مهناز امیرخانی; شهناز شایانفر; فاطمه منصورزاده
Volume 6, Issue 2 , September 2015, , Pages 37-58
Abstract
In the discussion of mingled modalities of the fist figure, Avicenna thought that the mode of conclusion doesn’t follow major premise just in two modes (the combination of proper minor with existential major and proper absolute minor premise with affirmative necessary) while according to the Khaje ...
Read More
In the discussion of mingled modalities of the fist figure, Avicenna thought that the mode of conclusion doesn’t follow major premise just in two modes (the combination of proper minor with existential major and proper absolute minor premise with affirmative necessary) while according to the Khaje Toosi's thought, other modes, including attribute major (one of the general and specific conditional or general and specific conventional), don’t follow the mode of conclusion as well. Studying the works of the ancient logicians, we find out that the number of the modes comes up to 42. Identifying mode of conclusion, logicians are agreed on 31 modes, but disagreed on their rest 11, though none of them considered the conclusions of these 11 modes as followings of the major. The present thesis is studying the mentioned 31 modes, their standards/criterions and the logicians' reasons of the mode of conclusion. In addition, the issue of those 11 modes would be discussed later in an independent survey.
