جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « قیاس اقترانی شرطی-حملی » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Throughout the texts of contemporary logicians, it has been explicitly or implicitly stated that the division of propositions into actuality, mental and factual, has no effect on logical syllogisms. In the following text, first, by analyzing the opinions of contemporaries on the division of propositions into actuality, mental and factual, the differences and similarities of the opinions in this regard have been identified. Then we examine the position of the conditional's quantifier and its effect on the conditions of conditional-categorical syllogisms (conjunctive or exceptive) in the opinions of contemporary logicians. In the final step and based on the conditions of conditional-categorical syllogisms (conjunctive or exceptive), we have shown that some of the moods that most contemporaries have declared to be valid have counter-examples, and only with the factual of the categorical premises in all situations and for all samples will result.

The necessity of the compatibility in all elements of logic is something that has never been denied among Muslims intellectuals. Throughout the history of logic, any possible inconsistency in the rules of logic, albeit small, has led to a careful study by Muslim logicians. In the continuation of this process, the present text introduces an important inconsistency in the current views of the logicians. In contemporary opinion, the division of predicative proposition into three categories: actuality, mental, and factual (with differences in interpretation) has been endorsed by most Islamic logicians and philosophers. It is claimed that this division is independent of the rest of the rules of logic and can be accepted without changing the syllogism expressed in the logical tradition. In this paper, it is presented that elements of the conditional-predicative conjunctive syllogisms can only be accepted if the predicative propositions are factual. This claim is proved by examining the conditional- predicative conjunctive syllogism by sharing an incomplete part and the middle term is a part of conditional consequence. This part of the syllogism in the tradition of Avicennian logic is considered the most obvious example of conditional-predicative syllogism with a shared incomplete part. Careful examination of the evidence in the books of the Avicennian logicians has shown the validity of our claim.