Topics and Prior Analytics: Peripatetic Logic between Aristotle and Alexander of Aphrodisias

题目(顶级)一至八和先前分析(四月)一至二是亚里士多德的两部逻辑著作。这两部著作都描述了什么是演绎论点，并指出了如何找到和建立以给定命题为结论的演绎论点。两篇文章中所描述的演绎论证的方法和基本结构在几个方面是不同的。这一事实使得现代译者或多或少地认可了关于亚里士多德演绎理论在上述两部作品中的不连贯和不相容的激进论点。拟议的项目旨在对这一传统图景进行分析和修改。具体而言，将追求以下三个具体目标：1)系统地研究Top和APR之间的整体关系：通过Top和APR I 1-22的比较特别明显地给人一种不相容的印象。然而，对APR I 23 ff的分析。而且APR II清楚地暗示了与Top的连续性比APR I 1-26最初可能暗示的更强。系统地研究这两部著作之间的关系在文献中是不存在的，本身可以被认为是对亚里士多德学派的重大贡献。2)基本理论问题的讨论：需要对Top和APR中提出的演绎论证方法的理论兼容性进行更广泛的讨论，以明确这两种方法为什么不能相容的深层理论原因。3)古代和晚期演绎论证辩论的重建：参照2)中对一般理论问题的讨论，古代和晚期关于这一问题的辩论的重建似乎是有希望的，不仅从历史的角度来看，而且从理论的角度：作者智力发展的假设，在现代研究中经常被用来解释亚里士多德著作中明显不相容的主张或部分的存在，对古代读者来说是陌生的。因此，古代读者阐述了兼容主义者的观点，并将Top和Apr(及其相应的方法)作为统一的逻辑系统的一部分来阅读。通过这种方式，古代口译人员探索了不同的理论选择，这些选择与该项目所处理的基本问题直接相关。

Topics (Top) I-VIII and Prior Analytics (APr) I-II are two of Aristotle's logical writings. Both works provide an account of what a deductive argument is and give indications on how to find and build deductive arguments having a given proposition as their conclusion. The methods and the basic structure of deductive arguments described in the two writings are different in several respects. This fact has led modern interpreters to endorse more or less radical theses on the incoherence and incompatibility of Aristotle's theory of deduction in the two aforementioned works. The proposed project aims at analyzing and revising this traditional picture. In particular, the following three specific goals will be pursued: 1) Systematic study of the relation between Top and APr in their entirety: The impression of incompatibility is particularly pronounced by the comparison between Top and APr I 1-22. However, an analysis of APr I 23 ff. and APr II clearly hints at a stronger continuity with Top than APr I 1-26 might suggest initially. A systematic study of the relations between these two writings is not available in the literature and can in itself be considered a significant contribution to Aristotelian scholarship. 2) Discussion of basic theoretical issues: A more general discussion of the theoretical compatibility of the approaches to deductive arguments presented in Top and APr is needed in order to make clear whether there is any deep theoretical reason why the two approaches should be incompatible. 3) Reconstruction of the debate on deductive arguments in Top and APr in antiquity and late antiquity: With reference to the discussion of the general theoretical issue presented in 2), the reconstruction of the debate on this issue in antiquity and late antiquity seems promising, not only from a historical point of view, but also from a theoretical one: the hypothesis of the intellectual development of the author, often used in modern studies to explain the presence of apparently incompatible claims or sections in Aristotle's writings, is foreign to ancient readers. Consequently, ancient readers elaborate compatibilist views and read Top and APr (as well as their corresponding approaches) as parts of a unified logical system. In this way ancient interpreters explore different theoretical options which are of direct relevance for the basic issues tackled by this project.