The author's dissertation, Freiburg, 1928. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Baylor University, 2008. / Bibliographic references (p. 157-158)

Orientador: Lucas Angioni / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-26T09:17:32Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Weinmann_Felipe_M.pdf: 1670373 bytes, checksum: 9d9632c815554f31a3a37b452a000b29 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014 / Resumo: A Definição Geral do Silogismo pode ser entendida como consistindo em duas partes de sua descrição de argumentos lógicos: as Condições Inferenciais e a Cláusula Final. Embora essa distinção clássica seja amplamente conhecida, a tradição interpretativa negligencia o papel que a Cláusula Final desempenha na silogística, concentrando-se apenas nas exigências estabelecidas pelas Condições Inferenciais. Tentamos mostrar que essa negligência da Cláusula Final descaracteriza não só a silogística, como também traz resultados indesejáveis para a exegese dos Primeiros Analíticos I. Por causa dessa negligência, tentamos propor uma análise da Cláusula Final e suas consequências para a própria silogística, apresentando-a como critério adicional próprio da Definição Geral do Silogismo e como fio condutor do primeiro livro da obra / Abstract: Aristotle's General Definition of the Syllogism may be taken as consisting of two parts: the Inferential Conditions and the Final Clause. Although this distinction being well known, traditional interpretations neglect the Final Clause and its influence on syllogistic. Instead, the aforementioned tradition focuses on the Inferential Conditions only. We intend to show that this neglect has severe consequences not just on syllogistic but on the whole exegesis of Aristotle's Prior Analytics I. Due to these consequences, our objective is to analyse the General Definition's Final Clause and its consequences on syllogistic. We propose a reading of the Final Clause as an additional criterion for distinguishing some arguments as properly syllogistic ones and as a main theme which connects all parts of the Prior Analytics I into one coherent piece of work / Mestrado / Filosofia / Mestre em Filosofia

Orientador: Lucas Angioni / Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-20T11:18:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Ferreira_MateusRicardoFernandes_D.pdf: 823119 bytes, checksum: 7ba656176385de662b9d8593f14aa89d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012 / Resumo: Nesta tese discuto aspectos da logica de Aristóteles que sao ressaltados por abordagens contemporâneas dos Primeiros Analíticos e que mostram uma teoria mais rica e sutil do que tradicionalmente se entende como sendo a lógica aristotelica. Em especial, abordo teses sobre como devem ser compreendidas as proposições categóricas, o que sao precisamente silogismos, o que sao silogismos perfeitos e quais problemas enfrenta a parte da lógica de Aristoteles que lida com proposicoes modais. Nessa direcao, abordo evidencias textuais para duas concepcoes de proposicao categorica e as dificuldades para coaduna-las com as proposicoes singulares. Alem disso, argumento que silogismos devem ser compreendidos como cadeias de predicacoes e que Aristoteles concebe um sistema logico quando procura justificar quais arranjos entre termos formam de fato tais cadeias. Argumento, tambem, que os silogismos perfeitos sao evidentes nesse sistema nao porque considerados indemonstraveis, mas porque podem ser deduzidos a partir de definicoes das proposicoes categoricas e de certas regras gerais, isto e, de regras aplicaveis nao apenas a um tipo de proposicao categorica. Por fim, apresento as caracteristicas gerais e as dificuldades de uma parte da logica de Aristoteles muito pouco associada a logica aristotelica como tradicionalmente entendida: a silogistica modal / Abstract: The present dissertation discusses aspects of Aristotle's Logic which are enhanced by contemporary approaches to Prior Analytics and display a logical theory richer and subtler than what traditionally is comprehended as being the Aristotelian Logic. My main claims concern how categorical propositions must be understood, what is the exact nature of syllogisms, what is a perfect syllogism, as well as some questions in the part of Aristotelian Logic which deals with modal propositions. From an examination of texts that support two different conceptions of categorical proposition, I discuss the difficulties in adjusting each of them to singular propositions. I also argue that syllogisms must be comprehended as chains of predications and that Aristotle conceives a logical system when he proceeds to justify which terms arrangement does produce chains of the required kind. I also argue that in this system perfect syllogisms must be understood as evident not because they are unproved, but because they are deduced from definitions for categorical propositions and from general rules, i.e. rules not applied just to some categorical propositions. Finally, I discuss general features and problems concerning a part of Aristotle's Logic rarely attached to the Aristotelian Logic as traditionally comprehended: the modal syllogistic / Doutorado / Filosofia / Doutor em Filosofia

Cette thèse se rapporte à la notion de contradiction, entendue en son sens logique ou formel. Plus précisément, elle vise à dégager une conception de la contradiction chez un philosophe qui, du point de vue chronologique, précède l’avènement de la syllogistique et de la logique : Platon. À partir de l’examen des dialogues réfutatifs de Platon, il s’agira de mettre en lumière la forme des propositions contradictoires, de déterminer la terminologie et les métaphores utilisées par Platon pour nommer et décrire la contradiction et d’évaluer le contexte dans lequel avait lieu la réflexion platonicienne. L’analyse révélera que Platon se faisait une idée somme toute assez précise de la contradiction logique et qu’il a même eu une influence sur Aristote lorsque ce dernier élabora son célèbre principe de non-contradiction. / This thesis examines the notion of contradiction understood in its logical or formal sense. Specifically, it seeks to study that notion in a philosopher who, chronologically speaking, precedes the advent of syllogistic or logic: Plato. Based on an analysis of Plato’s refutative dialogues, this thesis will determine the form given by Plato to contradictory propositions, unveil the terminology and metaphors used by Plato to name and describe contradictions and evaluate the context in which Plato reflected upon contradiction. The analysis will reveal that Plato had a very clear idea of what is a logical contradiction and that he even had an influence on Aristotle when the latter defined his famous principle of non-contradiction.

Cette thèse se rapporte à la notion de contradiction, entendue en son sens logique ou formel. Plus précisément, elle vise à dégager une conception de la contradiction chez un philosophe qui, du point de vue chronologique, précède l’avènement de la syllogistique et de la logique : Platon. À partir de l’examen des dialogues réfutatifs de Platon, il s’agira de mettre en lumière la forme des propositions contradictoires, de déterminer la terminologie et les métaphores utilisées par Platon pour nommer et décrire la contradiction et d’évaluer le contexte dans lequel avait lieu la réflexion platonicienne. L’analyse révélera que Platon se faisait une idée somme toute assez précise de la contradiction logique et qu’il a même eu une influence sur Aristote lorsque ce dernier élabora son célèbre principe de non-contradiction. / This thesis examines the notion of contradiction understood in its logical or formal sense. Specifically, it seeks to study that notion in a philosopher who, chronologically speaking, precedes the advent of syllogistic or logic: Plato. Based on an analysis of Plato’s refutative dialogues, this thesis will determine the form given by Plato to contradictory propositions, unveil the terminology and metaphors used by Plato to name and describe contradictions and evaluate the context in which Plato reflected upon contradiction. The analysis will reveal that Plato had a very clear idea of what is a logical contradiction and that he even had an influence on Aristotle when the latter defined his famous principle of non-contradiction.