This paper discusses Flórez’s idea that an inference having the form of Peirce’s abduction is to be found in chapter 13 of the first book of the Posterior Analytics, where Aristotle expounds the distinction between “syllogism of the that” and “syllogism of the why.” It is shown that this idea is mistaken because all of Aristotle’s examples in APo. I.13 are deductively valid first-figure syllogisms (either of the why or of the that), while abduction is a deductively invalid second-figure syllogism.

Aristotelian Abductions: A Reply to Flórez / Francesco Bellucci. - In: TRANSACTIONS OF THE CHARLES S. PEIRCE SOCIETY. - ISSN 0009-1774. - STAMPA. - 55:2(2019), pp. 185-196. [10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.55.2.06]

Aristotelian Abductions: A Reply to Flórez

Francesco Bellucci
2019

Abstract

This paper discusses Flórez’s idea that an inference having the form of Peirce’s abduction is to be found in chapter 13 of the first book of the Posterior Analytics, where Aristotle expounds the distinction between “syllogism of the that” and “syllogism of the why.” It is shown that this idea is mistaken because all of Aristotle’s examples in APo. I.13 are deductively valid first-figure syllogisms (either of the why or of the that), while abduction is a deductively invalid second-figure syllogism.
2019
Aristotelian Abductions: A Reply to Flórez / Francesco Bellucci. - In: TRANSACTIONS OF THE CHARLES S. PEIRCE SOCIETY. - ISSN 0009-1774. - STAMPA. - 55:2(2019), pp. 185-196. [10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.55.2.06]
Francesco Bellucci
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/701451
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact