![logic without ex falso quod libet logic without ex falso quod libet](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gOReO.png)
Some of them work in a full-fledged logical perspective others work on behalf of preserving theological matters of falsity and trivialization. All these authors seem supporting paraconsistent positions. We will give special attention to claims of Peter Abelard, Adam of Balsham, William of Soissons, Petrus Hispanus and William of Ockham. Second, we will introduce textual evidence concerning mediaeval logic which can fix some misunderstandings still extant in some historical studies on paraconsistent logic. We also present that ex falso sequitur quodlibet, a classical thesis related to trivialization, as far as we know, although could not be deduced in Stoic logic, it seems coming from this tradition. Such classical approach contrast with paraconsistent positions found in Heraclitus and even in Aristotle. We will analyze some classical reductio ad absurdum inference schemata used by Zeno of Elea, Plato and Aristotle. The outline of this tutorial is as follows.įirst, we will study some passages from the Ancient Greek logic legacy in which we have found several theoretical positions, inference schemata and the logical rules usage, which can be interpreted today as being part of paraconsistent approach. Such two issues are strictly connected and its analysis has offered a valid ground to a logical history of paraconsistent positions all along western thought tradition. In order to develop such discussion, we will focus on the history of the Principle of Non-Contradiction and also on that of the ex falso sequitur quodlibet rule. In this tutorial, we will present some research results concerning the history of paraconsistent logic.
![logic without ex falso quod libet logic without ex falso quod libet](http://article.sapub.org/image/10.5923.j.ap.20170101.03_011.gif)
State University of Campinas, SP - Brazil A Concise History of Paraconsistent LogicĬentre for Logic, Epistemology and the History of Science