Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy

2011 Edition
| Editors: Henrik Lagerlund

Obligations Logic

  • Mikko Yrjönsuuri
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9729-4_362

Abstract

Medieval obligations logic dealt with logical duties, primarily that of granting what follow from what has already been laid down. Technically these duties were put into the context of so-called obligational disputations, where the opponent puts forward propositions, which the respondent grants, denies, or doubts. For the most part, the answers do not follow truth, but some specific obligation given at the beginning of the disputation and the technical obligation rules. The main flourishing of obligations logic can be dated to the first half of the fourteenth century with authors like Walter Burley, Richard Kilvington, and Roger Swyneshed, who all presented somewhat different sets of rules for these disputations. It seems that medieval authors aimed generally at rules that take heed of two general dialectical duties: to follow truth and to remain coherent in one’s answers. The latter becomes clearly visible when exceptions to the former are allowed through issuing some special duty at the beginning of the disputation. Obligations logic, thus, can be characterized as studying what it means to be consistent and how one can remain coherent. This way, the area also contributed to the development of such modal notions as logical possibility and necessity.

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

Bibliography

Primary Sources

  1. Boethius de Dacia (1976) Questiones super librum Topicorum, ed. Green-Pedersen NJ, Pinborg J. Corpus Philosophorum Danicorum Medii Aevi 6. Gad, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  2. Burley Walter (1963) Tractatus de obligationibus, ed. Green R. An introduction to the logical treatise De obligationibus, with critical texts of William of Sherwood (?) and Walter Burley. PhD dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, LeuvenGoogle Scholar
  3. Kilvington Richard (1990) Sophismata, ed. Kretzmann N, Kretzmann BE. Oxford University Press for the British Academy, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Strode Ralph (1493) Consequentiae et obligationes cum commentis. Octavianus Scolis, VeniceGoogle Scholar
  5. Swyneshed Roger (1977) Obligationes, ed. Spade PV. In: Roger Swyneshed’s Obligationes: edition and comments. Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen âge 44:243–285Google Scholar
  6. Venetus Paulus (1988) Logica magna, Tractatus de obligationibus (II. 8), ed. Ashworth EJ. Oxford University Press for the British Academy, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Secondary Sources

  1. De Rijk LM (1974) Some thirteenth century tracts on the game of obligation I. Vivarium 12:94–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. De Rijk LM (1975) Some thirteenth century tracts on the game of obligation II. Vivarium 13:22–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dutilh Novaes C (2007) Formalizing medieval logical theories. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  4. Keffer H (2001) De obligationibus – Rekonstruktion einer spätmittelalterlichen Disputationstheorie. Brill, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  5. Spade P (1982) Three theories of obligationes: Burley, Kilvington and Swyneshed on counterfactual reasoning. Hist Philos Logic 3:1–32Google Scholar
  6. Spade P (1992) If obligationes were counterfactuals. Philos Top 20:171–188Google Scholar
  7. Yrjönsuuri M (ed) (2001) Medieval formal logic – obligations, insolubles and consequencies. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mikko Yrjönsuuri
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Social Sciences and PhilosophyUniversity of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland