Was ist ein vollkommener Syllogismus des Aristoteles?

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
This paper (1) criticizes Patzig's explanation of Aristotle's reason for calling his first figure syllogisms perfect syllogisms, i.e. the transitivity relation: it can only be used for Barbara, not for the other three moods. The paper offers (2) an alternative interpretation: It is only in the case of the (perfect) first figure moods that we can move from the subject term of the minor premiss, taken to be a predicate of an individual, to the predicate term of the major premiss. This contention is supported (i) by Aristotle's wording of the dictum de omni et nullo and (ii) by Aristotle's use of a formula which puts the minor term in the first position when he first states Barbara and Celarent.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2016-04-14
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
A Mathematical Model of Aristotle’s Syllogistic.John Corcoran - 1973 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 55 (2):191-219.
Warum Fehlt Bei Aristoteles Die 4. Figur?Theodor Ebert - 1980 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 62 (1):13-31.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
559 ( #6,089 of 46,175 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
146 ( #3,457 of 46,175 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.