A 17th-century debate on the consequentia mirabilis

History and Philosophy of Logic 13 (1):43-58 (1992)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In modern times the so?called consequentia mirabilis (if not-P, then P). then P) was first enthusiastically applied and commented upon by Cardano (1570) and Clavius (1574). Of later passages where it occurs Saccheri?s use (1697) has drawn a good deal of attention. It is less known that about the middle of the 17th century this remarkable mode of arguing became the subject of an interesting debate, in which the Belgian mathematician Andreas Tacquet and Christiaan Huygens were the main representatives of opposite views concerning its probative force. In this article the several phases and moves of that debate are delineated

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,990

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-02

Downloads
59 (#346,644)

6 months
2 (#1,730,672)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

On negation: Pure local rules.João Marcos - 2005 - Journal of Applied Logic 3 (1):185-219.
Truth, Pretense and the Liar Paradox.Bradley Armour-Garb & James A. Woodbridge - 2015 - In T. Achourioti, H. Galinon, J. Martínez Fernández & K. Fujimoto (eds.), Unifying the Philosophy of Truth. Dordrecht: Imprint: Springer. pp. 339-354.

Add more citations