Aristotle's Prior and Posterior Analytics. a Revised Text with Introduction and Commentary By W.D. Ross

by Aristotle. (Revised text by W. D. Ross).

Contained in this volume are books by Aristotle on the subject of logic or as the author would describe it, analytics. 'Prior Analytics and Posterior Analytics' are collected here in this volume translated by A. J. Jenkinson and G. R. G. Mure. This volume together with 'Categories, On Interpretation, and On Sophistical Refutations', and 'Topics' forms the 'Organon' or complete books of Aristotelian logic. Students of classical philosophy and literature will find this volume of much interest.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Logic

Hardcover

First published January 1, 1964

Reviews

[James Violand · Rating 3 out of 5]

Extremely difficult. I had to diagram the schematic. And these books laid down the laws of logic. It makes me realize how far modern man has fallen in education. The ancients put us to shame. Man, am I dumb.

[Plato · Rating 4 out of 5]

Yes, indeed, some people think that because knowledge through demonstration requires knowledge of the primary things there is no knowledge; others think that there is knowledge, and that everything knowable is demonstrable. These other people agree that knowledge results only from demonstration, but since they claim that it is possible to demonstrate everything, since they take circular and reciprocal demonstration to be possible.

These chumps didn't live long enough to hear the king speak: "We reply that not all knowledge is demonstrative, and in fact knowledge of the immediate premises is indemonstrable."

The first group of people just want an infinite regress so just fuck them, no way to have any type of knowledge for these idiots. The second group are also quite dumb, unqualified demonstration clearly cannot be circular if it must be derived from what is prior and better known.
For suppose that if A is, necessarily B is, and that if B is, necessarily C is; it follows that if A is, C will be. Suppose, then, that if A is, then B necessarily is, and if B is, A is (since this is what circular argument is), and let A be C. In that case, to say that if B is, A is is to say that C is; this that if A is, C is. But since C is the same as A, it follows that those who allow circular demonstration simply say that if A is, then A is. On these terms it is easy to prove anything.

These fools both took for granted that all knowledge is produced from demonstration. Aristotle solution is showing we know things in a different way, which he calls induction.

[JP · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a root of logic -- the place where Aristotle defines, explains and explores premise, term, and syllogism. It is here that he declares "A is A." He discusses the universal vs. the major and minor terms (logic based on absolute vs. subsets). He categorizes syllogisms as assertic, problematic, contrary, and contradictory. He defines the basis of proof, counter-proof, and false argument.

[Averill · Rating 2 out of 5]

If A is C then B is A then the moon is differently a whosit. That being said, whatsits are... Blah,blah,blah. Boring as hell not sure why he was made so popular. I have read Nichomachean Ethics, De Anima (earlier this year), politics, and metaphysics. I have yet to find one of his works to jump up and down about. Lack luster and lame at best.