Narrow your search

Library

KU Leuven (1)

UCLouvain (1)

UGent (1)

ULB (1)

ULiège (1)


Resource type

book (1)


Language

English (1)


Year
From To Submit

2014 (1)

Listing 1 - 1 of 1
Sort by

Book
On Aristotle Prior analytics 1.14-22
Authors: --- ---
ISBN: 0715634070 0715628763 9781472557803 9780715634073 9781472557810 9780715628768 1780938810 9781780938813 1472557808 9780715628553 0715634089 1472557816 0715628550 9780715634080 9781472558480 1472558480 Year: 2014 Publisher: London : Bloomsbury,

Loading...
Export citation

Choose an application

Bookmark

Abstract

The commentary of Alexander of Aphrodisias on Aristotle's Prior Analytics 1.8-22 is the main ancient commentary, by the 'greatest' commentator, on the chapters of the Prior Analytics in which Aristotle invented modal logic - the logic of propositions about what is necessary or contingent (possible). In this volume, which covers chapters 1.8-13, Alexander of Aphrodisias reaches the chapter in which Aristotle discusses the notion of contingency. Also included in this volume is Alexander's commentary on that part of Prior Analytics 1.17 which explains the conversion of contingent propositions (the rest of 1.17 is included in the second volume of Mueller's translation). In the second volume, the 'greatest' commentator, Alexander, concludes his discussion of Aristotle's modal logic. In the second half of book 1 of the Prior Analytics, Aristotle reflects on the application of the formalized logic he has developed in the first half, focusing particularly on the non-modal or assertoric syllogistic developed in the first seven chapters. The last 14 chapters of book 1 of Aristotle's "Prior Analytics" are concerned with the representation in the formal language of syllogistic of propositions and arguments expressed in more or less everyday Greek. In his commentary on those chapters, "Alexander of Aphrodisias" explains some of Aristotle's more opaque assertions and discusses post-Aristotelian ideas in semantics and the philosophy of language. In doing so he provides an unusual insight into the way in which these disciplines developed in the Hellenistic era. He also shows a more sophisticated understanding of these fields than Aristotle himself, while remaining a staunch defender of Aristotle's emphasis on meaning as opposed to Stoics concern with verbal formulation. In his commentary on the final chapter of book 1 Alexander offers a thorough discussion of Aristotle's distinction between denying that something is, for example, white and asserting that it is non-white.

Listing 1 - 1 of 1
Sort by