Term logic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Approach to logic

In philosophy, term logic, also known as traditional logic, syllogistic logic or Aristotelian logic, is a loose name for an approach to formal logic that began with Aristotle and was developed further in ancient history mostly by his followers, the peripatetics. It was revived after the third century CE by Porphyry's Isagoge.

Term logic revived in medieval times, first in Islamic logic by Alpharabius in the tenth century, and later in Christian Europe in the twelfth century with the advent of new logic, remaining dominant until the advent of predicate logic in the late nineteenth century.

However, even if eclipsed by newer logical systems, term logic still plays a significant role in the study of logic. Rather than radically breaking with term logic, modern logics typically expand it, so to understand the newer systems, one must be acquainted with the earlier one.

Contents

• 1 Aristotle's system
• 2 Basics
• 3 Term
• 4 Proposition
• 5 Singular terms
• 6 Influence on philosophy
• 7 Decline of term logic
• 8 Revival
• 9 See also
• 10 Notes
• 11 References
• 12 External links

Aristotle's system[edit]

Aristotle's logical work is collected in the six texts that are collectively known as the Organon. Two of these texts in particular, namely the Prior Analytics and De Interpretatione, contain the heart of Aristotle's treatment of judgements and formal inference, and it is principally this part of Aristotle's works that is about term logic. Modern work on Aristotle's logic builds on the tradition started in 1951 with the establishment by Jan Lukasiewicz of a revolutionary paradigm.^[1] Lukasiewicz's approach was reinvigorated in the early 1970s by John Corcoran and Timothy Smiley – which informs modern translations of Prior Analytics by Robin Smith in 1989 and Gisela Striker in 2009.^[2]

Basics[edit]

The fundamental assumption behind the theory is that the formal model of propositions are composed of two logical symbols called terms – hence the name "two-term theory" or "term logic" – and that the reasoning process is in turn built from propositions:

• The term is a part of speech representing something, but which is not true or false in its own right, such as "man" or "mortal". As originally conceived, all terms would be drawn from one of ten categories enumerated by Aristotle in his Organon, classifying all objects and qualities within the domain of logical discourse.
• The formal model of proposition consists of two terms, one of which, the "predicate", is "affirmed" or "denied" of the other, the "subject", and which is capable of truth or falsity.
• The syllogism is an inference in which one proposition (the "conclusion") follows of necessity from two other propositions (the "premises").

A proposition may be universal or particular, and it may be affirmative or negative. Traditionally, the four kinds of propositions are:

• A-type: Universal and affirmative ("All philosophers are mortal")
• I-type: Particular and affirmative ("Some philosophers are mortal")
• E-type: Universal and negative ("All philosophers are not mortal")
• O-type: Particular and negative ("Some philosophers are not mortal")

This was called the fourfold scheme of propositions (see types of syllogism for an explanation of the letters A, I, E, and O in the traditional square). Aristotle's original square of opposition, however, does not lack existential import.

In the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article, "The Traditional Square of Opposition", Terence Parsons explains:

One central concern of the Aristotelian tradition in logic is the theory of the categorical syllogism. This is the theory of two-premised arguments in which the premises and conclusion share three terms among them, with each proposition containing two of them. It is distinctive of this enterprise that everybody agrees on which syllogisms are valid. The theory of the syllogism partly constrains the interpretation of the forms. For example, it determines that the A form has existential import, at least if the I form does. For one of the valid patterns (Darapti) is:

Every C is B

Every C is A

So, some A is B

This is invalid if the A form lacks existential import, and valid if it has existential import. It is held to be valid, and so we know how the A form is to be interpreted. One then naturally asks about the O form; what do the syllogisms tell us about it? The answer is that they tell us nothing. This is because Aristotle did not discuss weakened forms of syllogisms, in which one concludes a particular proposition when one could already conclude the corresponding universal. For example, he does not mention the form:

No C is B

Every A is C

So, some A is not B

If people had thoughtfully taken sides for or against the validity of this form, that would clearly be relevant to the understanding of the O form. But the weakened forms were typically ignored...

One other piece of subject-matter bears on the interpretation of the O form. People were interested in Aristotle's discussion of "infinite" negation, which is the use of negation to form a term from a term instead of a proposition from a proposition. In modern English we use "non" for this; we make "non-horse," which is true for exactly those things that are not horses. In medieval Latin "non" and "not" are the same word, and so the distinction required special discussion. It became common to use infinite negation, and logicians pondered its logic. Some writers in the twelfth century and thirteenth centuries adopted a principle called "conversion by contraposition". It states that

• 'Every S is P ' is equivalent to 'Every non-P is non-S '
• 'Some S is not P ' is equivalent to 'Some non-P is not non-S '

Unfortunately, this principle (which is not endorsed by Aristotle) conflicts with the idea that there may be empty or universal terms. For in the universal case it leads directly from the truth:

Every man is a being

to the falsehood:

Every non-being is a non-man

(which is false because the universal affirmative has existential import, and there are no non-beings). And in the particular case it leads from the truth (remember that the O form has no existential import):

A chimera is not a man

To the falsehood:

A non-man is not a non-chimera

These are [Jean] Buridan's examples, used in the fourteenth century to show the invalidity of contraposition. Unfortunately, by Buridan's time the principle of contraposition had been advocated by a number of authors. The doctrine is already present in several twelfth century tracts, and it is endorsed in the thirteenth century by Peter of Spain, whose work was republished for centuries, by William Sherwood, and by Roger Bacon. By the fourteenth century, problems associated with contraposition seem to be well-known, and authors generally cite the principle and note that it is not valid, but that it becomes valid with an additional assumption of existence of things falling under the subject term. For example, Paul of Venice in his eclectic and widely published Logica Parva from the end of the fourteenth century gives the traditional square with simple conversion but rejects conversion by contraposition, essentially for Buridan's reason.^[3]

— Terence Parsons, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Term[edit]

A term (Greek ὅρος horos) is the basic component of the proposition. The original meaning of the horos (and also of the Latin terminus) is "extreme" or "boundary". The two terms lie on the outside of the proposition, joined by the act of affirmation or denial.

For early modern logicians like Arnauld (whose Port-Royal Logic was the best-known text of his day), it is a psychological entity like an "idea" or "concept". Mill considers it a word. To assert "all Greeks are men" is not to say that the concept of Greeks is the concept of men, or that word "Greeks" is the word "men". A proposition cannot be built from real things or ideas, but it is not just meaningless words either.

Proposition[edit]

In term logic, a "proposition" is simply a form of language: a particular kind of sentence, in which the subject and predicate are combined, so as to assert something true or false. It is not a thought, or an abstract entity. The word "propositio" is from the Latin, meaning the first premise of a syllogism. Aristotle uses the word premise (protasis) as a sentence affirming or denying one thing or another (Posterior Analytics 1. 1 24a 16), so a premise is also a form of words.

However, as in modern philosophical logic, it means that which is asserted by the sentence. Writers before Frege and Russell, such as Bradley, sometimes spoke of the "judgment" as something distinct from a sentence, but this is not quite the same. As a further confusion the word "sentence" derives from the Latin, meaning an opinion or judgment, and so is equivalent to "proposition".

The logical quality of a proposition is whether it is affirmative (the predicate is affirmed of the subject) or negative (the predicate is denied of the subject). Thus every philosopher is mortal is affirmative, since the mortality of philosophers is affirmed universally, whereas no philosopher is mortal is negative by denying such mortality in particular.

The quantity of a proposition is whether it is universal (the predicate is affirmed or denied of all subjects or of "the whole") or particular (the predicate is affirmed or denied of some subject or a "part" thereof). In case where existential import is assumed, quantification implies the existence of at least one subject, unless disclaimed.

Singular terms[edit]

For Aristotle, the distinction between singular and universal is a fundamental metaphysical one, and not merely grammatical. A singular term for Aristotle is primary substance, which can only be predicated of itself: (this) "Callias" or (this) "Socrates" are not predicable of any other thing, thus one does not say every Socrates one says every human (De Int. 7; Meta. D9, 1018a4). It may feature as a grammatical predicate, as in the sentence "the person coming this way is Callias". But it is still a logical subject.

He contrasts universal (katholou)^[4] secondary substance, genera, with primary substance, particular (kath' hekaston)^[4][5] specimens. The formal nature of universals, in so far as they can be generalized "always, or for the most part", is the subject matter of both scientific study and formal logic.^[6]

The essential feature of the syllogism is that, of the four terms in the two premises, one must occur twice. Thus

All Greeks are men

All men are mortal.

The subject of one premise, must be the predicate of the other, and so it is necessary to eliminate from the logic any terms which cannot function both as subject and predicate, namely singular terms.

However, in a popular 17th-century version of the syllogism, Port-Royal Logic, singular terms were treated as universals:^[7]

All men are mortals

All Socrates are men

All Socrates are mortals

This is clearly awkward, a weakness exploited by Frege in his devastating attack on the system.

The famous syllogism "Socrates is a man ...", is frequently quoted as though from Aristotle,^[8] but in fact, it is nowhere in the Organon. Sextus Empiricus in his Hyp. Pyrrh (Outlines of Pyrronism) ii. 164 first mentions the related syllogism "Socrates is a human being, Every human being is an animal, Therefore, Socrates is an animal."

Influence on philosophy[edit]

The Aristotelian logical system had a formidable influence on the late-philosophy of the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan. In the early 1970s, Lacan reworked Aristotle's term logic by way of Frege and Jacques Brunschwig to produce his four formulae of sexuation.^[9] While these formulae retain the formal arrangement of the square of opposition, they seek to undermine the universals of both qualities by the 'existence without essence' of Lacan's particular negative proposition.^[10]

Decline of term logic[edit]

Term logic began to decline in Europe during the Renaissance, when logicians like Rodolphus Agricola Phrisius (1444–1485) and Ramus (1515–1572) began to promote place logics. The logical tradition called Port-Royal Logic, or sometimes "traditional logic", saw propositions as combinations of ideas rather than of terms, but otherwise followed many of the conventions of term logic. It remained influential, especially in England, until the 19th century. Leibniz created a distinctive logical calculus, but nearly all of his work on logic remained unpublished and unremarked until Louis Couturat went through the Leibniz Nachlass around 1900, publishing his pioneering studies in logic.

19th-century attempts to algebraize logic, such as the work of Boole (1815–1864) and Venn (1834–1923), typically yielded systems highly influenced by the term-logic tradition. The first predicate logic was that of Frege's landmark Begriffsschrift (1879), little read before 1950, in part because of its eccentric notation. Modern predicate logic as we know it began in the 1880s with the writings of Charles Sanders Peirce, who influenced Peano (1858–1932) and even more, Ernst Schröder (1841–1902). It reached fruition in the hands of Bertrand Russell and A. N. Whitehead, whose Principia Mathematica (1910–13) made use of a variant of Peano's predicate logic.

Term logic also survived to some extent in traditional Roman Catholic education, especially in seminaries. Medieval Catholic theology, especially the writings of Thomas Aquinas, had a powerfully Aristotelean cast, and thus term logic became a part of Catholic theological reasoning. For example, Joyce's Principles of Logic (1908; 3rd edition 1949), written for use in Catholic seminaries, made no mention of Frege or of Bertrand Russell.^[11]

Revival[edit]

Some philosophers have complained that predicate logic:

• Is unnatural in a sense, in that its syntax does not follow the syntax of the sentences that figure in our everyday reasoning. It is, as Quine acknowledged, "Procrustean," employing an artificial language of function and argument, quantifier, and bound variable.
• Suffers from theoretical problems, probably the most serious being empty names and identity statements.

Even academic philosophers entirely in the mainstream, such as Gareth Evans, have written as follows:

"I come to semantic investigations with a preference for homophonic theories; theories which try to take serious account of the syntactic and semantic devices which actually exist in the language ...I would prefer [such] a theory ... over a theory which is only able to deal with [sentences of the form "all A's are B's"] by "discovering" hidden logical constants ... The objection would not be that such [Fregean] truth conditions are not correct, but that, in a sense which we would all dearly love to have more exactly explained, the syntactic shape of the sentence is treated as so much misleading surface structure" (Evans 1977)

See also[edit]

• Philosophy portal

• Converse (logic)
• Obversion
• Port-Royal Logic
• Propositional calculus
• Stoic logic
• Transposition (logic)

Notes[edit]

1. ^ Degnan, M. 1994. Recent Work in Aristotle's Logic. Philosophical Books 35.2 (April, 1994): 81-89.
2. ^ *Review of "Aristotle, Prior Analytics: Book I, Gisela Striker (translation and commentary), Oxford UP, 2009, 268pp., $39.95 (pbk), ISBN 978-0-19-925041-7." in the Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, 2010.02.02.
3. ^ Parsons, Terence (2012). "The Traditional Square of Opposition". In Edward N. Zalta (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2012 ed.). 3-4.
4. ^ ^{a b} καθόλου. Liddell, Henry George; Scott, Robert; A Greek–English Lexicon at the Perseus Project.
5. ^ καθ' ἕκαστον in Liddell and Scott.
6. ^ They are mentioned briefly in the De Interpretatione. Afterwards, in the chapters of the Prior Analytics where Aristotle methodically sets out his theory of the syllogism, they are entirely ignored.
7. ^ Arnauld, Antoine and Nicole, Pierre; (1662) La logique, ou l'art de penser. Part 2, chapter 3
8. ^ For example: Kapp, Greek Foundations of Traditional Logic, New York 1942, p. 17, Copleston A History of Philosophy Vol. I., p. 277, Russell, A History of Western Philosophy London 1946 p. 218.
9. ^ "The Aristotelian Roots of Lacan's Formulas of Sexuation".
10. ^ Urban, William J. (2015). Lacan and Meaning: Sexuation, Discourse Theory, and Topology in the Age of Hermeneutics. New York. pp. 108–10, 132–3. ISBN 978-1530345502.
11. ^ Copleston's A History of Philosophy

References[edit]

• Bochenski, I. M., 1951. Ancient Formal Logic. North-Holland.
• Louis Couturat, 1961 (1901). La Logique de Leibniz. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung.
• Gareth Evans, 1977, "Pronouns, Quantifiers and Relative Clauses," Canadian Journal of Philosophy.
• Peter Geach, 1976. Reason and Argument. University of California Press.
• Hammond and Scullard, 1992. The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-869117-3.
• Joyce, George Hayward, 1949 (1908). Principles of Logic, 3rd ed. Longmans. A manual written for use in Catholic seminaries. Authoritative on traditional logic, with many references to medieval and ancient sources. Contains no hint of modern formal logic. The author lived 1864–1943.
• Jan Lukasiewicz, 1951. Aristotle's Syllogistic, from the Standpoint of Modern Formal Logic. Oxford Univ. Press.
• John Stuart Mill, 1904. A System of Logic, 8th ed. London.
• Parry and Hacker, 1991. Aristotelian Logic. State University of New York Press.
• Arthur Prior

  1962: Formal Logic, 2nd ed. Oxford Univ. Press. While primarily devoted to modern formal logic, contains much on term and medieval logic.

  1976: The Doctrine of Propositions and Terms. Peter Geach and A. J. P. Kenny, eds. London: Duckworth.

• Willard Quine, 1986. Philosophy of Logic 2nd ed. Harvard Univ. Press.
• Rose, Lynn E., 1968. Aristotle's Syllogistic. Springfield: Clarence C. Thomas.
• Sommers, Fred

  1970: "The Calculus of Terms," Mind 79: 1-39. Reprinted in Englebretsen, G., ed., 1987. The new syllogistic New York: Peter Lang. ISBN 0-8204-0448-9

  1982: The logic of natural language. Oxford University Press.

  1990: "Predication in the Logic of Terms," Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 31: 106–26.

  and Englebretsen, George, 2000: An invitation to formal reasoning. The logic of terms. Aldershot UK: Ashgate. ISBN 0-7546-1366-6.

• Szabolcsi Lorne, 2008. Numerical Term Logic. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press.

External links[edit]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Term logic.

• Term logic at PhilPapers
• Smith, Robin. "Aristotle's Logic". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
• "Term logic". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
• Aristotle's term logic online-This online program provides a platform for experimentation and research on Aristotelian logic.
• Annotated bibliographies:

  Fred Sommers.

  George Englebretsen.

• PlanetMath: Aristotelian Logic.
• Interactive Syllogistic Machine for Term Logic A web based syllogistic machine for exploring fallacies, figures, terms, and modes of syllogisms.

v t e Aristotelianism
Overview	Aristotle Lyceum Peripatetic school Physics Biology Ethics Logic Theology (unmoved mover)
Ideas and interests	Active intellect Antiperistasis Arete Category of being Catharsis Classical unities Correspondence theory of truth Essence–accident Eudaimonia Four causes Future contingents Genus–differentia Hexis Hylomorphism Intromission theory of vision Ignoratio elenchi Lexis Magnanimity Mimesis Minima naturalia Moderate realism Aristotle's theory of universals (substantial form) Mythos Philosophy of nature (sublunary sphere) Philia Plenism Rational animal Phronesis Potentiality and actuality Sensus communis Substance theory (hypokeimenon, ousia) Syllogism Telos Temporal finitism To ti en einai/to ti esti Use value/exchange value Virtue ethics mathematical realism
Corpus Aristotelicum	Physics Organon Nicomachean Ethics Politics Metaphysics On the Soul Rhetoric Poetics
Followers	Alexander the Great Lyceum Aristoxenus Clearchus of Soli Dicaearchus Eudemus of Rhodes Theophrastus Strato of Lampsacus Lyco of Troas Aristo of Ceos Critolaus Diodorus of Tyre Erymneus Andronicus of Rhodes Islamic Golden Age Al-Kindi Al-Farabi Avicenna Averroes Jewish Maimonides Scholastics Peter Lombard Albertus Magnus Thomas Aquinas Duns Scotus Peter of Spain Jacopo Zabarella Pietro Pomponazzi Cesar Cremonini Modern Newman Trendelenburg Brentano Adler Foot MacIntyre Smith Hursthouse Nussbaum
Related topics	Platonism Plato Commentaries on Aristotle Renaissance commentators Recovery of Aristotle Scholasticism Thomism Conimbricenses Pseudo-Aristotle Views on women Aristotle's wheel paradox Aristotle's razor Metabasis paradox
Category  Philosophy portal

v t e Mathematical logic
General	Axiom First-order logic Formal proof Logical consequence Formal semantics Foundations of mathematics Model Set Theorem Theory Type theory
Theorems (list)	Gödel's completeness and incompleteness theorems Tarski's undefinability Banach–Tarski paradox Cantor's theorem, paradox and diagonal argument Lindström's Löwenheim–Skolem Compactness
Logics	Traditional Classical logic Proposition Inference Logical equivalence Argument Validity Syllogism Square of opposition Venn diagram Propositional Boolean algebra Boolean functions Logical connectives Propositional calculus Propositional formula Truth tables Many-valued logic Predicate First-order Quantifiers Predicate Second-order Monadic predicate calculus
Set theory	Set Element Ordered pair Ordinal number Russell's paradox Power set Subset Relation Function/Map Domain Codomain Image Extensionality Forcing Cardinality Empty set Inhabited set Enumeration Countable set Uncountable set Finite set Infinite set Class Schröder–Bernstein theorem Set theories Zermelo–Fraenkel Axiom of choice Continuum hypothesis General Kripke–Platek Morse–Kelley Naive Tarski–Grothendieck Von Neumann–Bernays–Gödel
Syntax & Language	Alphabet Arity Expression Ground Extension Relation Formal Grammar Language Proof System Theory Formation rule Formula Atomic Closed Ground Open Free/bound variable Logical connective ¬ ∨ ∧ → ↔ = Predicate Functional Variable Propositional variable Quantifier ∃ ∀ Sentence Atomic Signature String Substitution Symbol Function Logical/Constant Non-logical Variable Term
Proof theory	Formal proof Natural deduction Logical consequence Rule of inference Sequent calculus Theorem Systems Formal Axiomatic Deductive Hilbert Complete theory Independence (from ZFC)
Model theory	Interpretation Model Equivalence Finite Saturated Substructure Non-standard model of arithmetic Diagram Elementary Categorical theory Model complete theory Strength Semantics of logic Theories of truth Semantic Tarski's Kripke's T-schema Transfer principle Truth predicate Truth value Type Ultraproduct Validity
Computability theory	Church–Turing thesis Computably enumerable Computable function Computable set Decision problem Halting problem Primitive recursive function Recursion Recursive set

Authority control: National libraries	Germany United States

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Term_logic&oldid=1086090303"

Categories:

• Term logic
• Philosophy of Aristotle
• Logic
• Concepts in epistemology
• Philosophy of language
• Concepts in logic
• Semantics
• Concepts in metaphysics
• History of logic
• Mathematical logic
• Formal semantics (natural language)
• Philosophical logic
• Philosophy of logic

Hidden categories:

• Articles containing Ancient Greek (to 1453)-language text
• Articles with short description
• Short description is different from Wikidata
• Commons category link from Wikidata
• Articles with Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy links
• Articles with GND identifiers
• Articles with LCCN identifiers

Navigation menu

Personal tools

• Not logged in
• Talk
• Contributions
• Create account
• Log in

Namespaces

• Article
• Talk

English

Views

• Read
• Edit
• View history

More

Search

Navigation

• Main page
• Contents
• Current events
• Random article
• About Wikipedia
• Contact us
• Donate

Contribute

• Help
• Learn to edit
• Community portal
• Recent changes
• Upload file

Tools

• What links here
• Related changes
• Upload file
• Special pages
• Permanent link
• Page information
• Cite this page
• Wikidata item

Print/export

• Download as PDF
• Printable version

In other projects

• Wikimedia Commons

Languages

• Català
• Deutsch
• Eesti
• Español
• Français
• Bahasa Indonesia
• Magyar
• پښتو
• Polski
• Română
• Slovenčina
• 中文

Edit links

• This page was last edited on 4 May 2022, at 03:32 (UTC).
• Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

• Privacy policy
• About Wikipedia
• Disclaimers
• Contact Wikipedia
• Mobile view
• Developers
• Statistics
• Cookie statement

• 
•