Ancient Greek Antilogic Is the Craft of Suspending Judgment

Useless to strive to be convincing in this case. Over the centuries no one has furnished a clearer and more elegant demonstration of the business than Aristotle: “The often ridiculed consequence of these opinions is that they destroy themselves. For by asserting that all is true we assert the truth of the contrary assertion and consequently the fal

Our current Western worldview is founded upon Aristotelian logic, which is based on dichotomy, a type of binary opposition, i.e., something is either A or not-A. In fact, one of the fundamental laws of logical thought is referred to as “the law of the excluded middle.” It allows no betwixt and between. This kind of logic is thus particularly hostil

In an age that prides itself on being capable of resolving and clarifying every aspect of experience in such a way as to explain it, in the hope of controlling it, we are too apt, when faced with a question that cannot be answered, either to deny that the question has meaning, or to deny that the problematic entity exists, or both. It is not just Z

The only logic admitted by the Greeks was deductive, and all deduction had to start, like Euclid, from general principles regarded as self-evident. Timon denied the possibility of finding such principles. Everything, therefore, will have to be proved by means of something else, and all argument will be either circular or an endless chain hanging fr

premises of opposing arguments are often conflicting convictions. Can there be fruitful argument among people who disagree on fundamental premises?