Workshop in Ancient Philosophy (Thursday - Week 2, HT24)

Chair: Dimosthenis Patramanis

This paper has three aims. (i) I defend the traditional (but not uncontroversial) interpretation according to which the first argument of ch. 9 of Aristotle's De interpretatione derives the absurd consequence that every event is necessary from the premiss that every future-tense assertion is either true or false. (ii) I provide a very detailed analysis of the text and logic of the argument, showing how we can improve on the existing editions. (iii) I provide a new interpretation of Aristotle’s formulation of his conclusions at the end of the chapter.