The History of Logic: The Logic of Aristotle 

Love this content! 👍🏻

This is one of the best educational videos I have seen on you tube.

I just learned that David Hilbert gives us a systematic derivation of the traditional Aristotelian inferences using the monadic predicate calculus which I believe was taken from Russell and Whitehead. If I get bored enough I'll make an attempt at exposition here because it seems instructive. See Hilbert and Ackermann, Principles of Mathematical Logic 1928

The title reminded me when Gumshoe asked Edgeworth what Logic is.

Philosophy overdose, spill the beans! Where do you get all this philosophy gold? :D Also might you have the video of RM Hare on moral philosophy in The Men of Ideas interview (and in English)?

There are much better ways to convey the Square of Opposition than to describe it.

"A is A and not non-A". But that something is itself does not entail that it, for that very reason, cannot be not-itself; for nothing can be not-itself irrespective if it is established it is itself or not.

Excellent upload man! I don’t recall this video before they took everything down. I have to make a small critique. Logic or analytics, who cares? Aristotle would have likely shot down the emphasis given to the etymological explanation given here. He also fails to mention that time is a key problem pertaining to the context of de interpretatione. Propositional logic operates with a background assumption that time passes in the form in which we think and measure it. Aristotle is suspicious about this assumption, which is why the ship example is so puzzling to this day. If you reduce it to the problem of the excluded middle you miss the temporal dimension of the problem.

This video presents logic as so sinister in the intro

Who’s foot is that?

Fuseli painted that same foot

I was wondering where my foot went. There it is!

🙏🙏

Aristotle's Law of Excluded Middle: "A is either B or not-B. A third hypothesis is not given." (Tertium non datur ) Then how can Kant and everyone subsequent to him be correct in asserting that "existence cannot be a predicate," if this rule, that "A is either B or not-B" is absolutely true? To say "A must already be in existence to speak of it" is not an answer, for then making a predicate out of any existent thing A would merely be redundant, not false nor even wrongheaded. And to say, "you cannot speak of the existence of something that exists" is only tautalogical. The thinking too, I think, was that 'existence' is not a property of an existing thing, that is to say not an extrinsic feature or inherent quality of a thing that could properly serve as a predicate. But why not? Surely existence is an extrinsic feature of any existing thing, known epistemologically of it as is any other condition or attribute it possesses; and to deny existence the status of 'inherent quality' of any existing thing seems papably absurd for identical epistemic reasons. I therefore conclude, over against all modern philosophy since Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason," or his "Prolegomena To Any Future Metaphysic," or wherever the hell he so initiated this seemingly indelible heresy, that to the contrary, existence CAN be the predicate of any existing something or other, falsely ascribed if and only if said something does not in any way exist.

Proposition : Amazing to me how few people have viewed this video! Conclusion : Tells me that most people have no interest and no use for logic! Is this a logical conclusion?

All beings are philosophers

"If I say all men are mortal then it is true some men are mortal." ~ Gabriel Ginnantoni on Aristotle But if ALL men are mortal then not merely SOME men are mortal. So "all men are mortal then it is true some men are mortal" is true only if the statement "Some means less than all" is not true. For if it is, then "Some men are mortal" is not derivable from "All men are mortal," for it is not the case that "some" being less than "all" is true.

"analytics the procedure of analysis " - social sciences

😂 The Logic of Enlightened Aristotle BEGINS WITH ME ENDS WITH ME AS DIVINELY ORDAINED 🌺🕎🔯☮️✝️☯️☪️🕉️🌺

How far back has religion stunted the wide spread understanding of the human condition? ALOT

Aristoteles was Macedonian Greek! Macedonians were Greeks. Slavs aren't Macedonians. So the slavs and mix of Bulgarians Albanians in North of Macedonia aren't Greeks Macedonians! That's truth! But fake,lies and untruths can't be proved when wrong is telling everyday and makes a myth! Politicians can make a false theory be "truthful " when they have the power of propaganda! Greeks must prove now that they're still exists and they aren't a myth. From Macedonia in Greece, regards