プラトンのディアイレシスの方法 : その論理構造の分析
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
Aristotle's criticism of Platonic division(διαιρεσι&b.sigmav;) (An. Pr. I. ch. 31, An. Post. II. ch. 5 & 13)contains three important points as follows: 1. The method of definition by division does not syllogize or demonstrate. 2. It provides no guarantee against adding or omitting something or passing over some element in the being of the thing defined. 3. But we can solve this difficulty and establish an adequate definition by division if we (1)take essential attributes, (2) arrange them in the right order, (3)omit nothing of them. Indeed, Aristotle's argument is sound insofar as his theory of the syllogism and his categorial framework are presupposed. But, as Corn ford rightly remarks, "no satisfactory account of the relation of Platonic Forms can be given in terms of Aristotelian logic", and Aristotle's ontology of substance and attribute has no place within the Platonic framework. A detailed analysis of the method of collection (συναγωγη) and division illustrated in the Sophist shows that Plato's method of establishing an adequate definition is different from Aristotle's. Plato determines both necessary and sufficient conditions for being the definable Form, by the preliminary collection which may contain in itself the process of division and by the subsequent division. Thus, as Sayre argues, he establishes the adequate definition of the Form in question by formulating those conditions. Although Plato's method does not syllogize in the Aristotelian meaning, it involves inference which Aristotle doesn't take into consideration. Also it simplifies the conditions Aristotle proposes for the purpose of establishing an adequate definition.
- 日本西洋古典学会の論文
- 1976-03-31
著者
関連論文
- D. J. Furley & A. Nehamas, edd., Aristotle's Rhetoric : Philosophical Essays., Pp. xv+322, Princeton UP, 1994. / A. O. Rorty, ed., Essays on Aristotle's Rhetoric., Pp. xxiii+441, University of California Press, 1996.
- プラトンのディアイレシスの方法 : その論理構造の分析