Aristotle and the Philosophy of Logic Among the first great philosophers to study the philosophy of logic was Aristotle. Aristotle used logic as a means of discovering meaning. Through his work, he developed a system of logic that, when followed, would lead an individual to the truth. Aristotle's work is not only important because it is the first of its kind, but it also transformed the way reasoning was applied. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Aristotle's logic is structured in such a way that an individual can deduce new knowledge using a syllogism. A syllogism is an argument based on two premises that leads to a logical conclusion. The premise of an argument is the statement on which the argument is based. The key to using a syllogism to arrive at a conclusion lies in deduction. The best way to illustrate this is to use formal logic. Formal logic is one of the two types of logic invented by Aristotle. As the name suggests, formal logic deals with the appropriate form of a logical statement. This is where the deduction comes in. A classic example of formal logic can be demonstrated as a mathematical concept as follows: If A is equal to B and B is equal to C, then A is also equal to C. You can reach the conclusion A is equal to C using the deduction. . Another common example to show the logical progression of a form is the expression: if X then Y, different from these necessarily supposed results because they are” (as cited in “Aristotle Logic 1”). As long as the argument follows form and you base your inference on what you know to be true, then the conclusion you arrive at must be true. because of “necessity”. It is important to note that in formal logic, the fact or truth of a statement does not matter. Since formal logic only deals with the form of an argument, the emphasis is on the correctness of the form. If the form is used correctly, the argument is considered valid. While formal logic deals strictly with the form of an argument, substantive logic introduces context. By context, I mean real-world premises applied to a form. Using the formal logic example above, we could insert the context of the numbers, for example: 0 equals 1, 1 equals 2, then 0 equals 2. We know we are using the correct form of the argument that makes the argument valid, but the problem lies in the truth of the premises. You could say that 0 equals 1, but anyone who knows mathematics knows that is not true. When a statement uses the correct form but uses false premises, that statement is said to be ill-founded. Conversely, when an argument has true premises and uses a valid form, it is said to be valid. The application and benefits of logic are clear. Logic is a free tool available to anyone who thinks critically. If one understands logic, then one is able to evaluate logical statements. This is an important step in thinking critically and arriving at the truth of a statement. Suppose you are talking with a colleague and you can clearly identify that his second premise refutes the first, with logic you can immediately see that he is lying. The application of logic to science is even more practical than everyday life. The ability to discern facts from non-facts lies in the useof logic. A key element of the application of logic in science comes from Aristotle's first principles. Science clearly relies on logic, but for that science to work, certain things must first be accepted as fact. Aristotle's first principles seek to enable this to happen. Imagine where science would be if nothing could initially be accepted as fact, there would be no logic because no premise could be accepted as truth. Aristotle establishes the principles based on three criteria, first they must be obvious, second they are unprovable, and finally they are fundamental (“Aristotle Logic 3”). Aristotle breaks down the first principles into four principles of logic, the principles of identity, the excluded middle, sufficient reasoning and contradiction. These four principles serve as the foundation of all logic. The principle of identity concerns how we recognize objects. We accept the identity of certain things based on how we observe them through our senses. A banana is a banana because it is yellow and has a certain shape, smell and taste. Objects that meet certain criteria are identified as that object and the principle of identity states that if another object meets those criteria, then it is also that object. This is important because it’s how we decide what something is. The second principle, that of the excluded middle, addresses half-truths. Simply put, there are no half-truths. A statement can only be true or false if it is less true than false, and if it is more than false, then it is true. Think about the term "almost", if one were to say that they are almost anything, then they do not meet the requirement of being that thing, therefore they are not, therefore the statement is false . The third principle of logic, the principle of sufficient reasoning, concerns cause. The principle states that nothing can exist on its own. That is to say, everything must come from something. Finally, the fourth principle of logic, the principle of contradiction, deals with contradiction. The principle simply states that nothing can be in contradiction with itself. An object cannot have two contradictory identities. An apple cannot be both an apple and a banana. This can be easily applied to an argument that is proven false by contradicting statements. These principles are the foundation of logic because they provide a means of establishing premises. Hypothetically, let's establish the premise of "A", we first need A to be identifiable, if A is obscured by ambiguity then A cannot mean the same thing to everyone, which in turn prevents us from establish it, here the principle of identity is used. After identifying A as A, we have to prove that A is or is not, A almost cannot be A or vice versa, here we use the principle of excluded middle. Next, we establish that A is a thing, given that A has a cause. Here we use the principle of sufficient reasoning. Finally, we establish that A is, and can only be A, here we use the principle of contradiction. Using the four principles of logic, we have successfully established a premise that we can use in our argument. Without the ability to establish a premise, the strength of an argument would be impossible to prove, ultimately making logic unreliable. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay The greatest philosophical question comes from the application of logic. The question of whether or not logic is necessary to arrive at the truth. Some would say.