Alexander of Aphrodisias: On Aristotle Prior Analytics by Alexander of Aphrodisias

By Alexander of Aphrodisias

The final 14 chapters of publication 1 of Aristotle's "Prior Analytics" are excited about the illustration within the formal language of syllogistic of propositions and arguments expressed in additional or much less daily Greek. In his observation on these chapters, "Alexander of Aphrodisias" explains a few of Aristotle's extra opaque assertions and discusses post-Aristotelian rules in semantics and the philosophy of language. In doing so he presents an strange perception into the way those disciplines constructed within the Hellenistic period. He additionally indicates a extra refined figuring out of those fields than Aristotle himself, whereas closing a staunch defender of Aristotle's emphasis on that means rather than Stoics predicament with verbal formula. In his observation at the ultimate bankruptcy of publication 1 Alexander deals a radical dialogue of Aristotle's contrast among denying that whatever is, for instance, white and announcing that it really is non-white.

Show description

Read or Download Alexander of Aphrodisias: On Aristotle Prior Analytics 1.32-46 (Ancient Commentators on Aristotle) PDF

Similar logic books

Qualitative Spatial and Temporal Reasoning

Content material: bankruptcy 1 Allen's Calculus (pages 1–28): bankruptcy 2 Polynomial Subclasses of Allen's Algebra (pages 29–61): bankruptcy three Generalized periods (pages 63–85): bankruptcy four Binary Qualitative Formalisms (pages 87–144): bankruptcy five Qualitative Formalisms of Arity more than 2 (pages 145–158): bankruptcy 6 Quantitative Formalisms, Hybrids, and Granularity (pages 159–185): bankruptcy 7 Fuzzy Reasoning (pages 187–222): bankruptcy eight The Geometrical method and Conceptual areas (pages 223–258): bankruptcy nine susceptible Representations (pages 259–304): bankruptcy 10 versions of RCC?

Automated deduction - a basis for applications, vol.1: Foundations - calculi and methods

The national learn undertaking `Deduktion', funded via the `Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)' for a interval of six years, introduced jointly just about all study teams inside Germany engaged in the sphere of computerized reasoning. extensive cooperation and trade of principles ended in enormous development either within the theoretical foundations and within the program of deductive wisdom.

Extra resources for Alexander of Aphrodisias: On Aristotle Prior Analytics 1.32-46 (Ancient Commentators on Aristotle)

Example text

The u n i v e r s a l premiss is ' E v e r y consequent of something is a consequent of what that t h i n g is a consequent of. I n 'If, being a man, it is a n a n i m a l and, being a n a n i m a l , it is a substance' substance is a conse­ quent of a n i m a l and a n i m a l is a consequent of h u m a n being. There­ fore, substance is also a consequent of h u m a n being. T h i s can also be handled as follows: W h e n among three things the second is a consequent of the first and the t h i r d of the second, the t h i r d also follows the first; among h u m a n being, a n i m a l , and substance, w h i c h are three Translation things, a n i m a l follows h u m a n being, a n d substance follows animal; therefore, among these things substance w i l l also follow h u m a n being.

F o r he d i d not assume that everything active is body, since that is false; for, w h e n it is t a k e n indeterminately i t is true, but i t does not yield a syllogism. S i m i l a r l y i f one assumes that a h u m a n being is a n a n i m a l a n d a n i m a l is a genus, since a h u m a n being is not a genus. In cases of this k i n d the mistake comes from assimilating the indeterminate to the universal, since they assent to and accept as if the indeterminate is equivalent to the universal.

F o r there w i l l be a syllogism i f they are t a k e n this way: 10 15 E v e r y h u m a n being is a n a n i m a l ; every a n i m a l is a substance. B u t w h e n they are t a k e n i n the other way what follows follows necessarily but not syllogistically, since every syllogism is posited to show holding or not holding. A g a i n it is possible to find fault w i t h 'If, being a h u m a n being, it is necessary for it to be a n a n i m a l , a n d being a n a n i m a l , it is necessary for it to be a substance' for m a k i n g a non-syllogistic inference because its premisses ' h u m a n being-animal' and 'animal-substance' are inde­ terminate.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.95 of 5 – based on 3 votes