Aristotle and Logical Theory by Jonathan Lear

Abstract

BOOK REVIEWS 'i.77 learning, at least, to heed the prohibitions that are so necessary, so grounding a feature of any articulated moral system. But Nozick seems uninterested in the interdictory and writes for the most part as though some kind of ideal utilitarianism were true. People are concerned with realizing values and with growth in value, and perhaps with seeing to it that value-seeking and -creation become cosmic activities. I have to quote, though I feel embarrassed to do so, and can scarcely believe that it is written by the author of the book's earlier sections, Nozick's peroration. We can envision a humanistic philosophy, a self-consciously artistic one, sculpting ideas, value, and meaning into new constellations, reverberative with mythic power, lifting and ennobling us by its content and by its creation, leading us to understand and to respond to value and meaning-to experience them and attain them anew (647). This reminds us of something, perhaps a little of Teilhard de Chardin at his most vapid, perhaps of H. G. Wells of the period of God the Invisible King, m013t of all, I fear, of the literary lady in chapter 34 of Martin Chuzzlewit, who saluted the presentation of a Program to a Hominy as follows. " Mind and matter," said the lady in the wig, " glide swift into the vortex of immensity. Howls the sublime, and softly sleeps the calm Ideal, in the whispering chambers of Imagination. To hear, sweet it is. But then, outlaughs the stern philosopher, and saith to the Grotesque, 'What ho! arrest for me that Agency. Go, bring it here! ' And so the vision fadeth." J. M. CAMERON 389 Dundas St. London, Ontario, Canada Aristotle and Logical Theory. By JONATHAN LEAR. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Pp. xi + 123. $17.50. Aristotle is "not only the father of logic, but also the (grand-) father of metalogic "; his logical programme is " one of the triumphs of human thought"· The book is intended to be "an interpretation of that programme " (ix). It consists of six chapters, dealing respectively with "Syllogistic consequence" (1-14), "Completeness and compactness" (15-33), " Hypothetical syllogisms " (34-53), " Invalid inferences" (5475 ), " Invalid proofs " (with " A note on ignorance", 76-97), " Proof by refutation" (98-114). A Bibliography (115-120) and two Indices (121123 ) are added. In every chapter the author endeavors to show-and often 278 BOOK REVIEWS with success-that Aristotle had either the modern problem in question or a problem analogous to it. The Index locorum gives an insight into the author's main interests: the most frequently quoted Aristotelian chapters are (in that order): An.Pr. A 23, Met r, An. Pr.a 22,An.Pr.A 4, B 14, B 16, and A 44. On the other hand, An.Pr.A 8-22 are not mentioned, not even A 15. The book contains a number of analyses which would merit a thorough examination. This will not be offered here. Instead some remarks will be made on two points which may be of interest to Neo-Scholastics and render the work of Mr. Lear sympathetic to them. 1. The study is completely a-historical, and indeed in two ways. First, the Organon is considered as forming one block, without any sort of evolution and change occurring, e.g. between the Topics and the Prior Analytics. Solmsen is not even mentioned, nor are other scholars who did work on the problem, e.g. Minucci. Now, while this is a method often used by the Neo-Scholastics, it is hardly defensible. And once the possibility of changes occurring in Aristotle is admitted, the results of the inquiry might become very different from what they are. This is one way in which the work is a-historical. It is also a-historical in another way: the author is not interested in the interpretations supplied by his predecessors, except some of those who wrote recently in English or have been translated into English. One striking example of this laek of interest is the fact that Theophrastus is not mentioned. Now it is true that he did not have the privilege of an education at Cambridge. But, since he was a...