The historical researches of Louis Couturat saved the logical work of Leibniz from the oblivion of neglect and forgetfulness. They revealed that Leibniz developed in succession several versions of a “logical calculus” (calculus ratiocinatororcalculus universalis). In consequence of Couturat's investigations it has become well known that Leibniz's development of these logical calculi adumbrated the notion of a logistic system; and for these foreshadowings of the logistic treatment of formal logic Leibniz is rightly regarded as the father of symbolic logic.It is (...) clear from what has been said that it is scarcely possible to overestimate the debt which the contemporary student of Leibniz's logic owes to Couturat. This gratitude must, however, be accompanied by the realization that Couturat's own theory of logic is gravely defective. Couturat was persuaded that the extensional point of view in logic is the only one which is correct, an opinion now quite antiquated, and shared by no one. This prejudice of Couturat's marred his exposition of Leibniz's logic. It led him to battle with windmills: he viewed the logic of Leibniz as rife with shortcomings stemming from an intensional approach.The task of this paper is a re-examination of Leibniz's logic. It will consider without prejudgment how Leibniz conceived of the major formal systems he developed aslogicalcalculi – that is, these systems will be studied with a view to the interpretation or interpretations which Leibniz himself intends for them. The aim is to undo some of the damage which Couturat's preconception has done to the just understanding of Leibniz's logic and to the proper evaluation of his contribution. (shrink)

In this paper the author will assess Plato’s tripartite psychology in the light of his metaphysical account of μέγιστα γένη and One and Many, in order to further clarify the structure of his “dualism”. By doing so, the author will try to show that the tripartition is not a metaphysical conundrum of Plato’s thought and that it cannot be read in the light of Cartesian substance dualism, which is a noticeable approach in contemporary discussions. Aside of that, Plato and Descartes (...) are often understood as the main advocates of the substance dualism. Since the author finds the approach misleading, the aim of the paper is to point out the fundamental differences between the two, foremost by paying attention to the role of body in conceptual determination of soul. (shrink)

Epistemology is a science that discusses: 1. Human knowledge, 2. Evaluation of the types of human knowledge, 3. Determining the true and false criteria of human knowledge. Although this topic (issue, subject matter), has no long history in the history of science, as an independent science and a branch of philosophy, scholars have never been unaware of the issue of recognition and its value and importance, and attention to this issue is not restricted to recent decades. Also in Islamic philosophy (...) and logic, epistemological topics have been raised sporadically in various dimensions but many of them have an ontological state (approach) rather than an epistemological one. Allamah Tabatabai, as one of the greatest scholars and contemporary Islamic philosophers, discussed in his compilations, directly in some cases, and indirectly in other philosophical discussions, the subject of epistemology. Epistemology includes a variety of topics, but three of them are considered as the most important ones: 1. The definition of knowledge, 2. The possibility of knowledge, 3. The instruments of knowledge. The article analyzes epistemology in these titles from the perspective of Allamah Tabatabai. First, it expresses the importance and necessity of epistemology and then it looks at the historical course of epistemology in the Occident and Islam. (shrink)