The Ingredients of Aristotle’s Theory of Fallacy
- Pieter Sjoerd Hasper
- … show all 1 hide
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
In chapter 8 of the Sophistical Refutations, Aristotle claims that his theory of fallacy is complete in the sense that there cannot be more fallacies than the ones he lists. In this article I try to explain how Aristotle could have justified this completeness claim by analysing how he conceptualizes fallacies (dialectical mistakes which do not appear so) and what conceptual ingredients play a role in his discussion of fallacies. If we take the format of dialectical discussions into account, we will see that there are only so many mistakes one can make which still do not appear to be mistakes. Aristotle’s actual list is almost identical to these apparent mistakes.
- Evans, J.D.G. 1975. The codification of false refutations in Aristotle’s De sophisticis elenchis. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society NS 21: 42–52.
- Ebbesen, S. 1980. Commentators and commentaries on Aristotle’s sophistical refutations. A study of post-aristotelian ancient and medieval writings on fallacies I The Greek Tradition. Leiden: Brill.
- Hasper, P.S. 2006. Logic and linguistics: aristotle’s fallacies of combination and division in the Sophistical Refutations. Apeiron 42: 105–152.
- Hasper, P.S. 2012. Aristotle’s Sophistical Refutations. A Translation. In Fallacious arguments in ancient philosophy, ed. Hasper, P.S. and Rapp. C., Special issue of: Logical analysis and history of philosophy 15, 13–54.
- Ross, W.D. 1958. Aristotelis Topica et Sophistici Elenchi. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- van Eemeren, F.H., and R. Grootendorst. 2004. A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- The Ingredients of Aristotle’s Theory of Fallacy
Volume 27, Issue 1 , pp 31-47
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Completeness claim
- Dialectical discussion
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany