Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T09:56:22.517Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Petitio: Aristotle's Five Ways

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

John Woods  and
Douglas Walton
John Woods
Affiliation:
University of Lethbridge
Douglas Walton
Affiliation:
University of Winnipeg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

If one looks to the current textbook lore for reliable taxonomic and analytical information about the petitio principii, one is met with conceptual disarray and much too much nonsense. The present writers have recently attempted to furnish the beginnings of a theoretical reconstruction of this fallacy which is at once faithful to its formidable complexity yet useful as guide for its detection and avoidance. The fact is that the petitio has had a lengthy and interesting history, and in this paper we shall want to explore certain features of its development, such as it may have been. The principal origins of the concept of circular argument are to be found in Aristotle. The Aristotelian doctrine recurs with variations in the sophismata literature of the middle ages and in logic texts and manuals right up to the present day.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , March 1982 , pp. 77 - 100
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aristotle, The Works of Aristotle Translated into English, ed. Ross, W.D. (Oxford: Oxford University Press 1928)Google Scholar
Barker, John ‘The Fallacy of Begging the Question,’ Dialogue, 15 (1976) 241-55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Morris R. and Nagel, Ernes An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World 1934)Google Scholar
Copi, Irving Introduction to Logic 4th. edn. (New York: MacMillan 1972)Google Scholar
Morgan, Augustus De Formal Logic (London: Taylor and Walton 1847)Google Scholar
Hamblin, C.L. Fallacies (London: Methuen 1970)Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart A System of Logic (London: Longmans Green 1843)Google Scholar
Rescher, Nicholas The Coherence Theory of Truth (Oxford: Oxford University Press 1973)Google Scholar
Rescher, Nicholas (1977a), Dialectics (Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press 1977)Google Scholar
Rescher, Nicholas (1977b), Methodological Pragmatism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell 1977)Google Scholar
Sanford, David ‘Begging the Question,’ Analysis, 32 (1972) 197-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanford, David ‘The Fallacy of Begging the Question: A Reply to Barker,’ Dialogue, 16 (1977) 485-98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, Douglas ‘Mill and De Morgan on Whether the Syllogism is a Petitio,’ international Logic Review, 8 (1977) 57–68Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas 'Petitio Principii and Argument Analysis,’ in Informal Logic, ed. Johnson, R.H. and Blair, J.A. (Pt. Reyes, Cal.: Edgepress 1980) 40–54Google Scholar
Whately, Richard Elements of Logic (New York: Sheldon & Co. 1840)Google Scholar
Woods, John and Walton, Douglas ‘Petitio Principii,’ Synthese, 31 (1975) 107-27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, John ‘Petitio and Relevant Many-Premissed Arguments,’ Logique et Analyse, 77-78 (1977) 97-110Google Scholar
Woods, John ‘Arresting Circles in Formal Dialogues,’ Journal of Philosophical Logic, 7 (1978) 73–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, John,'Circular Demonstration and von Wright-Geach Entailment,’ Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic (forthcoming)Google Scholar
Woods, John ‘Question-Begging and Cumulativeness in Dialectical Games,’ NoûsGoogle Scholar
Woods, John ‘What is Informal Logic?', in Informal Logic, ed. Johnson, R.H. and Blair, J.A. (Pt. Reyes, Cal.: Edgepress 1980)Google Scholar