If Ibn Sina's 'always' and 'never' operators on conditionals do not form a standard contradictory pair—as Wilfrid Hodges's formal reconstruction of Avicennan logic suggests—the reductio in the supportingargument fails to close.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
Ibn Sina was a Persian philosopher and physician who lived about 1,000 years ago and is considered one of the most influential thinkers in history. He wrote major works on logic, medicine, and metaphysics that were studied in European universities for centuries and shaped how people understood everything from how the body works to how we think about existence itself. His medical encyclopedia was so authoritative that it remained a standard textbook in Europe well into the 1600s.
Operators (in logic)(Ibn Sina's 'always' and 'never' are logical operators)
Tools or symbols used in logical statements that modify or connect ideas—like 'and,' 'or,' or 'not' in everyday language.
Wilfrid Hodges(the scholar whose reconstruction is being referenced)
A modern British logician who studied how Ibn Sina's logical system works and translated it into formal mathematical language that today's logicians use.
reductio (reductio ad absurdum)(as a logical technique being used in the argument)
A method of proving something is wrong by showing that if you accept it as true, it leads to an obviously ridiculous or impossible conclusion.