History and Philosophy of Logic (forthcoming)
Much of the last fifty years of scholarship on Aristotle’s syllogistic suggests a conceptual framework under which the syllogistic is a logic, a system of inferential reasoning, only if it is not a theory or formal ontology, a system concerned with general features of the world. In this paper, I will argue that this a misleading interpretative framework. The syllogistic is something sui generis: by our lights, it is neither clearly a logic, nor clearly a theory, but rather exhibits certain characteristic marks of logics and certain characteristic marks of theories. In what follows, I will present a debate between a theoretical and a logical interpretation of the syllogistic. The debate centers on the interpretation of syllogisms as either implications or inferences. But the significance of this question has been taken to concern the nature and subject-matter of the syllogistic, and how it ought to be represented by modern techniques. For one might think that, if syllogisms are implications, propositions with conditional form, then the syllogistic, in so far as it is a systematic taxonomy of syllogisms, is a theory or a body of knowledge concerned with general features of the world. Furthermore, if the syllogistic is a theory, then it ought to be represented by an axiomatic system, a system deriving propositional theorems from axioms. On the other hand, if syllogisms are inferences, then the syllogistic is a logic, a system of inferential reasoning. And furthermore, it ought to be represented as a natural deduction system, a system deriving valid arguments by means of intuitively valid inferences. I will argue that one can disentangle these questions—are syllogisms inferences or implications, is the syllogistic a logic or a theory, is the syllogistic a body of worldly knowledge or a system of inferential reasoning, and ought we to represent the syllogistic as a natural deduction system or an axiomatic system—and that we must if we are to have a historically accurate understanding of Aristotle.
|Keywords||syllogistic logic aristotle|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Establishing Connections Between Aristotle's Natural Deduction and First-Order Logic.Edgar Jose Andrade & Edward Samuel Becerra - 2008 - History and Philosophy of Logic 29 (4):309-325.
A Reconstruction of Aristotle's Modal Syllogistic.Marko Malink - 2006 - History and Philosophy of Logic 27 (2):95-141.
Syllogisms with Fractional Quantifiers.Fred Johnson - 1994 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 23 (4):401 - 422.
Complexly Fractionated Syllogistic Quantifiers.Philip L. Peterson - 1991 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 20 (3):287 - 313.
Logic: The Stoics (Part Two).Susanne Bobzien - 1999 - In Keimpe Algra, Jonathan Barnes & et al (eds.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Syllogistic with Indefinite Terms.Enrique Alvarez & Manuel Correia - 2012 - History and Philosophy of Logic 33 (4):297-306.
Polarity and Inseparability: The Foundation of the Apodictic Portion of Aristotle's Modal Logic.Dwayne Raymond - 2010 - History and Philosophy of Logic 31 (3):193-218.
Conversion Principles and the Basis of Aristotle's Modal Logic.Richard Patterson - 1990 - History and Philosophy of Logic 11 (2):151-172.
Computation of Aristotle's and Gergonne's Syllogisms.S. N. Furs - 1987 - Studia Logica 46 (3):209 - 225.
Proclus and the Neoplatonic Syllogistic.John N. Martin - 2001 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (3):187-240.
Non-Standard Categorical Syllogisms: Four That Leibniz Forgot.Don Emil Herget - 1987 - History and Philosophy of Logic 8 (1):1-13.
Added to index2011-02-24
Total downloads145 ( #32,260 of 2,163,972 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #62,637 of 2,163,972 )
How can I increase my downloads?