Aristotle and Avicenna's Solution to Overcome the Limitation of Syllogism

Understanding syllogism requires recognizing its limitations and the First Teacher’s strategies for overcoming them. Aristotle’s syllogism, due to its conceptual focus, cannot address relational propositions. To escape this constraint, Aristotle resorted to the relational context (sīāq-e taʿalloqī), whereas Avicenna, due to his formalist perspective, could not adopt this approach. Therefore, he expanded the very concept of syllogism. Aristotle’s ‘Organon’ and Avicenna’s ‘The Book of Healing’ (al-Shifāʾ) form the two primary texts of this study. Our method for analyzing these texts is critical and hermeneutic; that is, we directly examined the Organon and asked through a critical reading: Why does the First Teacher rely solely on relational context to present his three types of syllogism? With the same approach, we turned to Avicenna’s syllogism and found that he, too, recognized the limitations of syllogism but could not utilize relational context because, influenced by Porphyry, he leaned toward formal syllogism. Thus, to overcome its limitations, he adopted Galen’s method - expanding the definition of syllogism to include Stoic conditional reasoning. To escape the constraints of syllogism, Aristotle turned to relational context, while Avicenna expanded the meaning of syllogism and introduced the exceptional syllogism. Students of Aristotelian logic may become familiar with the different methods of these two great teachers for overcoming the limitations of syllogism and the reasons behind their divergence.

کلیدواژه ها:

syllogism ، the limitation of syllogism ، Aristotle ، Avicenna ، belonging ، exceptive syllogism