Publication Date
1245
Subject
Logic
Type
Other
Language
Arabic
Digital
Yes
Manuscript
No
Library
Pompeu Fabra University Library
Record ID
cdi_europeana_collections_9200126_29CEB3CC40A7573368DBC95E608B8116DD1EDC27
Library Location
Available Online
Date
1245
Sample Text
Original paper covers with miqlab, leather over edges and binding, paper and leather partially damaged, linen binding untied; Neskhi script, black ink, certain terms and marks in the text written with red ink; interlinear and marginal notes, ink: black and red; text within a triple red frame; folios separated from binding: 8-10. Original covers made of glued sheets of paper with a flap on the back cover, leather reinforcement over the edges and spine. The paper and leather on the cover have worn away. The cloth binding is unraveling and falling apart. Nesha. The manuscript is written in black ink, some terms and marks in the text are written in red ink. Notes between the lines and in the margins are written in black and red ink. The text is framed by three thin red frames. Leaves 8-10 are detached from the binding. The opposing view of Greek logic is summed up in a famous debate said to have taken place in Baghdad in 932 between the grammarian Abu Said As-Sirafi and Abu Bishr Mata, a Syrian Christian who translated several works of Aristotle into Arabic and is believed to have been one of Al-Farabi's teachers. The extensive description of the discussion was rather biased in favor of As-Sirafi who attacks logical formalism and rejects the ability of logic to rule as a measure of thinking beyond the inner capacities of the intellect itself. His basic claims are that philosophical logic is Greek grammar just warmed up, that it is inextricably linked to the expression of the Greek language and that it has nothing to offer speakers of other languages, such as Arabic. This attitude towards Greek logic is epitomized in a famous debate reported to have taken place in Baghdad in 932 between the grammarian Abu Sa'id al-Sirafi and Abu BishrMatta, a Syriac Christian who translated some of Aristotle's works into Arabic and is purported to have been one of al-Farabi's teachers. The extant account of the debate is heavily biased towards al-Sirafi, who attacks logical formalism and denies the ability of logic to act as a measure of reasoning over and above the innate capacities of the intellect itself. His principal claims are that philosophical logic is nothing but Greek grammar warmed over, that it is inextricably tied to the idiom of the Greek language and that it has nothing to offer speakers of another language such as Arabic.
Kaynak
Europeana Collections
