Medieval obligationes literature, including Heytesbury's own contemporaries like Burley, treated certain sophisms as revealing genuine indeterminacy in consequence relations, not mere misapplication of agreed rules.

?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.

Burley(as a historical philosopher referenced in medieval logic): Walter Burley, a medieval English philosopher and logician (14th century) known for developing detailed rules about how words change meaning in logical arguments.
Consequence relations(the rules of logic that sophisms test): The logical connections between statements—basically, which conclusions are supposed to follow from which starting points.
Heytesbury(The subject of the philosophical criticism being discussed): A medieval English philosopher (14th century) who developed theories about logic and language, particularly about how words relate to things in the world.
Indeterminacy in consequence relations(what some philosophers believed sophisms revealed): A situation where it's genuinely unclear whether one statement logically follows from another, rather than the problem being that someone just applied the rules wrong.

Based on where you are in your exploration