Keywords
the divine
immutability
hypothetical syllogism
agreed hypotheses
How to Cite
Abstract
In the present work, we will analyze the methodological procedures implemented by Aristotle in fragment 16 of On Philosophy, where he postulates a certain entity, characterized as divine and eternal. To account for this entity, he uses an argument that can be divided into three moments: in the first moment, he presents the reasoning for which its eternity should be accepted; in the second instance, he establishes the identification between the divine and the optimal and focuses on the possible causes for which something changes; finally, based on this last result, in the third moment he focuses on demonstrating that the divine is immutable. To do this, he uses what he usually calls “hypothetical syllogisms.” Our objective is to examine the dialectical use of this type of syllogisms, which in the first part of the fragment are comparable to what in the terminology of current logic we know as modus ponens and towards the end of the fragment take the form from a reduction to the impossible.
Aristote (1967). Topiques I-IV. Introduction (J. Brunschwig, Trad.). Belles Letres.
Aristote (2007). Topiques VI- VIII (J. Brunschwig, Trad.). Belles Letres.
Aristotele (1963). Aristotele, Della filosofia (M. Untersteiner, Trad.). Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura.
Aristotele (2008). Aristotele, I Dialoghi (M. Zanatta, Trad.). Biblioteca Universitaria Rizzoli.
Aristóteles (1988). Tratados de lógica (Órganon). Categorías Tópicos - Sobre las refutaciones sofísticas [Tomo I] (M. Candel, Trad.). Gredos.
Aristóteles. (1993). Física (M. Boeri, Trad.). Biblos.
Aristóteles. (1995). Tratados de lógica (Órganon). Sobre la interpretación. Analíticos primeros. Analíticos segundos. Tomo II (M. Candel, Trad.). Gredos.
Aristóteles (2005). Fragmentos (A. Vallejo Campos, Trad.). Gredos.
Aristóteles (1962-1963). Sobre la filosofía y sobre el bien: fragmentos selectos (J. Teuzabá, Trad.), Ideas y valores, 4 (15-16), 92- 133.
Aristóteles (1996). Sobre el cielo (M. Candel, Trad. ), Gredos.
Bernays, J. (1968). Dialoge des Aristoteles in ihrem Verhaltnis zu seinen übrigen Werken. Hertz.
Berti, E. (1962). La filosofia del “primo” Aristotele. Cedam.
Berti, E. (1987). Contraddizione e dialettica negli antichi e nei moderni. L’EPOS.
Berti, E. (1997). La filosofia del “primo” Aristotele. Centro di Richerche di Metafisica dell’Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore.
Berti, E. (2004). Aristotele: dalla dialettica alla filosofia prima. Bompiani.
Berti, E. (2008). Las razones de Aristóteles. Oinos.
Besnier, B. (1998). La définition aristotélicienne du changement. En P. M. Morel (Ed.), Aristote et la notion de nature. Enjeux épistémologiques et pratiques (pp. 15-34). Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux.
Bignone, E. (1973). L’Aristotele perduto e la formazione filosofica di Epicuro. La Nuova Italia.
Bobzien, S. (2002). The Development of Modus Ponens in Antiquity: From Aristotle to the 2nd Century AD. Phronesis, 47 (4), 359-394.
Bochensky, I. M. (1951). Ancient Formal Logic. Holland Publishing Co.
Boss, P. (2008). A Double Theology in Aristotle, De philosophia, fr. 26 Ross (= Cic., De natura deorum 1.13.33). Prudentia, 20, 43-64.
Capacho, L. (2008). La lógica proposicional en Analíticos de Aristóteles. Revista de Filosofía Univiversidad de Costa Rica, 64 (117/118), 137-143.
Cherniss, H. (1946) Aristotle's Criticism of Plato and the Academy. Johns Hopkins Press.
Cooper, J. (1987). Hypothetical Necessity and Natural Teleology. En J. Lennox y A. Gotthelf (Ed.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology (pp. 243-274). Cambridge University Press.
Corcoran, J. (1974). Aristotle’s Natural Deduction System. En J. Corcoran (Ed.), Ancient Logic and its Modern Interpretations (pp. 85-132). Reidel Publishing Company.
Düring, I. (1961), Aristotle’s Protrepticus, An Attempt at Reconstruction, , Almqvist & Wiksell.
Düring, I. (1990). Aristóteles. Exposición e interpretación de su pensamiento (B. Navarro, Trad.). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Guthrie, W. K. C. (1933). The development of Aristotle’s dieology. Class. Quarterly, (27), 162-171
Jaeger, W. (1993). Aristóteles. Bases para la historia de su desarrollo (J. Gaos, Trad.). Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Kneale W. C. y Kneale, M. (1962). The Development of Logic. Clarendon Press.
Lear, J. (1980). Aristotle and Logical Theory. Cambridge University Press.
Lukasiewicz, J. (1957). Aristotle’s Syllogistic From The Standpoint of Modern Formal Logic. Clarendon Press.
Malink, M. (2018). Demonstration by reductio ad impossibile in Posterior Analytics https://as.nyu.edu/content/dam/nyu-as/philosophy/documents/Malink_Demonstration%20by%20reductio%20in%20Posterior%20Analytics%201.26.pdf
Mié, F. (2013). Demostración y silogismo en los Analíticos segundos. Reconstrucción y discusión. Diánoia, 58 (70), 35-58.
Quarantotto, D. (2002). Causa finale, sostanza, essenza in Aristotele. Saggio sulla struttura dei processi teleologici naturali e sulla funzione del telos. Bibliopolis.
Rose, V. (1966). Aristotelis qui ferebantur Librorum Fragmenta. Teubner.
Ross, W. D. (1964). Aristotelis Dialogorum Fragmenta. Clarendon Press.
Rossi, G. (2006). Entre lo accidental y lo aparente: la peculiar constelación causal del azar según Aristóteles. Tópicos 30 bis, 147-170.
Rossi, G. (2011). El azar según Aristóteles. Estructuras de la causalidad accidental en los procesos naturales y en la acción. Akademie Verlag.
Slomkowski, P. (1997). Aristotle's Topics [Philosophia Antiqua; vol. 74]. Brill.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Claudia Seggiaro