Talk:Conceptions of logic

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Philosophy: Logic Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic

Untitled

I am looking for a definition by Ockham, who avoids giving one in his Summa. Also by Aristotle.

John Poinsot, aka John of St Thomas I could not find in Wikepedia, but he must be there. Also Robert Kilwardy is bound to be under some different spelling somewhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Damian (original account) (talk • contribs) 2005-11-30T21:10:41 (UTC)

Citations

Should a "needs citations" message be put on this page along the lines of {{refimprove}}? -- Gregkaye (talk) 10:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not just that, but the article is mostly incorrect and confused. The lack of sources is a symptom of that, not the cause. SaundersLane (talk) 00:33, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Against merge

There's been a merge proposed since July. The kind of hermeneutic detail this article deals with is inappropriate for a level-2 vital article: I think there is no way to achieve a merge that keeps the useful information in this article without injuring the readability of the main logic article. — Charles Stewart (talk) 19:45, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]