Abstract

The article examines the relevance of Aristotle’s analysis that concerns the syllogistic figures. On the assumption that Aristotle’s analytics was inspired by the method of geometric analysis, we show how Aristotle used the three terms (letters), when he formulated the three syllogistic figures. So far it has not been appropriately recognized that the three terms — the major, the middle and the minor one — were viewed by Aristotle syntactically and predicatively in the form of diagrams. Many scholars have misunderstood Aristotle in that in the second and third figure the middle term is outside and that in the second figure the major term is next to the middle one, whereas in the third figure it is further from it. By means of diagrams, we have elucidated how this perfectly accords with Aristotle's planar and graphic arrangement. In the light of these diagrams, one can appropriately capture the definition of syllogism as a predicative set of terms. Irrespective of the tricky question concerning the abbreviations that Aristotle himself used with reference to these types of predication, the reconstructed figures allow us better to comprehend the reductions of syllogism to the first figure. We assume that the figures of syllogism are analogous to the figures of categorical predication, i.e., they are specific syntactic and semantic models. Aristotle demanded certain logical and methodological competence within analytics, which reflects his great commitment and contribution to the field.

Highlights

  • APr 43 a 22 εἰ γὰρ τήν τε γένεσιν τῶν συλλογισμῶν θεωροῖμεν καὶ τοῦ εὑρίσκειν ἔχοιμεν δύναμιν, ἔτι δὲ τοὺς γεγενημένους ἀναλύοιμεν εἰς τὰ προειρημένα σχήματα, τέλος ἂν ἔχοι ἡ ἐξ ἀρχῆς πρόθεσις

  • Our attention will focus here on this significant finding made in the Prior Analytics that so far has not yet been sufficiently treated

  • Least to some extent, Aristotle’s probable diagrams, which regrettably are missing from the extant text of the Prior Analytics

Read more

Summary

For an important discussion see Ierodiakonou 2002

Much has been written on Aristotle’s syllogistic as a deductive procedure,[12] but its analytical or heuristic strategy of finding terms and premises of syllogisms has generally been overlooked, mainly because the relevant diagrams of the three figures have not been adequately taken into account. Striker (2009: 79) with some hesitation decided to keep the word ‘syllogism’ as a transliteration of the Greek instead of ‘deduction’ She justly states that “the translation ‘deduction’ includes too much: not every deduction is or can be used as an argument, and the conditions Aristotle spells out in his definition make sense only if one keeps in mind that what he sets out to define is the notion of valid deductive argument” She justly states that “the translation ‘deduction’ includes too much: not every deduction is or can be used as an argument, and the conditions Aristotle spells out in his definition make sense only if one keeps in mind that what he sets out to define is the notion of valid deductive argument” (ibidem, p. 79)

16 See for instance
37 This was recently well shown by Eide 1995
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call