Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why the Logical Hexagon?

  • Published:
Logica Universalis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The logical hexagon (or hexagon of opposition) is a strange, yet beautiful, highly symmetrical mathematical figure, mysteriously intertwining fundamental logical and geometrical features. It was discovered more or less at the same time (i.e. around 1950), independently, by a few scholars. It is the successor of an equally strange (but mathematically less impressive) structure, the “logical square” (or “square of opposition”), of which it is a much more general and powerful “relative”. The discovery of the former did not raise interest, neither among logicians, nor among philosophers of logic, whereas the latter played a very important theoretical role (both for logic and philosophy) for nearly two thousand years, before falling in disgrace in the first half of the twentieth century: it was, so to say, “sentenced to death” by the so-called analytical philosophers and logicians. Contrary to this, since 2004 a new, unexpected promising branch of mathematics (dealing with “oppositions”) has appeared, “oppositional geometry” (also called “n-opposition theory”, “NOT”), inside which the logical hexagon (as well as its predecessor, the logical square) is only one term of an infinite series of “logical bi-simplexes of dimension m”, itself just one term of the more general infinite series (of series) of the “logical poly-simplexes of dimension m”. In this paper we recall the main historical and the main theoretical elements of these neglected recent discoveries. After proposing some new results, among which the notion of “hybrid logical hexagon”, we show which strong reasons, inside oppositional geometry, make understand that the logical hexagon is in fact a very important and profound mathematical structure, destined to many future fruitful developments and probably bearer of a major epistemological paradigm change.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aristotle: Categories and De Interpretatione. (Translated with notes by J.L. Ackrill). Clarendon Aristotle Series, Oxford (1963)

  2. Badir, S.: How the semiotic square came. In: [8]

  3. Béziau J.-Y.: From paraconsistent to universal logic. Sorites 12, 5–32 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Béziau J.-Y.: New light on the square of oppositions and its nameless corner. Log. Investig. 10, 218–233 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Béziau J.-Y.: Paraconsistent Logics! (a reply to Slater). Sorites 17, 17–25 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Béziau J.-Y.: The power of the Hexagon. Log. Universalis 6, 1–2 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Béziau, J.-Y., Jacquette, D. (eds): Around and Beyond the Square of Opposition. Birkhäuser, Basel (2012)

  8. Béziau, J.-Y., Payette, G. (eds.): The Square of Opposition. A General Framework for Cognition. Peter Lang, Bern (2012)

  9. Bianchi I., Savardi U.: The Perception of Contraries. Aracne, Roma (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bianchi, I., Savardi, U.: The cognitive dimensions of contrariety. In: [8]

  11. Blanché R.: Sur l’opposition des concepts. Theoria 19, 89–130 (1953)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Blanché R.: Opposition et négation. Rev. Philos. 167, 187–216 (1957)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Blanché R.: Sur la structuration du tableau des connectifs interpropositionnels binaires. J. Symb. Log. 22(1), 17–18 (1957)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Blanché R.: Structures intellectuelles. Essai sur l’organisation systématique des concepts. Vrin, Paris (1966)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Blanché R.: Raison et discours. Défense de la logique réflexive. Vrin, Paris (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Blanché R.: Sur le système des connecteurs interpropositionnels. Cahiers pour l’Analyse 10, 131–149 (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bonfiglioli S.: Aristotle’s Non-Logical Works and the Square of Oppositions in Semiotics. Logica Universalis 2(1), 107–126 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Boyd, G.A., Belt, T., Rhoda, A.: The hexagon of opposition: thinking outside the aristotelian box (2008). http://www.gregboyd.org/essays/warning-egghead-essays/the-hexagon-essay/

  19. Cavaliere, F.: Fuzzy syllogisms, numerical square, triangle of contraries, inter-bivalence. In: [7]

  20. Chellas B.F.: Modal Logic: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1980)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Czezowski T.: On certain peculiarities of singular propositions. Mind 64(255), 392–395 (1955)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Demey, L.: Reversed Squares of Opposition in PAL and DEL (2010). http://www.square-of-opposition.org/square2010power/demey.pdf

  23. Demey, L.: Structures of oppositions in public announcement Logic. In: [7]

  24. Dubois D., Prade H.: From Blanché’s hexagonal organization of concepts to formal concept analysis and possibility theory. Log. Universalis 6, 1–2 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fontanille J., Zilberberg C.: Tension et signification. Mardaga, Sprimont (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gaiser K.: Platons ungeschriebene Lehre. Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Gallais P.: Dialectique du récit médiéval (Chrétien de Troyes et l’hexagone logique). Rodopi, Amsterdam (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ganter B., Wille R.: Formale Begriffsanalyse. Mathematische Grundlagen. Springer, Berlin (1996)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Gärdenfors P.: Conceptual Spaces The Geometry of Thought. MIT Press, Cambridge MA (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gardies J.-L.: Essai sur la logique des modalités. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Ginzberg S.: Note sur le sens équivoque des propositions particulières. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 21(1), 101–106 (1913)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gottschalk W.H.: The theory of quaternality. J. Symb. Log. 18, 193–196 (1953)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Greimas A.J.: Du sens. Seuil, Paris (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Groupe d’Entrevernes: Analyse sémiotique des textes—Introduction Théorie Pratique. Presses Universitaires de Lyon, Lyon (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Guitart, R.: Borromean Objects, as examplified by the group G 168 of Klein’s Quartic, linked with Moving Logic (2008). http://www-lmpa.univ-littoral.fr/CT08/slides/Guitart.ppt

  36. Guitart R.: A hexagonal framework of the field F 4 and the associated Borromean logic. Logica Universalis 6, 1–2 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Horn L.: A Natural History of Negation. CSLI Publications, Stanford (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Horn, L.: Histoire d’*O: Lexical pragmatics and the geometry of opposition. In: [8]

  39. Hösle V.: I fondamenti dell’aritmetica e della geometria in Platone. Vita e Pensiero, Milano (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Hruschka J., Joerden J.C.: Supererogation: Vom deontologischen Sechseck zum deontologischen Zehneck. Zugleich ein Beitrag zur strafrechtlichen Grundlagenforschung. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie 73(1), 104–120 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hughes G.E., Cresswell M.J: A New Introduction to Modal Logic. Routledge, London (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ioan P.: Stéphane Lupasco et la propension vers le contradictoire dans la logique roumaine. In: Badescu, H., Nicolescu, B. (eds) Stéphane Lupasco, L’homme et l’oeuvre, Rocher, Monaco (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Jacoby P.: A triangle of opposites for types of propositions in Aristotelian logic. New Scholast 24, 32–56 (1950)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Jacquette, D.: Thinking outside the square of opposition box. In: [7]

  45. Jaspers, D.: Logic of colours. The mereological algebra of colours (2010). http://www.crissp.be/pdf/publications/handoutmitdj.pdf

  46. Jaspers D.: Logic of Colours in Historical Perspective. Log. Universalis 6, 1–2 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Jaspers, D., Larson, R.: Oppositions between quantifiers, colours and numerals—broad and narrow language faculties (2011). https://lirias.hubrussel.be/handle/123456789/5644

  48. Jespersen O.: The Philosophy of Grammar. Allen and Unwin, London (1924)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kalinowski G.: La logique des normes. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Khomski, Y.: William of sherwood, singular propositions and the hexagon of opposition. In: [8]

  51. Koslow A.: A Structuralist Theory of Logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1992)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  52. Lupasco S.: Le principe d’antagonisme et la logique de l’énergie. Hermann, Paris (1951)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Luzeaux D., Sallantin J., Dartnell C.: Logical extensions of Aristotle’s square. Log. Universalis 2(1), 167–187 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Milner J.-C.: Le périple structural. Figures et paradigme. Verdier, Paris (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Moretti A.: Geometry for Modalities? Yes: through ‘n-opposition theory’. In: Béziau, J.-Y., Costa-Leite, A., Facchini, A. (eds) Aspects of Universal Logic, University of Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Moretti, A.: The Geometry of Logical Opposition. PhD Thesis, University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland (2009)

  57. Moretti A.: The Geometry of Standard Deontic Logic. Log. Universalis 3(1), 19–57 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  58. Moretti, A.: The geometry of opposition and the opposition of logic to it. In: [78]

  59. Moretti A.: The critics of paraconsistency and of many-valuedness and the geometry of oppositions. Log. Log. Philos. 19, 63–94 (2010)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  60. Moretti, A.: From the “logical square” to the “logical poly-simplexes”: a quick survey of what happened in between. In: [8]

  61. Moretti, A.: A cube extending Piaget’s and Gottschalk’s formal square (2010). http://alessiomoretti.perso.sfr.fr/NOTMorettiCorte2010.pdf

  62. Mugler C.: Platon et la recherche mathématique de son époque. Heitz, Strasbourg-Zurich (1948)

    Google Scholar 

  63. Neuman Y.: A Novel Generic Conception of Structure: Solving Piaget’s Riddle. In: Valsiner, J., Rudolph, R. (eds) Mathematical Models for Research on Cultural Dynamics: Qualitative Methods for the Social Sciences, Routledge, London (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Øhrstrøm P., Hasle P.: A.N. Prior’s Rediscovery of Tense Logic. Erkenntnis 39, 23–50 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  65. Parsons, T.: The traditional square of opposition. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2006). http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/square/

  66. Peirce, C.S.: The new elements of mathematics, vol. III-1. In: Eisele, C. (ed.) The Hague-Paris. Walter De Gruyter, New York (1976)

  67. Pellissier R.: “Setting” n-opposition. Log. Universalis 2(2), 235–263 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  68. Pellissier, R.: 2-opposition and the topological hexagon. In: [8]

  69. Piaget J.: Traité de logique. Essai de syllogistique opératoire. Armand Colin, Paris (1949)

    Google Scholar 

  70. Piaget J.: Structuralism. Basic Books, New York (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Read, S.: John Buridan’s theory of consequence and his octagons of oppositions. In: [7]

  72. Reale G.: Per una nuova interpretazione di Platone. Rilettura della metafisica dei grandi dialoghi alla luce delle “Dottrine non scritte”. Vita e Pensiero, Milano (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Richard M.-D.: L’enseignement oral de Platon Une nouvelle interprétation du platonisme. Cerf, Paris (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Ricoeur, P.: La grammaire narrative de Greimas. Actes Sémiot. Doc. 15 (1980)

  75. Sart, F.: Truth tables and oppositional solids (2010). http://alessiomoretti.perso.sfr.fr/NOTSartCorte2010.pdf

  76. Sauriol P.: Remarques sur la Théorie de l’hexagone logique de Blanché. Dialogue 7, 374–390 (1968)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Sauriol P.: La structure tétrahexaédrique du système complet des propositions catégoriques. Dialogue 15, 479–501 (1976)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  78. Savardi, U. (ed.): The perception and cognition of contraries. McGraw-Hill, Milano (2009)

  79. Sesmat A.: Logique II. Les raisonnements, la logistique. Hermann, Paris (1951)

    Google Scholar 

  80. Seuren, P.A.M.: From logical intuitions to natural logic. In: [8]

  81. Smessaert H.: On the 3D visualisation of logical relations. Log. Universalis 3(2), 303–332 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  82. Smessaert H.: The classical Aristotelian hexagon versus the modern duality hexagon. Log. Universalis 6, 1–2 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  83. Staschok M.: Non-traditional squares of predication and quantification. Log. Universalis 2(1), 77–85 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  84. Strößner, C., Strobach, N.: Veridications and their square of oppositions. In: [8]

  85. Thomas R.: Analyse et synthèse de réseaux de régulations en termes de boucles de rétroaction. In: Felz, B., Crommelinck, M., Goujon, P. (eds) Auto-organisation et émergence dans les sciences de la vie., Ousia, Bruxelles (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  86. Toth I.: Aristotele e i fondamenti assiomatici della geometria. Prolegomeni alla comprensione dei frammenti non-euclidei nel “Corpus Aristotelicum”. Vita e Pensiero, Milano (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  87. Vasil’ev, N.A.: O chastnykh suzhdeniiakh, o treugol’nike protivopolozhnostei, o zakone iskliuchennogo chetvertogo. In: Voobrazhaemaia logika. Izbrannye trudy. Nauka, Moskow (1989) (in Russian)

  88. Vernant D.: Pour une logique dialogique de la dénégation, In: Armengaud, F., Popelard, M.-D., Vernant, D. (eds.) Du dialogue au texte. Autour de Francis Jacques. Kimé, Paris (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  89. Wirth O.: Le symbolisme astrologique. Dervy, Paris (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  90. N-opposition theory (website) http://alessiomoretti.perso.sfr.fr/NOTHome.html

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nice, France

    Alessio Moretti

Authors
  1. Alessio Moretti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alessio Moretti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moretti, A. Why the Logical Hexagon?. Log. Univers. 6, 69–107 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11787-012-0045-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11787-012-0045-x

Mathematics Subject Classification (2010)

Keywords

Search

Navigation