Sofistyczna antylogika – wprowadzenie w problematykę

Zbigniew Nerczuk
{"title":"Sofistyczna antylogika – wprowadzenie w problematykę","authors":"Zbigniew Nerczuk","doi":"10.18778/1733-0319.26.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses the sophistic method of “antilogic” (“double arguments”, “contrasting arguments”, “opposed speeches”, “two-fold arguments”). The main goal is to show that it is a method that, in the light of the doctrine presented in Plato’s Theaetetus, is based on philosophical foundations. The work of G.B. Kerferd was crucial for the research on the art of antilogic, as it broke with the unequivocally negative understanding of this method adopted by the earlier research tradition. Late testimonies of Diogenes Laertius, Clement of Alexandria, Seneca and Eudoxus point to Protagoras of Abdera as the creator and promoter of the antilogic. These testimonies are confirmed by references to the method of “opposed speeches” contained in the comedies of Aristophanes, in the tragedies of Euripides and in the anonymous treatise Dialexeis. Plato’s report on the doctrine attributed to Protagoras in the Theaetetus reveals the philosophical context of the antilogic. The so-called “secret doctrine”, based on the acceptance of appearances and of the privacy of perceptions (man-measure doctrine), the rejection of truth and falsehood, and acceptance of the contradictory judgments results from the new vision of reality in flux. Therefore, the “secret doctrine” presents a consistent and coherent project leading to a new concept of logic and language and lays the foundations for the method of “double arguments”.","PeriodicalId":33406,"journal":{"name":"Collectanea Philologica","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Collectanea Philologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-0319.26.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article discusses the sophistic method of “antilogic” (“double arguments”, “contrasting arguments”, “opposed speeches”, “two-fold arguments”). The main goal is to show that it is a method that, in the light of the doctrine presented in Plato’s Theaetetus, is based on philosophical foundations. The work of G.B. Kerferd was crucial for the research on the art of antilogic, as it broke with the unequivocally negative understanding of this method adopted by the earlier research tradition. Late testimonies of Diogenes Laertius, Clement of Alexandria, Seneca and Eudoxus point to Protagoras of Abdera as the creator and promoter of the antilogic. These testimonies are confirmed by references to the method of “opposed speeches” contained in the comedies of Aristophanes, in the tragedies of Euripides and in the anonymous treatise Dialexeis. Plato’s report on the doctrine attributed to Protagoras in the Theaetetus reveals the philosophical context of the antilogic. The so-called “secret doctrine”, based on the acceptance of appearances and of the privacy of perceptions (man-measure doctrine), the rejection of truth and falsehood, and acceptance of the contradictory judgments results from the new vision of reality in flux. Therefore, the “secret doctrine” presents a consistent and coherent project leading to a new concept of logic and language and lays the foundations for the method of “double arguments”.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
诡辩反逻辑--问题简介
本文论述了“反逻辑”的诡辩方法(“双重论证”、“对比论证”、“对立言论”、“双重论证”)。主要目的是要说明,根据柏拉图的《泰阿泰德》所提出的学说,这是一种基于哲学基础的方法。G.B. Kerferd的工作对反逻辑艺术的研究至关重要,因为它打破了早期研究传统对这种方法的明确否定理解。第欧根尼·莱尔修斯、亚历山大的克莱门特、塞内加和欧多克索斯的晚期证词指出,阿比德拉的普罗泰哥拉是反逻辑的创造者和推动者。在阿里斯托芬的喜剧、欧里庇德斯的悲剧和佚名的狄亚历克塞的论著中,都提到了“对立演说”的方法,证实了这些证词。柏拉图在《泰阿德图》中对普罗泰哥拉学说的报告揭示了反逻辑的哲学背景。所谓的“秘密主义”,建立在接受表象和感知的私密性(人量主义),拒绝真理和谬误,接受矛盾的判断的基础上,源于对不断变化的现实的新看法。因此,“秘密主义”呈现出一种连贯一致的工程,导致一种新的逻辑和语言概念,并为“双重论证”方法奠定了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sic undique fulgor percussit. Ekfraza w VII eklodze Kalpurniusza Sykulusa Problem winy i odpowiedzialności za zbrodnię w Orestesie Eurypidesa Owidiusz, Amory III 1 w polskim przekładzie Cicero und Andokides O religii starożytnych Germanów. Komentarze do księgi VII Geografii Strabona
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1