Logical consequence in Avicenna's theory (Q2418016)

An in-depth look at Avicenna's notion of logical consequence, mostly in the context of syllogism (Avicenna's syllogism, however, ``is much wider than the Aristotelian kind of syllogisms, because it can be both categorical and hypothetical, and can contain all kinds of propositions, from conditional and conjunctive ones to several kinds of disjunctive propositions''). Without explicitly differentiating between the two, Avicenna ``privileges formal consequences over material ones'' and, although he finds them incomplete, he studies single premise arguments called ``enthymemes''. Avicenna rejects \textit{ex falso sequitur quodlibetis}, for he finds that, while the premises of a syllogism can be in conflict, in case they are in conflict, they always lead to a false conclusion.