USD $198.00
Search Results
Author:
Relational inferences are a well-known problem for Aristotelian logic. This book charts the development of thinking about this anomaly, from the beginnings of the Arabic logical tradition in the tenth century to the end of the nineteenth. Based in large part on hitherto unstudied manuscripts and rare books, the study shows that the problem of relational inferences was vigorously debated in the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. In the course of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Ottoman logicians (writing in Arabic) came to recognize relational inferences as a distinct kind of 'unfamiliar syllogism' and began to investigate their logic. These findings show that the development of Arabic logic did not - as is often supposed - come to an end in the fourteenth century. On the contrary, Arabic logic was still being developed by critical and fecund reflections as late as the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Author:
Relational inferences are a well-known problem for Aristotelian logic. This book charts the development of thinking about this anomaly, from the beginnings of the Arabic logical tradition in the tenth century to the end of the nineteenth. Based in large part on hitherto unstudied manuscripts and rare books, the study shows that the problem of relational inferences was vigorously debated in the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. In the course of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Ottoman logicians (writing in Arabic) came to recognize relational inferences as a distinct kind of 'unfamiliar syllogism' and began to investigate their logic. These findings show that the development of Arabic logic did not - as is often supposed - come to an end in the fourteenth century. On the contrary, Arabic logic was still being developed by critical and fecund reflections as late as the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Author:
Abstract
In the present article, I discuss Goldziher's contention (echoed in more recent literature) that from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, Sunnī Muslim scholars ('ulamā') became increasingly hostile to rational sciences such as logic. On the basis of discussions and fatāwā by Sunni scholars in the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, I show that this idea is radically mistaken. Mainstream scholars in the Maghrib, Egypt and Turkey considered l ogic to be not only permissible but actually commendable or even a religious duty incumbent on the Muslim community as a whole (i.e. a fard˙ kifāyah). Though there were dissenting voices in the period, such as the Qād˙īzādelīs, this seems to have been the mainstream opinion of Sunni scholars until the rise of the Salafiyyah movement in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.