Defending Definitions: The Tools of Disputation in Logic of al-Fanārī
Al-Abharī’s (d.1265) Isagoge (al-Īsāghūjī) is an introductory primer in logic which has received numerous commentaries, each geared towards students of various levels of familiarity with this instrumental science. Al-Fanārī’s (d. 1431) advanced commentary on the Isagoge, called al-Fawāʾid al-Fanāriy...
সংরক্ষণ করুন:
| প্রকাশিত: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/methodos, |
|---|---|
| প্রধান লেখক: | |
| বিন্যাস: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| ভাষা: | Anglais |
| প্রকাশিত: |
Methodos
2022
|
| বিষয়গুলি: | |
| অনলাইন ব্যবহার করুন: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| id |
openedition-oai:revues.org:methodos_9045 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
openedition |
| collection |
OpenEdition Journal |
| language |
Anglais |
| format |
Article ou chapitre numérique |
| building |
0/Bibliothèque numérique/ 1/Bibliothèque numérique/OpenEdition Journals/ |
| topic |
logique Al-Abharī Isagoge al-Īsāghūjī Al-Fanārī Sājaqlīzādah Munāẓara Manṭiq commentaire dispute logic dialectic Al-Abharī Isagoge al-Īsāghūjī disputation Al-Fanārī Sājaqlīzādah Munāẓara Manṭiq commentary |
| spellingShingle |
logique Al-Abharī Isagoge al-Īsāghūjī Al-Fanārī Sājaqlīzādah Munāẓara Manṭiq commentaire dispute logic dialectic Al-Abharī Isagoge al-Īsāghūjī disputation Al-Fanārī Sājaqlīzādah Munāẓara Manṭiq commentary Spevack, Aaron Defending Definitions: The Tools of Disputation in Logic of al-Fanārī |
| description |
Al-Abharī’s (d.1265) Isagoge (al-Īsāghūjī) is an introductory primer in logic which has received numerous commentaries, each geared towards students of various levels of familiarity with this instrumental science. Al-Fanārī’s (d. 1431) advanced commentary on the Isagoge, called al-Fawāʾid al-Fanāriyya, has confounded students of logic for centuries due to its terse and dense style as well as the presumption that the reader knows well the science of disputation along with the subtle interpretive disagreements discussed in other texts and commentaries.Sājaqlīzādah’s primer on disputation entitled al-Waladiyya, written nearly 300 years after al-Fanārī’s commentary, provides useful examples of the possible claims, objections, and defenses available to one making scholarly claims in the form of definitions, classifications, and propositional assents or syllogistic reasoning. In this article, I explore several instances of al-Fanārī’s use of the terms and methods of disputation in order to defend definitions or classifications found al-Abharī’s Isagoge. I aim to identify the specific disputational moves used by al-Fanārī, drawing from those described by Sājaqlīzādah. In doing so, I demonstrate that this important advanced commentary on a popular logic primer is best understood through the lens of disputation. I also argue that Sājaqlīzādah’s suggested methods of making claims, objections, and defenses can be transposed in whole or in part from one category of claim—definitions, classifications, assents—to another, indicating a greater complexity of disputational possibilities than his introductory handbook provides. |
| author |
Spevack, Aaron |
| author_facet |
Spevack, Aaron |
| author_sort |
Spevack, Aaron |
| title |
Defending Definitions: The Tools of Disputation in Logic of al-Fanārī |
| title_short |
Defending Definitions: The Tools of Disputation in Logic of al-Fanārī |
| title_full |
Defending Definitions: The Tools of Disputation in Logic of al-Fanārī |
| title_fullStr |
Defending Definitions: The Tools of Disputation in Logic of al-Fanārī |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Defending Definitions: The Tools of Disputation in Logic of al-Fanārī |
| title_sort |
defending definitions: the tools of disputation in logic of al-fanārī |
| publisher |
Methodos |
| publishDate |
2022 |
| container_title |
URI:https://journals.openedition.org/methodos |
| url |
https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://doi.org/10.4000/methodos.9045 https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://journals.openedition.org/methodos/9045 |
| _version_ |
1877293173232893952 |
| spelling |
openedition-oai:revues.org:methodos_9045 https://doi.org/10.4000/methodos.9045 urn:doi:10.4000/methodos.9045 en https://journals.openedition.org/methodos/9045 2022-05-31T02:00:00Z info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess article info:eu-repo/semantics/article urn:handle:20.500.13089/i9r9 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Defending Definitions: The Tools of Disputation in Logic of al-Fanārī Methodos Savoirs textes langage - UMR 8163 info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/1769-7379 info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/1626-0600 URI:https://journals.openedition.org/methodos Spevack, Aaron logique Al-Abharī Isagoge al-Īsāghūjī Al-Fanārī Sājaqlīzādah Munāẓara Manṭiq commentaire dispute logic dialectic Al-Abharī Isagoge al-Īsāghūjī disputation Al-Fanārī Sājaqlīzādah Munāẓara Manṭiq commentary Al-Abharī’s (d.1265) Isagoge (al-Īsāghūjī) is an introductory primer in logic which has received numerous commentaries, each geared towards students of various levels of familiarity with this instrumental science. Al-Fanārī’s (d. 1431) advanced commentary on the Isagoge, called al-Fawāʾid al-Fanāriyya, has confounded students of logic for centuries due to its terse and dense style as well as the presumption that the reader knows well the science of disputation along with the subtle interpretive disagreements discussed in other texts and commentaries.Sājaqlīzādah’s primer on disputation entitled al-Waladiyya, written nearly 300 years after al-Fanārī’s commentary, provides useful examples of the possible claims, objections, and defenses available to one making scholarly claims in the form of definitions, classifications, and propositional assents or syllogistic reasoning. In this article, I explore several instances of al-Fanārī’s use of the terms and methods of disputation in order to defend definitions or classifications found al-Abharī’s Isagoge. I aim to identify the specific disputational moves used by al-Fanārī, drawing from those described by Sājaqlīzādah. In doing so, I demonstrate that this important advanced commentary on a popular logic primer is best understood through the lens of disputation. I also argue that Sājaqlīzādah’s suggested methods of making claims, objections, and defenses can be transposed in whole or in part from one category of claim—definitions, classifications, assents—to another, indicating a greater complexity of disputational possibilities than his introductory handbook provides. L’Isagoge (al-Īsāghūjī) d’al-Abharī (m. 1265) est un abécédaire d’introduction à la logique qui a fait l’objet de nombreux commentaires, chacun s’adressant à des étudiants dont le niveau de connaissance de cette science fondamentale pouvait varier considérablement. Le commentaire avancé d’al-Fanārī (m. 1431) sur l’Isagoge, appelé al-Fawāʾid al-Fanāriyya, a déconcerté les étudiants en logique pendant des siècles à cause de son style laconique et dense ainsi que par la supposition chez le lecteur d’une connaissance approfondie de la science de la dispute et des désaccords interprétatifs discutés dans d’autres textes et commentaires.Le manuel d’introduction à la dispute de Sājaqlīzādah, intitulé al-Waladiyya et rédigé près de 300 ans après le commentaire d’al-Fanārī, fournit des exemples utiles des affirmations, objections et défenses possibles dont dispose celui qui fait des affirmations savantes sous forme de définitions, de classifications et d’assentiments propositionnels ou de raisonnement syllogistique. Le présent article se voue à l’examen de plusieurs exemples où al-Fanārī emploie les termes et les méthodes de la dispute pour défendre des définitions ou des classifications retrouvées dans l’Isagoge d’al-Abharī. J’y vise à identifier les démarches de dispute spécifiques utilisées par al-Fanārī en m’inspirant de celles qui sont décrites par Sājaqlīzādah. Ce faisant, je démontre qu’il est possible de mieux comprendre cet important commentaire avancé sur un abécédaire de logique populaire en le considérant à travers l’objectif de la dispute. Je soutiens également que les méthodes suggérées par Sājaqlīzādah pour formuler des affirmations, des objections et des défenses peuvent être transposées, en tout ou en partie, d’une catégorie d’affirmations – définitions, classifications, assentiments – à une autre, ce qui met en valeur une plus grande complexité des possibilités de dispute que ne l’indique son manuel d’introduction. |