David Botting
De La Salle University (PhD)
In this paper I will consider several interpretations of the fallacy of secundum quid as it is given by Aristotle in the Sophistical Refutations and argue that they do not work, one reason for which is that they all imply that the fallacy depends on language and thus fail to explain why Aristotle lists this fallacy among the fallacies not depending on language, amounting often to a claim that Aristotle miscategorises this fallacy. I will argue for a reading that preserves Aristotle’s categorization by a quite different account of how qualifications function.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.2478/slgr-2014-0008
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,360
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Fallacies and Argument Appraisal.Christopher W. Tindale - 2007 - Cambridge University Press.
Aristotle and the so-Called Fallacy of Equivocation.Christopher Kirwan - 1979 - Philosophical Quarterly 29 (114):35-46.

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Role of Qualification.Allan Bäck - 2002 - Journal of Philosophical Research 27:159-171.
Goodness Without Qualification.E. Wielenberg - 1998 - Journal of Value Inquiry 32 (1):93-104.


Added to PP index

Total views
21 ( #514,275 of 2,448,901 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #443,144 of 2,448,901 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes