نوع مقاله : پژوهشی
نویسنده
استادیار گروه فلسفه، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
The treatise al-Shakl al-Rābiʿ min Aškāl al-Qiyās al-Ḥamlī by Abu’l-Futūḥ Najm al-Dīn Aḥmad b. Muḥammad b. al-Sarī b. al-Ṣalāḥ (d. 548/1153) is the oldest systematic defense of the fourth figure of the categorical syllogism in Islamic logic. This text remained unknown until the 1960s, when its first publication was made by Nicholas Rescher (1966) based on the incomplete manuscript Ayasofya 4830. Asadullah Fallāḥī (2014) claimed to provide a corrected edition, making the text more pedagogical but introducing numerous additions and personal interpretations. Muhammad Çelik (2021), by discovering the more complete manuscript Ayasofya 4845, offered the first true critical edition and criticized Fallāḥī’s work for its additions and alterations.
This article, through a comparison of the three editions, demonstrates that textual and manuscript variations profoundly alter our understanding of Abu’l-Futūḥ: in Rescher he appears incomplete and raw, in Fallāḥī decisive and Galen-aware, and in Çelik cautious and independent from the Hellenistic tradition. These differences affect key innovations (the definition of qasīm, refutation of objections, superiority of multiple conclusions) and render the history of Islamic logic less Galen-centered and more indigenous.
کلیدواژهها English
