Results for 'syllogisms'

42 found
Order:
  1. Wholly Hypothetical Syllogisms.Susanne Bobzien - 2000 - Phronesis 45 (2):87-137.
    ABSTRACT: In antiquity we encounter a distinction of two types of hypothetical syllogisms. One type are the ‘mixed hypothetical syllogisms’. The other type is the one to which the present paper is devoted. These arguments went by the name of ‘wholly hypothetical syllogisms’. They were thought to make up a self-contained system of valid arguments. Their paradigm case consists of two conditionals as premisses, and a third as conclusion. Their presentation, either schematically or by example, varies in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  2. Aristotle's Modal Syllogisms.Fred Johnson - 2004 - In Dov M. Gabbay, John Woods & Akihiro Kanamori (eds.), Handbook of the History of Logic. Elsevier. pp. 1--247.
    McCall's system for contingent syllogisms is modified. A semantics for the resulting system is provided.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  3. Apodeictic Syllogisms: Deductions and Decision Procedures.Fred Johnson - 1995 - History and Philosophy of Logic 16 (1):1-18.
    One semantic and two syntactic decision procedures are given for determining the validity of Aristotelian assertoric and apodeictic syllogisms. Results are obtained by using the Aristotelian deductions that necessarily have an even number of premises.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4. Syllogisms with Fractional Quantifiers.Fred Johnson - 1994 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 23 (4):401 - 422.
    Aristotle's syllogistic is extended to include denumerably many quantifiers such as 'more than 2/3' and 'exactly 2/3.' Syntactic and semantic decision procedures determine the validity, or invalidity, of syllogisms with any finite number of premises. One of the syntactic procedures uses a natural deduction account of deducibility, which is sound and complete. The semantics for the system is non-classical since sentences may be assigned a value other than true or false. Results about symmetric systems are given. And reasons are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  5. Parry Syllogisms.Fred Johnson - 1999 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 40 (3):414-419.
    Parry discusses an extension of Aristotle's syllogistic that uses four nontraditional quantifiers. We show that his conjectured decision procedure for validity for the extended syllogistic is correct even if syllogisms have more than two premises. And we axiomatize this extension of the syllogistic.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6. Extended Gergonne Syllogisms.Fred Johnson - 1997 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 26 (5):553-567.
    Syllogisms with or without negative terms are studied by using Gergonne's ideas. Soundness, completeness, and decidability results are given.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  41
    Suhrawardi on Syllogisms.Zia Movahed - 2010 - Sophia Perennis 2:5-18.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8. Models for Modal Syllogisms.Fred Johnson - 1989 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 30 (2):271-284.
    A semantics is presented for Storrs McCall's separate axiomatizations of Aristotle's accepted and rejected polysyllogisms. The polysyllogisms under discussion are made up of either assertoric or apodeictic propositions. The semantics is given by associating a property with a pair of sets: one set consists of things having the property essentially and the other of things having it accidentally. A completeness proof and a semantic decision procedure are given.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  9.  16
    Syllogisms and Existence in Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics.Joseph Karbowski - 2019 - Manuscrito 42 (4):211-242.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  38
    Suhrawardi's Modal Syllogisms.Zia Movahed - 2012 - Sophia Perennis 21:5-17.
    Suhrawardi’s logic of the Hikmat al-Ishraq is basically modal. So to understand his modal logic one first has to know the non-modal part upon which his modal logic is built. In my previous paper ‘Suhrawardi on Syllogisms’(3) I discussed the former in detail. The present paper is an exposition of his treatment of modal syllogisms. On the basis of some reasonable existential presuppositions and a number of controversial metaphysical theses, and also by confining his theory to alethic modality, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. Syllogisms Diagrammed: OOA to OOO.Mark Andrews - manuscript
    This document diagrams the forms OOA, OOE, OOI, and OOO, including all four figures. Each form and figure has the following information: (1) Premises as stated: Venn diagram showing what the premises say; (2) Purported conclusion: diagram showing what the premises claim to say; (3) Relation of premises to conclusion: intended to describe how the premises and conclusion relate to each other, such as validity or contradiction. Used in only a few examples; (4) Distribution: intended to create a system in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. The Development of Modus Ponens in Antiquity: From Aristotle to the 2nd Century AD.Susanne Bobzien - 2002 - Phronesis 47 (4):359-394.
    ABSTRACT: This paper traces the earliest development of the most basic principle of deduction, i.e. modus ponens (or Law of Detachment). ‘Aristotelian logic’, as it was taught from late antiquity until the 20th century, commonly included a short presentation of the argument forms modus (ponendo) ponens, modus (tollendo) tollens, modus ponendo tollens, and modus tollendo ponens. In late antiquity, arguments of these forms were generally classified as ‘hypothetical syllogisms’. However, Aristotle did not discuss such arguments, nor did he call (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  13. Warum Fehlt Bei Aristoteles Die 4. Figur?Theodor Ebert - 1980 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 62 (1):13-31.
    The reason for Aristotle’s treatment of (traditional) fourth figure syllogisms as first figure syllogisms with inverted terms in the conclusion is the following: To disprove the conclusiveness of a premiss pair Aristotle formulates two triplets of true propositions such that two of them correspond to the premiss pair in question and that the third proposition corresponding to a conclusion is an a-proposition in the first case, an e-proposition in the other. Since the truth of an a-proposition grants the (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14. The Stoics on Hypotheses and Hypothetical Arguments.Susanne Bobzien - 1997 - Phronesis 42 (3):299-312.
    ABSTRACT: In this paper I argue (i) that the hypothetical arguments about which the Stoic Chrysippus wrote numerous books (DL 7.196) are not to be confused with the so-called hypothetical syllogisms" but are the same hypothetical arguments as those mentioned five times in Epictetus (e.g. Diss. 1.25.11-12); and (ii) that these hypothetical arguments are formed by replacing in a non-hypothetical argument one (or more) of the premisses by a Stoic "hypothesis" or supposition. Such "hypotheses" or suppositions differ from propositions (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  15.  15
    Opuscula Logica. 2. The Tripropositional Bivalent Level (3L2) and its Relationship with the Aristotelic Syllogistic.Gabriel Garduño-Soto - 2008 - Mexico, DF, MEXICO: Author's edition.
    In this fragment of Opuscula Logica it is displayed an arithmetical treatment of the aristotelic syllogisms upon the previous interpretations of Christine Ladd-Franklin and Jean Piaget. For the first time, the whole deductive corpus for each syllogism is presented in the two innovative modalities first proposed by Hugo Padilla Chacón. A. The Projection method (all the possible expressions that can be deduced through the conditional from a logical expression) and B. The Retrojection method (all the possible valid antecedents or (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. Completeness of an Ancient Logic.John Corcoran - 1972 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (4):696-702.
    In previous articles, it has been shown that the deductive system developed by Aristotle in his "second logic" is a natural deduction system and not an axiomatic system as previously had been thought. It was also stated that Aristotle's logic is self-sufficient in two senses: First, that it presupposed no other logical concepts, not even those of propositional logic; second, that it is (strongly) complete in the sense that every valid argument expressible in the language of the system is deducible (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   53 citations  
  17. The Contemporary Relevance of Ancient Logical Theory.John Corcoran - 1982 - Philosophical Quarterly 32 (126):76.
    This interesting and imaginative monograph is based on the author’s PhD dissertation supervised by Saul Kripke. It is dedicated to Timothy Smiley, whose interpretation of PRIOR ANALYTICS informs its approach. As suggested by its title, this short work demonstrates conclusively that Aristotle’s syllogistic is a suitable vehicle for fruitful discussion of contemporary issues in logical theory. Aristotle’s syllogistic is represented by Corcoran’s 1972 reconstruction. The review studies Lear’s treatment of Aristotle’s logic, his appreciation of the Corcoran-Smiley paradigm, and his understanding (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  18. Aristotle's Many-Sorted Logic.J. Corcoran - 2008 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 14 (1):155-156.
    As noted in 1962 by Timothy Smiley, if Aristotle’s logic is faithfully translated into modern symbolic logic, the fit is exact. If categorical sentences are translated into many-sorted logic MSL according to Smiley’s method or the two other methods presented here, an argument with arbitrarily many premises is valid according to Aristotle’s system if and only if its translation is valid according to modern standard many-sorted logic. As William Parry observed in 1973, this result can be proved using my 1972 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  19. Logic: A Modern Guide.Colin Beckley - 2016 - Milton Keynes: Think Logically Books.
    This book is written for those who wish to learn some basic principles of formal logic but more importantly learn some easy methods to unpick arguments and assess their value for truth and validity. -/- The first section explains the ideas behind traditional logic which was formed well over two thousand years ago by the ancient Greeks. Terms such as ‘categorical syllogism’, ‘premise’, ‘deduction’ and ‘validity’ may appear at first sight to be inscrutable but will easily be understood with examples (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. A Model of Critical Thinking in Higher Education.Martin Davies - 2014 - In M. B. Paulsen (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. pp. 41-92.
    “Critical thinking in higher education” is a phrase that means many things to many people. It is a broad church. Does it mean a propensity for finding fault? Does it refer to an analytical method? Does it mean an ethical attitude or a disposition? Does it mean all of the above? Educating to develop critical intellectuals and the Marxist concept of critical consciousness are very different from the logician’s toolkit of finding fallacies in passages of text, or the practice of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  21. Causality and Coextensiveness in Aristotle's Posterior Analytics 1.13.Lucas Angioni - 2018 - Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 54:159-185.
    I discuss an important feature of the notion of cause in Post. An. 1. 13, 78b13–28, which has been either neglected or misunderstood. Some have treated it as if Aristotle were introducing a false principle about explanation; others have understood the point in terms of coextensiveness of cause and effect. However, none offers a full exegesis of Aristotle's tangled argument or accounts for all of the text's peculiarities. My aim is to disentangle Aristotle's steps to show that he is arguing (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  22. Demonstração, silogismo e causalidade.Lucas Angioni - 2014 - In Lógica e Ciência em Aristóteles. pp. 61-120.
    This chapter argues in favour of three interrelated points. First, I argue that demonstration (as expression of scientific knowledge) is fundamentally defined as knowledge of the appropriate cause for a given explanandum: to have scientific knowledge of the explanandum is to explain it through its fully appropriate cause. Secondly, I stress that Aristotle’s notion of cause has a “triadic” structure, which fundamentally depends on the predicative formulation (or “regimentation”) of the explanandum. Thirdly, I argue that what has motivated Aristotle to (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  23. Stoic Syllogistic.Susanne Bobzien - 1996 - Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 14:133-92.
    ABSTRACT: For the Stoics, a syllogism is a formally valid argument; the primary function of their syllogistic is to establish such formal validity. Stoic syllogistic is a system of formal logic that relies on two types of argumental rules: (i) 5 rules (the accounts of the indemonstrables) which determine whether any given argument is an indemonstrable argument, i.e. an elementary syllogism the validity of which is not in need of further demonstration; (ii) one unary and three binary argumental rules which (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  24. What Is a Perfect Syllogism in Aristotelian Syllogistic?Theodor Ebert - 2015 - Ancient Philosophy 35 (2):351-374.
    The question as to what makes a perfect Aristotelian syllogism a perfect one has long been discussed by Aristotelian scholars. G. Patzig was the first to point the way to a correct answer: it is the evidence of the logical necessity that is the special feature of perfect syllogisms. Patzig moreover claimed that the evidence of a perfect syllogism can be seen for Barbara in the transitivity of the a-relation. However, this explanation would give Barbara a different status over (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25.  63
    Demonstration and the Indemonstrability of the Stoic Indemonstrables.Susanne Bobzien - 2020 - Phronesis 65 (3):355-378.
    Since Mates’ seminal Stoic Logic there has been uncertainty and debate about how to treat the term anapodeiktos when used of Stoic syllogisms. This paper argues that the customary translation of anapodeiktos by ‘indemonstrable’ is accurate, and it explains why this is so. At the heart of the explanation is an argument that, contrary to what is commonly assumed, indemonstrability is rooted in the generic account of the Stoic epistemic notion of demonstration. Some minor insights into Stoic logic ensue.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. Aristotle's Syllogistic and Core Logic.Neil Tennant - 2014 - History and Philosophy of Logic 35 (2):120-147.
    I use the Corcoran–Smiley interpretation of Aristotle's syllogistic as my starting point for an examination of the syllogistic from the vantage point of modern proof theory. I aim to show that fresh logical insights are afforded by a proof-theoretically more systematic account of all four figures. First I regiment the syllogisms in the Gentzen–Prawitz system of natural deduction, using the universal and existential quantifiers of standard first-order logic, and the usual formalizations of Aristotle's sentence-forms. I explain how the syllogistic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  27. Stoic Logic.Susanne Bobzien - 2003 - In Brad Inwood (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Stoic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
    ABSTRACT: An introduction to Stoic logic. Stoic logic can in many respects be regarded as a fore-runner of modern propositional logic. I discuss: 1. the Stoic notion of sayables or meanings (lekta); the Stoic assertibles (axiomata) and their similarities and differences to modern propositions; the time-dependency of their truth; 2.-3. assertibles with demonstratives and quantified assertibles and their truth-conditions; truth-functionality of negations and conjunctions; non-truth-functionality of disjunctions and conditionals; language regimentation and ‘bracketing’ devices; Stoic basic principles of propositional logic; 4. (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  28. Explanation and Understanding Revisited.Panu Raatikainen - 2017 - In Human Condition. Philosophical Essays in Honour of the Centennial Anniversary of Georg Henrik von Wright. Helsinki: , The Philosophical Society of Finland. pp. 339-353.
    "Explanation and Understanding" (1971) by Georg Henrik von Wright is a modern classic in analytic hermeneutics, and in the philosophy of the social sciences and humanities in general. In this work, von Wright argues against naturalism, or methodological monism, i.e. the idea that both the natural sciences and the social sciences follow broadly the same general scientific approach and aim to achieve causal explanations. Against this view, von Wright contends that the social sciences are qualitatively different from the natural sciences: (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. Why Are There No Conditionals in Aristotle’s Logic?David Ebrey - 2015 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 53 (2):185-205.
    Aristotle presents a formal logic in the Prior Analytics in which the premises and conclusions are never conditionals. In this paper I argue that he did not simply overlook conditionals, nor does their absence reflect a metaphysical prejudice on his part. Instead, he thinks that arguments with conditionals cannot be syllogisms because of the way he understands the explanatory requirement in the definition of a syllogism: the requirement that the conclusion follow because of the premises. The key passage is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  30. Was Ist Ein Vollkommener Syllogismus des Aristoteles?Theodor Ebert - 1995 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 77 (3):221-247.
    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 (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  31. Aristotle’s Assertoric Syllogistic and Modern Relevance Logic.Philipp Julius6 Steinkrüger - 2015 - Synthese 192 (5):1413-1444.
    This paper sets out to evaluate the claim that Aristotle’s Assertoric Syllogistic is a relevance logic or shows significant similarities with it. I prepare the grounds for a meaningful comparison by extracting the notion of relevance employed in the most influential work on modern relevance logic, Anderson and Belnap’s Entailment. This notion is characterized by two conditions imposed on the concept of validity: first, that some meaning content is shared between the premises and the conclusion, and second, that the premises (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  32. ARISTOTELIAN LOGIC AND EUCLIDEAN GEOMETRY.John Corcoran - 2014 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 20 (1):131-2.
    John Corcoran and George Boger. Aristotelian logic and Euclidean geometry. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic. 20 (2014) 131. -/- By an Aristotelian logic we mean any system of direct and indirect deductions, chains of reasoning linking conclusions to premises—complete syllogisms, to use Aristotle’s phrase—1) intended to show that their conclusions follow logically from their respective premises and 2) resembling those in Aristotle’s Prior Analytics. Such systems presuppose existence of cases where it is not obvious that the conclusion follows from the (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33.  92
    Transcendental Paralogisms as Formal Fallacies - Kant’s Refutation of Pure Rational Psychology.Toni Kannisto - 2018 - Kant-Studien 109 (2):195-227.
    : According to Kant, the arguments of rational psychology are formal fallacies that he calls transcendental paralogisms. It remains heavily debated whether there actually is any formal error in the inferences Kant presents: according to Grier and Allison, they are deductively invalid syllogisms, whereas Bennett, Ameriks, and Van Cleve deny that they are formal fallacies. I advance an interpretation that reconciles these extremes: transcendental paralogisms are sound in general logic but constitute formal fallacies in transcendental logic. By formalising the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. Systemy sylogistyki dowodowej.Piotr Kulicki - 2010 - Roczniki Filozoficzne 58 (1):139-154.
    Aristotle in Analytica Posteriora presented a notion of proof as a special case of syllogism. In the present paper the remarks of Aristotle on the subject are used as an inspiration for developing formal systems of demonstrative syllogistic, which are supposed to formalize syllogisms that are proofs. We build our systems in the style of J. Łukasiewicz as theories based on classical propositional logic. The difference between our systems and systems of syllogistic known from the literature lays in the (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. THE NORMATIVITY OF THE MENTAL: ZANGWILL AND A CONSERVATIVE STANDPOINT OF PHILOSOPHY.Yusuke Kaneko - 2011 - International Journal of Arts and Sciences 4 (7):99–114.
    This paper is devoted to defending philosophical studies of mind, especially traditional ones. In my view, human mentality is a dialogue with myself, which has a social aspect that is never explained nor predicted by scientific studies. We firstly derive this picture from Descartes’ classical argmuments (§§2-3), and then develop it in the context of Kantian ethics (§4). Some readers think this combination arbitrary. However, these two philosophers agree on mind/body dualism (§5), and further, the fact that the dialogue is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36. From Syllogism to Predicate Calculus.Thomas J. McQuade - 1994 - Teaching Philosophy 17 (4):293-309.
    The purpose of this paper is to outline an alternative approach to introductory logic courses. Traditional logic courses usually focus on the method of natural deduction or introduce predicate calculus as a system. These approaches complicate the process of learning different techniques for dealing with categorical and hypothetical syllogisms such as alternate notations or alternate forms of analyzing syllogisms. The author's approach takes up observations made by Dijkstrata and assimilates them into a reasoning process based on modified notations. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37. L'idée de Logique Morale aux XIIIe Et XIVe Siècles.Aurélien Robert - 2012 - Médiévales 63:27-45.
    This paper tries to understand how three medieval philosophers (Roger Bacon, Albert the Great and John Buridan) developed the idea of a special logic for ethics, taking into account Aristotle's thesis according to which ethics does not need theoretical syllogisms and uses a special kind of scientific reasoning. If rhetoric is a good candidate, we find three different readings of this approach and then three different theories of ethical reasoning.
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38.  57
    Zur Formulierung prädikativer Aussagen in den logischen Schriften des Aristoteles.Theodor Ebert - 1977 - Phronesis 22 (2):123 - 145.
    Why does Aristotle not use the copulative wording for categorical propositions, but instead the clumsier terminological formulations (e. g. the B belongs to every A) in his syllogistic? The proposed explanations by Alexander, Lukasiewicz and Patzig: Aristotle wants to make clear the difference between subject and predicate, seems to be insufficient. In quantified categorical propositions, this difference is always sufficiently clear by the use of the pronouns going with the subject expressions. Aristotle opts for the terminological wording because in premiss (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39.  85
    Future Logic: Categorical and Conditional Deduction and Induction of the Natural, Temporal, Extensional, and Logical Modalities.Avi Sion - 1990,1996 - Geneva, Switzerland: CreateSpace & Kindle; Lulu..
    Future Logic is an original, and wide-ranging treatise of formal logic. It deals with deduction and induction, of categorical and conditional propositions, involving the natural, temporal, extensional, and logical modalities. Traditional and Modern logic have covered in detail only formal deduction from actual categoricals, or from logical conditionals (conjunctives, hypotheticals, and disjunctives). Deduction from modal categoricals has also been considered, though very vaguely and roughly; whereas deduction from natural, temporal and extensional forms of conditioning has been all but totally ignored. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40.  52
    The Logic of Causation: Definition, Induction and Deduction of Deterministic Causality.Avi Sion - 1999-2000, 2003- - Geneva, Switzerland: CreateSpace & Kindle; Lulu..
    The Logic of Causation: Definition, Induction and Deduction of Deterministic Causality is a treatise of formal logic and of aetiology. It is an original and wide-ranging investigation of the definition of causation (deterministic causality) in all its forms, and of the deduction and induction of such forms. The work was carried out in three phases over a dozen years (1998-2010), each phase introducing more sophisticated methods than the previous to solve outstanding problems. This study was intended as part of a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41.  19
    Силлогизм О Добродетельных Мудрецах.Yaroslav Slinin - 2018 - Schole 12 (1):63-71.
    The article deals with the Aristotelian doctrine of induction and its influence on the theory of induction of Al-Farabi. Inductive syllogisms of antiquity and the Middle Ages are compared with modern inferences by induction.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. A Lógica de Lewis Carroll.John L. Lindemann - 2017 - Dissertation,
    The present dissertation presents an examination of the Carrollian logic through the reconstruction of its syllogistic theory. Lewis Carroll was one of the main responsible for the dissemination of logic during the nineteenth century, but most of his logical writings remained unknown until a posthumous publication of 1977. The reconstruction of the Carrollian syllogistic theory was based on the comparison of the two books on author's logic, "The Game of Logic" and "Symbolic Logic". The analysis of the Carrollian syllogistics starts (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark