Thu Apr 12, 2012
Howison Library, 4:10–6 PM
Aristotle defines proof as a scientific (or cognitive) syllogism, and virtually everything he has to say about proofs is determined by the definition. The paper reflects on some of the questions raised by the definiens: are proofs necessarily syllogisms? (if they are, then there are heavy consequences); and what exactly does it mean to talk about a ‘scientific’ or ‘cognitive’ syllogism?