English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

What terms are susceptible of syllogistic operations? For important interpreters of Aristotelian logic - especially Ross, Lukasiewicz and Patzig - the answer tends to introduce a single and homogeneous group of terms, those of intermediate generality (&#964;&#8048;µ&#949;&#964;&#945;&#958;&#8058;). Mostly based on the tripartite classification of beings which appears in Chapter 27 of Prior Analytics I, this view attributes to syllogistic the exclusion of proper names and singular designations (such as Socrates and this man), transcategoricals (such as being and one), as well as of the so-called summa genera (substance, quality, quantity, etc.). In our opinion, these results are not derived from the writings of Aristotle, but from improper readings, translations and interpretations of the central passages for the discussion. In this paper, we will make a further examination of these texts in order to show that Aristotle has never departed from his logic the types of terms that interpreters do not hesitate to exclude from syllogistic. Thereby, we hope to bring back singular terms, transcategoricals and summa genera to the operation domain of the Aristotelian syllogistic.Quais termos são suscetíveis de operações silogísticas? Para importantes intérpretes da lógica aristotélica - especialmente Ross, Patzig e Lukasiewicz - a resposta tende a introduzir um único e homogêneo grupo de termos, aqueles de generalidade intermediária (&#964;&#8048; µ&#949;&#964;&#945;&#958;&#8058;). Fundamentada basicamente na classificação tripartite de entes que aparece no capítulo 27 de Primeiros Analíticos I, essa opinião atribui à silogística a exclusão de (i) termos singulares (como Sócrates e este homem), (ii) transcategoriais (como ente e um), bem como dos chamados (iii) summa genera (substância, qualidade, quantidade, etc.). Em nossa opinião, esses resultados não derivam dos textos de Aristóteles, mas de leituras, traduções e interpretações impróprias das passagens centrais da discussão. Neste artigo, faremos um novo exame desses textos, a fim de mostrar que Aristóteles jamais afastou de sua lógica os tipos de termos que os intérpretes não hesitam em excluir da silogística. Assim, esperamos reintroduzir termos singulares, transcategoriais e summa genera, no domínio da silogística aristotélica

Termos singulares, transcategoriais e Summa Genera na lógica de Aristóteles