Abstract

This work is essentially a history of the scholastic conception of dialectica from Garlandus Compotista to William Ockham, with an eye to rendering intelligible the puzzling nature of late medieval treatises on logical obligations. Such treatises seem to countenance violations of fundamental and indisputable logical rules, for example, that a disjunction is false if both of its disjuncts are false. In large part to explain this apparent surd development in medieval logic, Eleonore Stump has collected into a single volume twelve separately published essays. Together they form an interesting and convincing argument.