Sophistical Refutations (Greek: ?????????? ???????; Latin: De Sophisticis Elenchis) is a text in Aristotle’s Organon in which he identified thirteen fallacies. Aeterna Press
On Sophistical Refutations Aristotle - Sophistical Refutations is a text in Aristotle's Organon in which he identified thirteen fallacies. At the end of the text he also claims to be the first thinker to treat the subject of deduction.
Presenting the first book-length study in English of Aristotle's Sophistical Refutations, this work takes a fresh look at this seminal text on false reasoning. Through a careful and critical analysis of Aristotle's examples of sophistical reasoning, Scott G. Schreiber explores Aristotle's rationale for his taxonomy of twelve fallacy types. Contrary to certain modern attempts to reduce all fallacious reasoning to either errors of logical form or linguistic imprecision, Aristotle insists that, as important as form and language are, certain types of false reasoning derive their persuasiveness from mistaken beliefs about the nature of language and the nature of the world.
How were Aristotle’s Sophistical Refutations read in Antiquity? What were the perceived intentions, messages and problems of this treatise, the last within the Organon? This book presents newly discovered fragments from the lost ancient commentaries by Aspasios, Herminos, Alexander and Syrianos on Aristotle’s Sophistical Refutations. After presenting the fragments, which were preserved by the humanist and philosopher Agostino Nifo (ca. 1473-1538), the introduction makes the case for their authenticity. There follows an edition of the fragments, accompanied by a translation and detailed commentary. This material sheds new light on the history and philosophy of logic, and especially on the theory of fallacies. It further documents how the Sophistical Refutations were interpreted and used in ancient Aristotelianism. Finally, it complements our knowledge of the philosophy of two major Aristotelians, Herminos and his pupil, the great Alexander of Aphrodisias. This study is of immediate relevance to readers with an interest in philosophy, logic, history, and/or Greco-Roman antiquity. Because it concerns the use and abuse of fallacies, and ways to counteract them, it also has countless practical applications in all fields of mundane life.
A complex and complete picture of the theory, practice, and reception of Sophistic argument Recent decades have witnessed a major restoration of the Sophists' reputation, revising the Platonic and Aristotelian "orthodoxies" that have dominated the tradition. Still lacking is a full appraisal of the Sophists' strategies of argumentation. Christopher W. Tindale corrects that omission in Reason's Dark Champions. Viewing the Sophists as a group linked by shared strategies rather than by common epistemological beliefs, Tindale illustrates that the Sophists engaged in a range of argumentative practices in manners wholly different from the principal ways in which Plato and Aristotle employed reason. By examining extant fifth-century texts and the ways in which Sophistic reasoning is mirrored by historians, playwrights, and philosophers of the classical world, Tindale builds a robust understanding of Sophistic argument with relevance to contemporary studies of rhetoric and communication. Beginning with the reception of the Sophists in their own culture, Tindale explores depictions of the Sophists in Plato's dialogues and the argumentative strategies attributed to them as a means of understanding the threat Sophism posed to Platonic philosophical ambitions of truth seeking. He also considers the nature of the "sophistical refutation" and its place in the tradition of fallacy. Tindale then turns to textual examples of specific argumentative practices, mapping how Sophists employed the argument from likelihood, reversal arguments, arguments on each side of a position, and commonplace reasoning. What emerges is a complex reappraisal of Sophism that reorients criticism of this mode of argumentation, expands understanding of Sophistic contributions to classical rhetoric, and opens avenues for further scholarship.
The Posterior Analytics (Greek: ????????? ??????; Latin: Analytica Posteriora) is a text from Aristotle’s Organon that deals with demonstration, definition, and scientific knowledge. The demonstration is distinguished as a syllogism productive of scientific knowledge, while the definition marked as the statement of a thing’s nature, ... a statement of the meaning of the name, or of an equivalent nominal formula. Aeterna Press
. Metzger points out that contemporary researchers in rhetoric often assume a definition of rhetoric for the purpose of classification; distinguishing, for instance, among a medieval rhetoric, a feminist rhetoric, or a phenomenological rhetoric. This kind of research, he believes, examines rhetoric in terms of what it was or might be, but not in terms of what it actually is.
Protagoras was an important Greek thinker of the fifth century BC, the most famous of the so called Sophists, though most of what we know of him and his thought comes to us mainly through the dialogues of his strenuous opponent Plato. In this book, Ugo Zilioli offers a sustained and philosophically sophisticated examination of what is, in philosophical terms, the most interesting feature of Protagoras' thought for modern readers: his role as the first Western thinker to argue for relativism. Zilioli relates Protagoras' relativism with modern forms of relativism, in particular the 'robust relativism' of Joseph Margolis, gives an integrated account both of the perceptual relativism examined in Plato's Theaetetus and the ethical or social relativism presented in the first part of Plato's Protagoras and offers an integrated and positive analysis of Protagoras' thought, rather than focusing on ancient criticisms and responses to his thought. This is a deeply scholarly work which brings much argument to bear to the claim that Protagoras was and remains Plato's subtlest philosophical enemy.