CARROLL’S PARADOX FROM THE VIEWPOINTS OF WITTGENSTEIN, IBN SĪNĀ, AND TŪSĪ

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

AZIMI MAHDI

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

Journal: JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL THEOLOGICAL RESEARCH Year:2017 | Volume:18 | Issue:2 (70) Page(s): 179-194

Download Full-Text

Persian Verion

View:

648

Download:

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

CARROLL’S PARADOX FROM THE VIEWPOINTS OF WITTGENSTEIN, IBN SĪNĀ, AND TŪSĪ

Author(s)

AZIMI MAHDI | Issue Writer Certificate

Keywords

LWIS CARROLL'S PARADOXQ1

THE PARADOX OF INFERENCEQ1

MODU PONENDO PONENSQ1

IBN SINAQ1

TUSIQ1

WITTGENSTEINQ1

Abstract

Carroll’s paradox calls the most fundamental concept of logic, namely the concept of inference, into challenge, and appears to convey that one cannot pass, in any inferences, legitimately from premises to conclusion. So as to get hold of any possible solution out of their writings, the current article puts the paradox under three giant thinkers’ (i.e. WITTGENSTEIN, Ibn Sīnā, and Tūsī) views. WITTGENSTEIN puts forward an “inexpressible” but “showable” modus ponens in all inferences that leads ultimately to the distinction between “rule” and “premise”. Ibn Sīnā recognizes the logical principles as criterion (“mikyāl”) not as matter (“mādda”) for which the same exactly holds as the above distinction. Also, Tūsī speaks of the necessity of any syllogism to have an “assistant” and “concomitant” modus ponens that can be considered as the iteration of WITTGENSTEIN’s “inexpressible-but-showable modus ponens” leading as before to the mentioned distinction. As a key solution to Carroll’s paradox, one should make a robust distinction between “rule” and “premise”, and bring inadmissibility to converting the former to the latter.

Cites

No record.

References

No record.

Cite

APA: Copy

AZIMI, MAHDI. (2017). CARROLL’S PARADOX FROM THE VIEWPOINTS OF WITTGENSTEIN, IBN S?N?, AND T?S?. JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL THEOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 18(2 (70)), 179-194. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/98152/en

Vancouver: Copy

AZIMI MAHDI. CARROLL’S PARADOX FROM THE VIEWPOINTS OF WITTGENSTEIN, IBN S?N?, AND T?S?. JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL THEOLOGICAL RESEARCH[Internet]. 2017;18(2 (70)):179-194. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/98152/en

IEEE: Copy

MAHDI AZIMI, “CARROLL’S PARADOX FROM THE VIEWPOINTS OF WITTGENSTEIN, IBN S?N?, AND T?S?,” JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL THEOLOGICAL RESEARCH, vol. 18, no. 2 (70), pp. 179–194, 2017, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/98152/en

Related Journal Papers