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

主题（Top） I-VIII和先验分析（APr） I-II是亚里士多德的两个逻辑著作。这两部作品都提供了演绎论证是什么，并给出了如何找到和建立演绎论证的指示，以给定的命题作为结论。这两部著作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。这一事实导致现代诠释者或多或少地赞同上述两部作品中关于亚里士多德演绎理论的不连贯和不相容的激进论点。本项目旨在对这一传统图景进行分析和修正。主要有以下三个目标：1)系统地研究Top与APr的整体关系：Top与APr的不相容印象在Top与APr的比较中尤为明显1-22。然而，对APr的分析显示：APr II明显暗示与Top的连续性强于APr I 1-26。对这两种著作之间关系的系统研究在文献中是没有的，这本身就可以被认为是对亚里士多德学术的重大贡献。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相容性进行更广泛的讨论，以明确这两种方法不相容是否有任何深刻的理论原因。3)上古晚期Top和APr的演绎论证之争的重建：参考2)中一般理论问题的讨论，无论是从历史的角度，还是从理论的角度来看，上古晚期Top和APr的演绎论证之争的重建都是有希望的：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作品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，古代读者阐述了相容论的观点，并将Top和APr（以及它们相应的方法）作为一个统一的逻辑系统的一部分来阅读。通过这种方式，古代诠释者探索了与本项目所解决的基本问题直接相关的不同理论选择。

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.