In defense of bramantip

Abstract

In the traditional logic of the syllogism, Aristotelian logic, there are four kinds of syllogisms, Darapti, Felapton, Bramantip, and Fesapo, that are often said to be invalid in modern logic. Elementary logic students may even simply be told that they really are invalid. This is, of course, a distortion; but it is instructive to consider why this has happened and why it is that the syllogisms are considered invalid.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

H.P. Grice's defense of the two-valued formal system of classical logic: a critique.Araceli C. Hidalgo - 1985 - Diliman, Quezon City: Asian Center, University of the Philippines.
How many syllogisms are there?Colwyn Williamson - 1988 - History and Philosophy of Logic 9 (1):77-85.
Aristotle’s Syllogistic, Modern Deductive Logic, and Scientific Demonstration.Edward M. Engelmann - 2007 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 81 (4):535-552.
The power of logic.Frances Howard-Snyder - 2012 - New York: McGraw-Hill. Edited by Daniel Howard-Snyder & Ryan Wasserman.
Socratic logic.Peter Kreeft - 2005 - South Bend, Ind.: St. Augustine's Press. Edited by Trent Dougherty.
Approximate syllogisms – on the logic of everyday life.Lothar Philipps - 1999 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (2-3):227-234.
Lehmann on the rules of the invalid syllogisms.Charles Turek - 1975 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 16 (4):603-604.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
22 (#692,982)

6 months
6 (#512,819)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references