As then the reasoning of the syllogism was the main problem of
Aristotle's logic, what was his analysis of it? In distinguishing
inner and outer reason, or reasoning and discourse, he added that it
is not to outer reason but to inner reason in the soul that
demonstration and syllogism are directed (_Post. An._ i. 10). One
would expect, then, an analysis of mental reasoning into mental
judgments ([Greek: kriseis]) as premises and conclusion. In point of
fact, he analysed it into premises, but then analysed a premise into
terms, which he divided into subject and predicate, with the addition
of the copula "is" or "is not." This analysis, regarded as a whole and
as it is applied in the _Analytics_ and in the other logical
treatises, was evidently intended as a linguistic analysis. So in the
_Categories_, he first divided things said ([Greek: ta legomena]) into
uncombined and combined, or names and propositions, and then divided
the former into categories; and in the _De interpretatione_ he
expressly excluded mental conceptions and their combinations, and
confined himself to nouns and verbs and enunciations, or, as we should
say, to names and propositions. Aristotle apparently intended, or at
all events has given logicians in general the impression, that he
intended to analyse syllogism into propositions as premises, and
premise into names as terms. His logic therefore exhibits the curious
paradox of being an analysis of mental reasoning into linguistic
elements. The explanation is that outer speech is more obvious than
inner thought, and that grammar and poetic criticism, rhetoric and
dialectic preceded logic, and that out of those arts of language arose
the science of reasoning. The sophist Protagoras had distinguished
various kinds of sentences, and Plato had divided the sentence into
noun and verb, signifying a thing and the action of a thing.
Rhetoricians had enumerated various means of persuasion, some of which
are logical forms, e.g. probability and sign, example and enthymeme.
Among the dialecticians, Socrates had used inductive arguments to
obtain definitions as data of deductive arguments against his
opponents, and Plato had insisted on the processes of ascending to and
descending from an unconditional principle by the power of giving and
receiving argument. All these points about speech, eloquence and
argument between man and man were absorbed into Aristotle's theory of
reasoning, and in particular the grammar of the sentence consisting of
noun and verb caused the logic of the proposition consisting of
subject and predicate. At the same time, Aristotle was well aware that
the science of reasoning is no art of language and must take up a
different position towards speech as the expression of thought. In the
_Categories_ he classified names, not, however, as a grammarian by
their structure, but as a logician by their signification. In the _De
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account