X-Digest-Num: 77 Message-ID: <44114.77.457.959273824@eGroups.com> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:21:34 -0500 From: Bob LeChevalier-Logical Language Group Subject: PC on asian logics X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 457 Content-Length: 3137 Lines: 60 I don't think I posted this yet. pc answered my private query on Hindu and Chinese logic with the following: >Indian Logic: The main line is called Nyaya. The line runs from Akshapada's >Nyayasutra through a number of minor lights to Uddyotakara's (spelling >problem, I don't have references handy) commentary to a renewal under Gangesha >in the roughly 13th century (Navya-Nyaya), which then developed mightily into >the 16th century at least. The Navya-Nyaya has been studied a lot, mainly by >DHH Ingalls from Harvard and his pupils, especially BK Matilal. It is here >that the intensional underpinnigs get their fullest exposition -- which have >never been fully reworked in Western form. >The "lesser light" period is mainly filled by Buddhists, Dignaga (various >spellings -- its got n's in it we have no idea how to represent) and >Dharmakirti and followers. >I have seen a book on Tibetan relics of the Buddhist system but it mainly on >debate and the dance that accompanies it, I think. >Jains also do a bit of logic work (seven-fold oppositions). >A short (but old) sketch is in Bochenski's History of Formal Logic, a more up- >to-date on in Matilal's posthumous Character of Logic in India. A muddled >sketch in Walker' Hindu World. Karl Potter is grinding out most of the texts >with commentaries and there are studies of various degrees of intelligibility >dating back to the '20's (Vidyabhushana's History especially and Randle's >Indian Logic and Atomism). > >The Buddhist stuff got carried to China and Japan, of course, but did not >flourish there, being saved mainly unadapted as rote rules. But China, at >least, had the beginning of logical studies in the classical period (Confucius >to the First Emperor). Large parts of the Motzu can only be called proto- >logic or even some real stuff -- a step beyond debate and rhetoric in any >case. There are also the Dialecticians (the School of Names?): Kung-sun Lung >and Hui Shih (memory at work here, use with care) and some parts of the >Chuangtzu (including some real Chuang, when he blows Hui away). There is very >little follow-up in the Han or later. >Standard textbooks on Chinese philosophy are pretty bad on this. About the >clearest stuff I can think of offhand is in Graham's Disputers of the Tao, >which spends a lot of time on these movements and gives some evidence that >Graham knows some modern logic. Someone told me that Hao Wang, a major >mathematical logician, had written a study of the Chinese tradition, beyond >his short talk at the East-West Philosophy Conference in 1973, but I have >never seen it. >Hopes this helps. I can get more details given a little time to rummage in >still not quite organized book boxes. lojbab ---- lojbab ***NOTE NEW ADDRESS*** lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: see Lojban WWW Server: href=" http://xiron.pc.helsinki.fi/lojban/ " Order _The Complete Lojban Language_ - see our Web pages or ask me.