Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Pagnan, Ruggero 2012. A Diagrammatic Calculus of Syllogisms. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, Vol. 21, Issue. 3, p. 347.


    ×

AN INTENSIONAL LEIBNIZ SEMANTICS FOR ARISTOTELIAN LOGIC

  • KLAUS GLASHOFF (a1)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1755020309990396
  • Published online: 01 March 2010
Abstract

Since Frege’s predicate logical transcription of Aristotelian categorical logic, the standard semantics of Aristotelian logic considers terms as standing for sets of individuals. From a philosophical standpoint, this extensional model poses problems: There exist serious doubts that Aristotle’s terms were meant to refer always to sets, that is, entities composed of individuals. Classical philosophy up to Leibniz and Kant had a different view on this question—they looked at terms as standing for concepts (“Begriffe”). In 1972, Corcoran presented a formal system for Aristotelian logic containing a calculus of natural deduction, while, with respect to semantics, he still made use of an extensional interpretation. In this paper we deal with a simple intensional semantics for Corcoran’s syntax—intensional in the sense that no individuals are needed for the construction of a complete Tarski model of Aristotelian syntax. Instead, we view concepts as containing or excluding other, “higher” concepts—corresponding to the idea which Leibniz used in the construction of his characteristic numbers. Thus, this paper is an addendum to Corcoran’s work, furnishing his formal syntax with an adequate semantics which is free from presuppositions which have entered into modern interpretations of Aristotle’s theory via predicate logic.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG, BUNDESSTRASSE 55, D-20146 HAMBURG, GERMANY E-mail:klaus@glashoff.net
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

G. Boger (1998). Completion, reduction and analysis: Three proof-theoretic processes in Aristotle’s Prior Analytics. History and Philosophy of Logic, 19, 187226.

J. Corcoran (1974). Aristotle’s natural deduction system. In J. Corcoran , editor. Ancient Logic and Its Modern Interpretation. Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel, pp. 85131.

K. Glashoff (2005). Aristotelian syntax from a computational-combinatorial point of view. Journal of Logic and Computation, 15(6), 949973.

J. Lyons (1977). Semantics: Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

J. N Martin . (1997). Aristotle’s natural deduction reconsidered. History and Philosophy of Logic, 18, 115.

W. v. O. Quine (1951). Two dogmas of empiricism. The Philosophical Review, 60, 2043.

T. Smiley (1973). What is a syllogism? Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2, 136154.

R. Smith (1983). An ecthetic syllogistic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 24, 224232.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Review of Symbolic Logic
  • ISSN: 1755-0203
  • EISSN: 1755-0211
  • URL: /core/journals/review-of-symbolic-logic
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×