Publication: Refutation, Deduction and The Demarcation of Philosophy from Sophistry
Date
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Access Restrictions
Abstract
This dissertation argues that Plato’s and Aristotle’s conceptions of genuine philosophical
argumentation were significantly shaped by their attempts to distance their own methods
from the argumentative practices of the Eristic sophists. The Eristics characteristically
employed short question-and-answer refutational arguments in which a questioner deduced a
conclusion based on an answerer’s commitments that contradicted one of the answerer’s
central philosophical positions, but did so in ways that we would now regard as fallacious. I
begin by showing that the Eristics’ refutations presented a significant challenge to Plato and
Aristotle not only because they derived contradictions based on important Platonic and
Aristotelian commitments, but also because the Eristics’ primary aim in offering these
refutations was to establish controversial doctrines that were immune to the contradictions
that they derived. In the remaining chapters I argue that Plato originally developed his
conception of a genuine contradiction in explicit contrast to the contradictions produced in
Eristic refutations and that Aristotle developed his conception of a deduction in direct
opposition to the ways in which Eristics deduced contradictory conclusions in their
refutations. Plato made it a necessary condition for a refutation that the contradiction it
produces satisfy conditions that clearly demarcate genuine contradictions from the merely
apparent ones that the Eristics produced. Aristotle then accepted and strengthened Plato’s
conception of true refutation by making it a necessary condition for a refutation that its
conclusion is deduced in accordance with a set of requirements that clearly exclude Eristic
ways of deducing from the class of genuine deductions. These logical innovations provided
both philosophers with the tools necessary to diagnose sophistical refutations as fallacies, and
thereby to resist the unpalatable doctrines the Eristics advanced through their arguments. On
the account I offer, it was in large part through their efforts to demarcate their argumentation
from that of these opponents that Plato laid the groundwork for, and Aristotle brought to
completion, the first system of logic in Western philosophy.