Modalities in Medieval Logic [PhD Thesis]

This document was uploaded by one of our users. The uploader already confirmed that they had the permission to publish it. If you are author/publisher or own the copyright of this documents, please report to us by using this DMCA report form.

Simply click on the Download Book button.

Yes, Book downloads on Ebookily are 100% Free.

Sometimes the book is free on Amazon As well, so go ahead and hit "Search on Amazon"

Author(s): Sara L. Uckelman
Series: ILLC Dissertation Series DS-2009-04
Publisher: University of Amsterdam
Year: 2009

Language: English
Pages: 251
City: Amsterdam

1 The changing scope of logic 1
1.1 Two views on the scope of logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 ‘History of’ as an operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2.1 The via antiqua and via nova . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2.2 The Humanist revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.3 A modern view of medieval logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2 Logic and the condemnations of 1277 15
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.1.1 The condemnation in Paris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1.2 The prohibition in Oxford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.2 Historical background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.2.1 The structure of a university . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.2.2 Previous condemnations and strictures . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.3 The propositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.4 After the condemnation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.4.1 Oxford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.4.2 Paris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.5 Modal and temporal logic in the 14th century . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.5.1 Modal logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.5.2 Temporal logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.6 Concluding remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3 St. Anselm on agency and obligation 41
3.1 Agency as a modal notion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.2 Anselm on facere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.2.1 Philosophical and theological motivations . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.2.2 The types and modes of doing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
3.3 Semantics for non-normal modal logics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
3.4 The syntax of agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.5 Human agency, obligation, and goodness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4 13th-century quantified modal logic 67
4.1 Modes and modal propositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.1.1 Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
4.1.2 Quantity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
4.1.3 Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
4.2 Inferential relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4.2.1 Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4.2.2 Conversions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
4.2.3 Modal syllogisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
4.3 Contrasts with modern views of modal logic . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4.3.1 The nature of modality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4.3.2 The truth conditions of modal sentences . . . . . . . . . . 80
4.3.3 Concluding remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
5 A quantified predicate logic for ampliation and restriction 85
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
5.2 Basic notions and definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.3 Appellation, ampliation, and restriction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
5.4 Constructing a formal model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
5.5 Applying the formal model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
5.6 Conclusions and future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
6 Swyneshed’s notion of self-falsification 103
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
6.2 Paradoxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
6.2.1 Fitch’s paradox of knowability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
6.2.2 The Liar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
6.2.3 Solutions to paradoxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
6.3 Modern responses to Fitch’s Paradox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
6.3.1 Dynamic epistemic logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
6.3.2 Van Benthem’s solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.4 Medieval responses to the Liar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.4.1 Na¨ıve restriction strategy solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
6.4.2 Roger Swyneshed’s solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
6.5 Announcement pointer semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
6.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
7 A logic for the trinity 121
7.1 Paralogisms of the trinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
7.2 The text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
7.3 Background theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
7.3.1 Modes of being and speaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
7.3.2 Supposition theory and the distribution of terms . . . . . . 130
7.3.3 Expository syllogisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
7.4 The formal system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
7.4.1 Language and models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
7.4.2 Properties of the system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
7.5 Resolving the paradoxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
A Logical preliminaries 151
A.1 Categorical syllogisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
A.2 Kripke semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
A.3 Quantified modal logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
B On modal propositions 157
B.1 Aquinas, On modal propositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
B.2 Pseudo-Aquinas, excerpts from Summa totius logicae Aristotelis . 159
Tract. 6, cap. 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Tract. 6, cap. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
Tract. 6, cap. 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Tract. 6, cap. 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Tract. 7, cap. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Tract. 7, cap. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Tract. 7, cap. 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
Tract. 7, cap. 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
Tract. 7, cap. 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
C Trinitarian predication & syllogizing 177
Bibliography 199
Index 223
Samenvatting 229
Abstract 231