The Philosophical Apprentice

“Only one who devotes himself to a cause with his whole strength and soul can be a true master. For this reason mastery demands all of a person.” Albert Einstein

Logic old and new

I’ve been avidly following a debate that has arisen recently over the respective merits of modern symbolic logic versus traditional logic. Peter Kreeft started the whole affair with an article Clashing Symbols The Loss of Aristotelian Logic & the Social, Moral & Sexual Consequences. in Touchstone Magazine.

I haven’t read it yet but between the article’s title and what I’ve read of Kreeft’s book Socratic Logic, I can safely conclude Kreeft is fairly hostile to modern symbolic logic. In response,  William Randolph Brafford has published  a rejoinder defending symbolic logic which can be found on the First Thoughts Blog.  

Martin Cothran, the author of several popular books on traditional logic, has jumped into the fray as well. He has two responses which can be found here and here.

Personally. I am very sympathetic to both Kreeft’s  and Cothran’s  positions. I have enjoyed studying traditional logic very much but have found symbolic logic baffling and esoteric. In truth, I just don’t know enough about modern logic to make a qualified judgement on the matter. However, I do plan on reading the books that Cothran mentions in his posts as well as continuing my studies in both branches of  logic.


Single Post Navigation

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: