Journals / Felsefe Dünyası / 2005 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 42

Modal Difficulties in Definition of "Possible" Notion in Antiquity

Antik Çağ'da Mümkün Modalitesi'nin Tanıtımındaki Bazı Problemler

Pages
46–64
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Aristotle's criticism of the Megarians turns on the concept of possibility.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:What is the possibility and possible ?
📊
Key Findings & Data:Yet anyone responding to this question must understand the meaning of possible being, contingent being and necessary being.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Aristotle's criticism of the Megarians turns on the concept of possibility.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

What is the possibility and possible ? Yet anyone responding to this question must understand the meaning of possible being, contingent being and necessary being. In this paper we wish to discuss the analysis of modal terms especially "possible" concept. The explanation and analysis of modal terms is a matter of dispute among Ancient logicians.We are unable to define modal terms adequately. One might say that the definition of modal terms is only nominal definition. In due to the fact that there is a negative character of the definition of modal notions, we could only describe a modal concept at the level of nominal definition. Some logicians asserts that definition of modalities is really circular, because modality can only be defined with each other. There is not determinate number of modal terms among the logicians, nevertheless the standard logical modalities might be arranged as follows in Aristotle's Second Book Peri Hermeneias: possible, impossible, necessary and contingent. According to mediavel logicians these four c'oncepts are standart modalities.Megarian and Stoic philosophers held that all truths about the,world are necessary. Some of the Megarians including Diodorus held deterministic views. Diodorus formulated his deterministic views in an argument entitled "The Master Argument". Aristotle's criticism of the Megarians turns on the concept of possibility.

🔖

Cite This Article

KÖZ, İ. (2022). Modal Difficulties in Definition of "Possible" Notion in Antiquity. Felsefe Dünyası, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 42, 46–64. https://ajindex.com/articles/513099

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Abdülaziz, Ismail, Nazariyyetu'l- Müvecciheti'l- Mantıkiyye, Kahire,1993
  2. Abdülaziz, Ismail,Metafizik, Çev. Ahmet Arslan, c. II, Bornova-İzmir, E.Ü.Ed. Fak.Yay., 1993
  3. Abdülaziz, Ismail,Metafizik, Çev. Ahmet Arslan, c. I, Bornova-İzmir, E.Ü.Ed. Fak.Yay., 1985
  4. Abdülaziz, Ismail,Organon II Önerme, Çev. Hamdi Ragıp Atademir, 2. Bsk., İstanbul, 1989
  5. Bolay, Naci, İbn Sina Mantığında Önermeler, Erzurum, 1981 Hintikka,Jaakko, "Aristotle and The "Master Argument" of Diodorus", American Philosophical Quarterly,Volume I, Number 2, April, USA, 1964 İbn Sina, (Şifa) İlahiyat, Takdim. İbrahim Madkur, Tahkik, Said Zade, Kahire, 1964
  6. Kneale, William-Kneale Marta, The Development of Logic, Oxford, 1962
  7. Michael, Frederic Seymour, "What is the Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus?", American. Philosophical Quarterly, USA, Vol. 13, Number 3, Haziran, 1976
  8. Öner, Necati, Felsefe Yolunda Düşünceler, İstanbul, 1995
  9. Öner, Necati,Klasik Mantık, A.Ü. İlahiyat Fak. Yay., 6. bsk., 1991 Refik el- Acem, el-Mantık İnde'l-Farabi, Beyrut, 1985
  10. Rescher, Nicholas, "Aversion of The Master Argument of Diodorus", The Journal of Philosophy, USA, vol. 63, 1966
  11. Ülken, Hilmi Ziya, Varlık ve Oluş, A.Ü. İlahiyat Fak. Yay., Ankara, 1968
  12. Yaren, M.Tahir, İbn Sina Mantığına Giriş, Ankara, 1996