Aristotle’s problem in de Interpretatione ix
In de Interpretatione Aristotle says about antiphasis (pair of sentences that are contradictory) that necessarily one of them is true and the other is false but later in chapter ix tells this thesis doesn’t hold about future contingent singulars because otherwise we shall commit to determinism but d...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | fas |
| Published: |
University of Isfahan
2015-03-01
|
| Series: | Metaphysics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://uijs.ui.ac.ir/mph/browse.php?a_code=A-10-41-1&slc_lang=en&sid=1 |
| Summary: | In de Interpretatione Aristotle says about antiphasis (pair of sentences that are contradictory) that necessarily one of them is true and the other is false but later in chapter ix tells this thesis doesn’t hold about future contingent singulars because otherwise we shall commit to determinism but determinism is not acceptable then the rule under discussion, doesn’t hold about future contingent singulars. There are several interpretations of this passage. Traditional interpreters say that here Aristotle denies the principle of excluded middle and/or bivalence. Another common interpretation is that Aristotle wants to note that necessity of the disjunction (that represent excluded middle) doesn’t entail that one of the disjunct is necessary. The first interpretation is more successful in dealing with determinism but not consistent with other ideas of Aristotle. The second interpretation, however, does not succeed alone against determinism, but is consistent with other views of Aristotle. I think that Aristotle's main goal in this passage is not an argument against determinism but he tries to block the way of concluding determinism from his ideas about antiphasis. Non-traditional interpretation is more successful in representing this concern |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2008-8086 2476-3276 |