Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Aristotle's Organon, a work on logic

Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2014 5:32:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I have started reading Aristotle's Organon to learn more about prior analytics in relation to syllogistic logic. What are people's views of Aristotelian logic?

To provide a basic picture of it, Aristotle proposed that statements in philosophy are comprised of at least two entities and a relationship between them. These entities are terms and they have a definition which does not have a truth value per se. The terms are then refuted or affirmed in syllogism where the next follows necessarily from the previous if true.

I'm personally suprised at how much we use his logic without knowing it. It's as if he were naming a mental process that occurred every day.
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2014 9:55:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/15/2014 5:32:00 AM, Smithereens wrote:
I have started reading Aristotle's Organon to learn more about prior analytics in relation to syllogistic logic. What are people's views of Aristotelian logic?

To provide a basic picture of it, Aristotle proposed that statements in philosophy are comprised of at least two entities and a relationship between them. These entities are terms and they have a definition which does not have a truth value per se. The terms are then refuted or affirmed in syllogism where the next follows necessarily from the previous if true.

I'm personally suprised at how much we use his logic without knowing it. It's as if he were naming a mental process that occurred every day.

I haven't actually read a whole lot of the Organon, but I'm pretty familiar with Aristotelian logic, and it's personally some of my favorite.

I'm surprised how many people, even on here, have no clue what a CELARENT or DARII or CAMESTRES syllogism is.

Wikipedia also has a good overview of the valid syllogisms he discovered. http://en.wikipedia.org...

The BIG difference between modern logic and Aristotelian/traditional logic is this...

One is from a nominalist point of view, the other is from a realist point of view. Modern logic is just like: If P, then Q. It doesn't assume essences or forms as real things. Aristotelian logic does though. "All men are mortal" and "Socrates is a man" assume that there are different "classes" of things or that there are forms, and that they can be either united or denied of one another.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2014 12:45:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/15/2014 9:55:23 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 4/15/2014 5:32:00 AM, Smithereens wrote:
I have started reading Aristotle's Organon to learn more about prior analytics in relation to syllogistic logic. What are people's views of Aristotelian logic?

To provide a basic picture of it, Aristotle proposed that statements in philosophy are comprised of at least two entities and a relationship between them. These entities are terms and they have a definition which does not have a truth value per se. The terms are then refuted or affirmed in syllogism where the next follows necessarily from the previous if true.

I'm personally suprised at how much we use his logic without knowing it. It's as if he were naming a mental process that occurred every day.

I haven't actually read a whole lot of the Organon, but I'm pretty familiar with Aristotelian logic, and it's personally some of my favorite.

I'm surprised how many people, even on here, have no clue what a CELARENT or DARII or CAMESTRES syllogism is.

Wikipedia also has a good overview of the valid syllogisms he discovered. http://en.wikipedia.org...

The BIG difference between modern logic and Aristotelian/traditional logic is this...

One is from a nominalist point of view, the other is from a realist point of view. Modern logic is just like: If P, then Q. It doesn't assume essences or forms as real things. Aristotelian logic does though. "All men are mortal" and "Socrates is a man" assume that there are different "classes" of things or that there are forms, and that they can be either united or denied of one another.

Some good thoughts right there, but take predicate calculus for instance, which is closest to what I believe you are referring to, and contrast it to propositional calculus. In modern propositional calculus, entire propositions are considered and refuted or affirmed, this with all its definitions that allow it to use terms. Predicate calculus on the other hand is your ordinary first order logic etc, which you point out correctly does not consider terms in the sense that Aristotle did.

Since that time however, philosophy and logic have branched out quite far, such that we can have a different system for every day of the year.
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
philochristos
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2014 6:36:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/15/2014 5:32:00 AM, Smithereens wrote:

I'm personally suprised at how much we use his logic without knowing it. It's as if he were naming a mental process that occurred every day.

I think that's exactly what he was doing. When it comes to logic, he was a master of the obvious. He simply articulated in a formal way the reasoning processes every rational person uses automatically from the time they're able to reason at all. The advantage of formalizing it that it makes us more mindful of it so we can avoid making mistakes in reasoning, and so we can recognize when somebody else has reasoned correctly or incorrectly.
"Not to know of what things one should demand demonstration, and of what one should not, argues want of education." ~Aristotle

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." ~Aristotle
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/17/2014 7:35:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
From Aristotle's Organon II, on Interpretation.
"An affirmation is opposed to a denial in the sense which I
denote by the term "contradictory", when, while the subject
remains the same, the affirmation is of universal character and
the denial is not. The affirmation "every man is white" is the
contradictory of the denial "not every man is white", or again,
the proposition "no man is white" is the contradictory of the
proposition "some men are white". But propositions are opposed
as contraries when both the affirmation and the denial are
universal, as in the sentences "every man is white", "no man is
white", "every man is just", "no man is just".
We see that in a pair of this sort both propositions cannot be
true, but the contradictories of a pair of contraries can
sometimes both be true with reference to the same subject; for
instance "not every man is white" and some men are white" are
both true. Of such corresponding positive and negative
propositions as refer to universals and have a universal
character, one must be true and the other false. This is the case
54
also when the reference is to individuals, as in the propositions
"Socrates is white", "Socrates is not white".
When, on the other hand, the reference is to universals, but the
propositions are not universal, it is not always the case that one
is true and the other false, for it is possible to state truly that
man is white and that man is not white and that man is
beautiful and that man is not beautiful; for if a man is deformed
he is the reverse of beautiful, also if he is progressing towards
beauty he is not yet beautiful.
This statement might seem at first sight to carry with it a
contradiction, owing to the fact that the proposition "man is not
white" appears to be equivalent to the proposition "no man is
white". This, however, is not the case, nor are they necessarily
at the same time true or false."

The most basic principle of logic -non contradiction, in relation to propositions. I believe this is the first recorded philosophical paper on the issue. What a pleasure to see the progression of philosophy.
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...