Intuitionist and Classical Dimensions of Hegel’s Hybrid Logic

Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI:10.1080/01445340.2023.2180727
P. Redding
{"title":"Intuitionist and Classical Dimensions of Hegel’s Hybrid Logic","authors":"P. Redding","doi":"10.1080/01445340.2023.2180727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hegel interpreters commonly reject attempts to situate Hegel’s logic in relation to modern movements. Appealing to his criticisms of the logic of Verstand or mere understanding with its fixed logical structure, Hegel’s logic, it is pointed out, was a logic of Vernunft or reason—a logic more at home in the thought of Plato and Aristotle than in modern mathematical forms. Contesting this implied dichotomy, it is here argued that the ancient roots of Hegel’s logic, especially as transmitted by late Neopythagorean/Neoplatonic thinkers such as Proclus, gave it many features similar to ones later found in the type of algebraic transformation of Aristotle, started first by Leibniz, reanimated by Boole in the mid-nineteenth century and then developed by others such as C. S. Peirce and Arend Heyting. In particular, the ancient mathematics upon which Hegel had drawn allowed him to anticipate an answer to the criticism that Frege would later aim at Boole, concerning his inability to unite opposed class and propositional calculi. Hegel’s logic would be a hybrid, incorporating features found later in intuitionist and classical logic, but it could be so because of the way he had called upon the mathematics of the ancient Platonist tradition.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01445340.2023.2180727","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hegel interpreters commonly reject attempts to situate Hegel’s logic in relation to modern movements. Appealing to his criticisms of the logic of Verstand or mere understanding with its fixed logical structure, Hegel’s logic, it is pointed out, was a logic of Vernunft or reason—a logic more at home in the thought of Plato and Aristotle than in modern mathematical forms. Contesting this implied dichotomy, it is here argued that the ancient roots of Hegel’s logic, especially as transmitted by late Neopythagorean/Neoplatonic thinkers such as Proclus, gave it many features similar to ones later found in the type of algebraic transformation of Aristotle, started first by Leibniz, reanimated by Boole in the mid-nineteenth century and then developed by others such as C. S. Peirce and Arend Heyting. In particular, the ancient mathematics upon which Hegel had drawn allowed him to anticipate an answer to the criticism that Frege would later aim at Boole, concerning his inability to unite opposed class and propositional calculi. Hegel’s logic would be a hybrid, incorporating features found later in intuitionist and classical logic, but it could be so because of the way he had called upon the mathematics of the ancient Platonist tradition.
分享
查看原文
黑格尔混合逻辑的直觉与古典维度
黑格尔诠释者通常拒绝将黑格尔逻辑与现代运动联系起来。有人指出,黑格尔的逻辑是一种理性的逻辑,是柏拉图和亚里士多德思想中的逻辑,而不是现代数学形式中的逻辑。对这种隐含的二分法提出异议,这里认为黑格尔逻辑的古代根源,特别是由普罗克劳斯等新毕达哥拉斯/新柏拉图主义思想家传播的,赋予了它许多类似于后来在亚里士多德的代数变换类型中发现的特征,这些特征首先由莱布尼茨开始,在19世纪中叶由布尔重新活跃起来,然后由C. S.皮尔斯和阿伦特·海廷等人发展。特别是,黑格尔所借鉴的古代数学,使他能够预见到弗雷格后来针对布尔的批评,即他无法统一对立的阶级和命题微积分。黑格尔的逻辑将是一种混合体,融合了后来在直觉主义和古典逻辑中发现的特征,但这可能是由于他调用了古代柏拉图主义传统的数学方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信