This monograph explores the logical systems of early logicians in the Arabic tradition from a theoretical perspective, providing a complete panorama of early Arabic logic and centering it within an expansive historical context. By thoroughly examining the writings of the first Arabic logicians, al-Fārābī, Avicenna and Averroes, the author analyzes their respective theories, discusses their relationship to the syllogistics of Aristotle and his followers, and measures their influence on later logical systems. Beginning with an introduction to the (...) writings of the most prominent Arabic logicians, the author scrutinizes these works to determine their categorical logic, as well as their modal and hypothetical logics. Where most other studies written on this subject focus on the Arabic logicians’ epistemology, metaphysics, and theology, this volume takes a unique approach by focusing on the actual technical aspects and features of their logics. The author then moves on to examine the original texts as closely as possible and employs the symbolism of modern propositional, predicate, and modal logics, rendering the arguments of each logician clearly and precisely while clarifying the theories themselves in order to determine the differences between the Arabic logicians’ systems and those of Aristotle. By providing a detailed examination of theories that are still not very well-known in Western countries, the author is able to assess the improvements that can be found in the Arabic writings, and to situate Arabic logic within the breadth of the history of logic. This unique study will appeal mainly to historians of logic, logicians, and philosophers who seek a better understanding of the Arabic tradition. It also will be of interest to modern logicians who wish to delve into the historical aspects and progression of their discipline. Furthermore, this book will serve as a valuable resource for graduate students who wish to complement their general knowledge of Arabic culture, logic, and sciences. (shrink)

Recent years have seen a dramatic change in scholarly views of the later career of Arabic and Islamic philosophy. For much of the twentieth century, researchers tended to dismiss the value of Arabic writings on philosophy and logic after the twelfth century, often on the basis of the prejudice that handbooks, commentaries and glosses are of necessity pedantic and unoriginal. This assumption has now been abandoned. As a consequence, a vast amount of later Arabic writings on philosophy (...) and logic, hitherto neglected, are now being studied and edited. The present work is an attempt at giving an overview of the development of Arabic logic from 1200 to 1800, identifying major themes, figures and works in this period, while taking into account regional differences within the Islamic world. It offers a corrective to Nicholas Rescher's seminal but now outdated The Development of Arabic Logic, published in 1964. (shrink)

This translation of Ibn-al-Tayyib’s work on Porphyry’s Eisagoge brings to the English readers a significant book in Near Eastern logic that has been discussed and excerpted by major philosophers such as Tusi, Averroes, and Avicenna. It has also been the source of philosophical discussions on topics of logic by Boethius, Abelard, Ockham and others. Gyekye has clarified the Arabic link between Greek and Latin traditions with his translation, detailed explanations and text analysis of this 11th century philosopher’s commentary on (...) the Eisagoge, a work which is itself based on Aristotle’s Categories and Metaphysics. (shrink)

Arabic contributions to medicine, mathematics, astronomy, and other fields have been extensively studied, yet Arabic logic has never been systematically investigated. In this book, Nicholas Rescher sheds new light on the major philosophical contribution of Arab logicians. He provides a historical account of the evolution of Arabic logic, from its inception in the early ninth century through the sixteenth century, when these tenets gained wide acceptance. The book also includes a bio-bibliography of 170 Arabic logicians, and (...) a discussion of the place of each within the overall scheme of developments. (shrink)

Johannes Steuchius’ disputatio uses Arabic logic to present an historical account of the development of philosophical thought in Arabia before and after the emergence of Islam. Steuchius first proposes that philosophy drew its origins from the East. His evidence for this claim is that many of the Greek philosophers, considered the forefathers of European philosophy, began cultivating their philosophical thinking as a result of exposure to ancient Eastern philosophy. After the introduction of Greek philosophy, it is agreed that dialectic (...) was among the first of the arts the Arabs practiced. (shrink)

In this paper, I raise the following problem: What terms are considered as syncategoremata in the Arabic logical texts? How are they defined? How do they determine the forms of the propositions and the inferences? To answer these questions, I focus on the analyses provided by al-Fārābī and Avicenna. Both authors apply the grammatical distinction between the particle, the noun and the verb to logic. They also state the semantic and the syntactic criterions, but their analyses of the particles (...) are different. For al-Fārābī devotes two treatises to the analysis of particles: al-musta‘malah fī l-maniq, where he provides a listing of particles that he classifies in the manner of the Greek grammarians and Kitāb al-urūf, where he analyzes some particles used in metaphysics; while Avicenna, despite the considerable amount of his logical corpus, does not devote a special book to the analysis of particles. He does not provide any listing either but characterizes each logical particle on its own, while analyzing the propositions, their elements and the inferences. In this paper, I argue that this treatment of particles in the two frames shows a significant difference between the two authors with regard to the relation between logic and grammar, and with regard to the characterizations of the logical particles themselves. For Avicenna is much less interested than al-Fārābī by the grammatical analysis and focuses much more on the logical particles, which he scrutinizes meticulously. This enriches his definitions of the logical constants and leads him in the final analysis to different and more various inferences than those hold by al-Fārābī. (shrink)

Nicholas Rescher. Schools.” An English translation of these sections of the text is given in Appendix A below. No matter how difficult or boring this material proved for the Muslim schoolmaster, it is of the greatest relevance for our interests.

Relational inferences are a well-known problem for Aristotelian logic. This book charts the development of thinking about this problem by logicians writing in Arabic from the ninth to the nineteenth century. It shows that that the development of Arabic logic did not - as is often supposed - come to an end in the fourteenth century.

Much attention has been given to Arabic thought in the history of philosophy, however, Arabic contributions to logic have been greatly overlooked. In the ten essays of this book, Nicholas Rescher presents substantial material on the history, progression and major trends of Arabic logic from the eighth through the sixteenth century. Rescher finds that, like much of Western thought, Arabic logic had its basis in Greek philosophy, and specifically in Hellenistic Aristotelian logic.

The more passages one examines in the translations from Arabic to Latin and from Arabic to English and other modern languages, the more mistakes one comes across in the translation of the Arabic expression ‘alā al-qaṣd al-awwal . The mistakes stem from the failure to distinguish between two senses of the expression, one an adverb, and the other a famous philosophic concept. Failing to distinguish between the two senses, the translators translated the phrase literally, often with unsatisfactory (...) results. In this paper, I shall indicate a Greek word which was rendered by the Arabic ‘alā al-qaṣd al-awwal. I shall refer to some English translations from the Arabic and show how wrong they are. I shall suggest that in Arabic philosophy itself al-Fārābī, rather than Avicenna, may have been the origin of the philosophic concepts of “first and second intentions.” I shall point out that although these concepts may have been introduced into Latin scholasticism by Raymond Lull, he could not have derived them from the Logic of al-Ghazālī, as has been alleged. (shrink)

Arabic logicians in the thirteenth century discussed a set of arguments raised by the theologian Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 1210) that in some respects closely resembles Carroll’s paradox. Roughly, the paradox states that we can never reach a conclusion from a set of premises without incurring an infinite regress. The present article presents and discusses Rāzī’s formulation of the problem with syllogistic deduction, his own solutions to the problem, and the contributions of Afḍal al-Dīn al-Khūnajī (d. 1248) and Najm (...) al-Dīn al-Kātibī (d. 1276). It is argued that the proposed solutions developed by these authors are best understood as tending in the direction of Gilbert Ryle’s distinction between knowing-that and knowing-how. (shrink)

Relational Syllogisms and the History of Arabic Logic, 900–1900. By Khaled El-Rouayheb. Islamic Philosophy, Theology and Science, vol. 80. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Pp. viii + 295. $168.

Rescher is one of the few logicians equipped to deal with the whole of logic in the original languages. Arabic logic is particularly fortunate in finding such an interpreter. This book however is not a systematic treatment, but a series of topical essays. Perhaps its usefulness is to acquaint the un initiated with the flavor and tone of Arabic logic. One can then pass on to Rescher's systematic study—The Development of Arabic Logic—which is promised this year.—H. C.

The first part of the book examines language as a tool of logic, and deals with Alfarabi's analysis of the meanings of various terms as they are used in logic and philosophy.

This book explores the reaction of tenth-century Arab philosopher Abu Nasr Alfarabi to the logical works of Aristotle. From numerous short treatises the author develops a systematic and comprehensive topical survey of Alfara bi's logical writings. The book is divided into two major parts: language as a tool of logic and logic as a tool with which to analyze language. The first five chapters deal with Alfarabi's analysis of the meanings of various terms as they are used in logic and (...) philosophy. Alfarabi refutes the Arab grammarians who claimed that Arab logicians were building a language within a language and shows that the philosophical meanings of terms are in fact their most original and essential meanings. The final chapter deals with Alfarabi's analysis of certain aspects of the Arabic language and demonstrates that Arabic, like any natural language, conforms to universal logical structures of which natural languages are only a concrete expression. (shrink)

Epistles 10-14 of the Brethren of Purity focus on the foundations of logic, offering a tenth-century interpretation of the classic Aristotelian texts by scholars in Islamic civilization. This is the first critical edition, presenting the original Arabic text with a fully annotated English translation.

A critically important development in the tradition of philosophy, as understood by Arabic authors, was the inclusion of both rhetoric and poetics within logic. While these writers' conception of the logical Organon gave appropriate place to the theory of demonstration as found and defined in Aristotle's Posterior Analytics, they added to it the syllogism not only of dialectic, but of rhetoric and poetry as well. By attaching the latter two arts to logic, the Arabic philosophers created a contextual (...) claim about rhetoric and poetry which tended both to weaken the status of either one as a mode of nonlogical discourse and yet potentially to enhance their importance as tools of cognitive activity by recognizing in them some form of syllogistic reasoning. (shrink)