Just wanted to add a few qualifications to some comments about Aristotle and his place in the history of logic. It's too strong to say that Aristotle was "dethroned" as some have put it: he created the template for the more sophisticated logical systems that we have today like the propositional calculus and first-order logic. Virtually all logic relies on some formulation of deductive validity, which Aristotle was the first to codify. Virtually all logic uses some version of Aristotle's three laws of thought: the law of non-contradiction in particular is the cornerstone of most logics. Virtually all logics make use of Aristotle codification of quantity (all & some) and quality (affirmation & negation).

As someone else put it, the problem with Aristotle was that he was too good, not that he got some things wrong: that is inevitable with any individual thinker/scientist. The systematic approach to investigating the world is in some strong respects inherited from Aristotle. Even though his physics is utterly archaic by today's standards, the mode of reasoning about the physical world through causes and effects is still the overriding schematism -- nowhere is that more lucidly formulated than in Aristotle. The problem was that subsequent history took many of his insights as "settled" and transmitted his corpus as authority, which is not a norm that we today accept in intellectual pursuits, nor was it the norm in Aristotle's time.

Just wanted to add a few qualifications to some comments about Aristotle and his place in the history of logic. It's too strong to say that Aristotle was "dethroned" as some have put it: he created the template for the more sophisticated logical systems that we have today like the propositional calculus and first-order logic. Virtually all logic relies on some formulation of deductive validity, which Aristotle was the first to codify. Virtually all logic uses some version of Aristotle's three laws of thought: the law of non-contradiction in particular is the cornerstone of most logics. Virtually all logics make use of Aristotle's codification of quantity (all & some) and quality (affirmation & negation).

As someone else put it, the problem with Aristotle was that he was too good, not that he got some things wrong: that is inevitable with any individual thinker/scientist. The systematic approach to investigating the world is in some strong respects inherited from Aristotle. Even though his physics is utterly archaic by today's standards, the mode of reasoning about the physical world through causes and effects is still the overriding schematism -- nowhere is that more lucidly formulated than in Aristotle. The problem was that subsequent history took many of his insights as "settled" and transmitted his corpus as authority, which is not a norm that we today accept in intellectual pursuits, nor was it the norm in Aristotle's time.

Just wanted to add a few qualifications to some comments about Aristotle and his place in the history of logic. It's incorrect to say that Aristotle was "dethroned" as some have put it: he created the template for the more sophisticated logical systems that we have today like the propositional calculus and first-order logic. Virtually all logic relies on some formulation of deductive validity, which Aristotle was the first to codify. Virtually all logic uses some version of Aristotle's three laws of thought: the law of non-contradiction in particular is the cornerstone of most logics. Virtually all logics make use of Aristotle codification of quantity (all & some) and quality (affirmation & negation).

As someone else put it, the problem with Aristotle was that he was too good, not that he got some things wrong: that is inevitable with any individual thinker/scientist. The systematic approach to investigating the world is in some strong respects inherited from Aristotle. Even though his physics is utterly archaic by today's standards, the mode of reasoning about the physical world through causes and effects is still the overriding schematism -- nowhere is that more lucidly formulated than in Aristotle. The problem was that subsequent history took many of his insights as "settled" and transmitted his corpus as authority, which is not a norm that we today accept in intellectual pursuits, nor was it the norm in Aristotle's time.

Just wanted to add a few qualifications to some comments about Aristotle and his place in the history of logic. It's too strong to say that Aristotle was "dethroned" as some have put it: he created the template for the more sophisticated logical systems that we have today like the propositional calculus and first-order logic. Virtually all logic relies on some formulation of deductive validity, which Aristotle was the first to codify. Virtually all logic uses some version of Aristotle's three laws of thought: the law of non-contradiction in particular is the cornerstone of most logics. Virtually all logics make use of Aristotle codification of quantity (all & some) and quality (affirmation & negation).

As someone else put it, the problem with Aristotle was that he was too good, not that he got some things wrong: that is inevitable with any individual thinker/scientist. The systematic approach to investigating the world is in some strong respects inherited from Aristotle. Even though his physics is utterly archaic by today's standards, the mode of reasoning about the physical world through causes and effects is still the overriding schematism -- nowhere is that more lucidly formulated than in Aristotle. The problem was that subsequent history took many of his insights as "settled" and transmitted his corpus as authority, which is not a norm that we today accept in intellectual pursuits, nor was it the norm in Aristotle's time.