministic.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  12
    Paul Mckechnie (1995). Diodorus Siculus and Hephaestion's Pyre. Classical Quarterly 45 (02):418-.
    Chapters 114 and 115 of Diodorus Siculus Book 17 give rise to impressive difficulties, considering their relative brevity. At the beginning of Chapter 113 Diodorus has announced the opening of the year 324/3 —the last year of Alexander the Great's life. Alexander by then has already, at the end of the previous year , taken the fateful step of entering Babylon: wounded in his soul by Chaldaean prophecy, Diodorus says, but healed by Anaxarchus and the philosophical corps (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  9
    John A. Barker & Thomas D. Paxson Jr (1985). Aristotle Vs. Diodorus. Philosophy Research Archives 11:41-76.
    We develop a modified system of standard logic, Augmented Standard Logic (ASL), and we employ ASL in an effort to show that, contrary to prevailing opinion, both Aristotle and Diodorus presented impressive arguments, having valid structures and highly plausible premisses, in their famous fatalism debate. We argue that ASL, which contains standard logic and a full system of modal and temporal logic emanating from a modicum of primitives, should not only enable one to appreciate the sophisticated philosophizing which characterized (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  9
    Nicholas Denyer (1998). Philoponus, Diodorus, and Possibility. Classical Quarterly 48 (01):327-.
    The definition here ascribed to Philo is entirely in line with what we know of Philo from else where: Alex. Aphr. in APr. 184.6–10; Simp, in Cat. 195.33–196.5; Boethius, in de Int. 234.10–15. The same is not true of the definition here ascribed to Diodorus. For Diodorus, we are told elsewhere, defined the possible as that which either is or will be so: Cic. Fat. 13, 17; Plu. de Stoic rep. 1055d-e; Alex. Aphr. in APr. 183.42–184.5; Boethius, in (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42.  9
    N. G. L. Hammond (1938). The Sources of Diodorus Siculus XVI. (II). Classical Quarterly 32 (3-4):137-.
    The source-criticism2 of Diodorus XVI has been dominated by the principle of argument from detail. Thus, if two details in Diodorus' text are found to conflict, they are assumed to derive from different sources and, if similar, from the same source; and, where a fragment of an ancient historian is found to resemble a passage in Diodorus, that historian is assumed to be the source employed by Diodorus in that passage; finally, when a sufficient mosaic of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  5
    Christopher Tuplin (1979). Two Proper Names in the Text of Diodorus, Book 15. Classical Quarterly 29 (02):347-.
    Both patently incorrect readings and long-established emendations have a habit of retaining their places in texts of ancient authors with few or no questions asked. This paper considers two examples of this phenomenon in Book 15 of Diodorus' Bibliotheke.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  3
    Catherine Rubincam (1998). How Many Books Did Diodorus Siculus Originally Intend to Write? Classical Quarterly 48 (01):229-.
    Diodorus Siculus was notoriously inconsistent in his statements about the terminal date of his survey of history, the Bibliotheca Historica. In the ‘table of contents’ which he included in the general preface to the whole work, written apparently when he was preparing his manuscript for publication , he specifically names the year 60/59 as the last year of his narrative. Elsewhere, however, he not only gives a figure for the period of history encompassed by his work which would bring (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. N. Denyer (1999). The Master Argument of Diodorus Chronus: A Near Miss. Logical Analysis and History of Philosophy 2:239-252.
    Diodorus' Master Argument was intended to show that whatever is possible either is or will be true. The intended conclusion does not follow from the extant premisses of the Master Argument. The Near Miss argues however, from those premisses alone, that nothing can be more than momentarily an exception to the Master Argument's intended conclusion. Strong arguments support even the most contentious of those premisses . We therefore cannot easily ignore the Near Miss. Moreover, there are various supplementary premisses (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46.  2
    R. K. Sinclair (1966). Diodorus Siculus and Fighting in Relays. Classical Quarterly 16 (02):249-.
    It has been customary to believe that apart from selection and abridgement Diodorus Siculus made little contribution to his Scholars have admitted the contribution of Diodorus himself when he refers to his native town Agyrium with some pride and to Sicily in general and when he occasionally records details of his own life. Beyond statements of this character, however, the tendency has been to assume that the origin of any particular statement is to be sought in the single (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  17
    Nicholas Rescher (1966). A Version of the "Master Argument" of Diodorus. Journal of Philosophy 63 (15):438-445.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  48.  15
    A. N. Prior (1958). Diodorus and Modal Logic: A Correction. Philosophical Quarterly 8 (32):226-230.
  49.  8
    Jaakko Hintikka (1964). Aristotle and the "Master Argument" of Diodorus. American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (2):101 - 114.
  50.  1
    John Carter (1992). Reassessing Diodorus. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 42 (1):34-36.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 147