760:
really trying to avoid an edit war. So please, let us discuss this nonsense before I put the article up for deletion once again, and this time a majority comes in to vote in favor of it. If anyone is going to provide a source, please let it be something definitive. Something which is very well established. Although
Knowledge (XXG) forbids quoting of other encyclopedias, or encyclopedic content, such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, please do not hesitate in using such sources to establish facts, as the Encyclopedia Britannica is probably the most reliable online resource for establishing true facts. And Knowledge (XXG) also states to only use official rules as a guideline, rather than absolute law, and that logic and common sense trump most rules. Thanks.
403:
of philosophical interest---it seems analogous to talking about contributions to logic made by people whose name begins with 'Z'. On the other hand, if what is intended by 'Islamic' is some natural class of ideas associated with a philosophical tradition connected to reasoning about
Islamic texts, as the earlier section of the article seems to suggest, perhaps it would help to make clearer how Islam colored the development of these ideas. Maybe specific brief examples of particular arguments (or sketches thereof) would be useful? (None of this is intended to suggest that this article isn't really interesting, though... I found it very informative.)
351:
335:
319:
524:
no record of dispute or discussion concerning the present page. Since editors have taken responsibility for helping bring these pages up to standard, it is incumbent upon the deleting editor to check citations and show point-for-point on this page why each cited statement has been removed, preserving material that is adjudged reliable and valuable. I do not discount the possibility of merging reliable text into another article.
539:
standard and there are people in the process of expanding the stubs again. Other concentrate on removing contentious material — I am sure that you agree no information is always better than tons of misinformation. You are absolutely welcome to restore material which you consider reliable on a point-by -point basis to the article. It is then considered 'your' material and we would turn to you for requests of verification.
50:
112:
102:
21:
81:
221:
186:
231:
640:
These other main articles on logic only take into account
European and Greek history. Islamic civilization's developments are often not acknowledged because they either had no impact on European thought and only European thought seems to matter amongst you Knowledge (XXG) editors or the contributions
523:
The editor in question has contributed several "good articles" and I have informally verified certain material in these pages including significant material unavailable elsewhere in wikipedia. Pointing to failures elsewhere does not justify wholesale deletion of other content sight unseen. I can find
402:
I'm a little confused by this article, in that it never quite makes clear in what sense any of this 'Islamic'. The portion about fuzzy logic seems to suggest that what is intended is only contributions to logic that come from 'the
Islamic world'. I'm not clear on why such geographical facts should be
759:
There are many things which are not cited, and are unrealistic among the opening section or paragraph of this article. Knowledge (XXG) policy states to just delete such nonsense without the need for discussion, but I know if i do this I will surely be challenged by disruptive religious people. I am
538:
These good articles have already been delisted as generally unreliable and the user has been meanwhile the subject of a RFC/U, a socket puppetry case and of the largest cleaning-up effort I am aware of in
Knowledge (XXG). Yes, editors have taken responsibility for helping bring these pages up to
644:
Anyone who alleges issue with the development of modal logic in
Islamic civilization is out of their mind. Look up the cosmological argument, read the contributions of Avicenna and Al-Ghazali. There's your proof, without a doubt, of the widespread use of modal logic in 10th-11th century Islamic
593:, while it mentions the greeks a lot (in the context of modal), doesn't explicitly contain "modal logic" anywhere, nor does it mention anything Islamic in the context of modal that I can see. But I may have missed it; if so, please point it out. The claim to have developed
692:
Figures you already had your signature all over the edits for that article too. What's with your recent obsession with deletion of articles on
Islamic civilization? You're a long way from climate change articles.
697:
Modal logic is a type of formal logic that extends the standards of formal logic to include the elements of modality (for example, possibility and necessity). Modals qualify the truth of a judgment.
31:
567:
Important developments made by
Islamic logicians included the development of original systems of logic, notably Avicennian and post-Avicennian logic, and the development of early theories on
604:
If you're prepared to give this article a thorough, skeptical going-over then good; but Jagged's history, and a quick skim over the article, indicates that stubbing is a good decision
465:
874:
889:
879:
252:
on
Knowledge (XXG). 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
869:
806:
I can see the problem with the lede. Ledes are supposed to introduce and summarize their article. But this one is largely disconnected from the body of the article.
728:
Not sure, either, what your complaint is. Certainly, as you know, logic as a discipline originated with the Greeks and
Aristotle not only was the first to formulate
894:
834:
158:
289:
884:
483:
342:
200:
849:
279:
459:
358:
204:
648:
Get off your lazy asses and read something other than Knowledge (XXG) for a change. Or volunteer to keep your ignorance off Knowledge (XXG). Thanks.
475:
168:
254:
829:
789:
Give an example? The citations needed within the opening paragraph make it pretty clear. You already seem to be confused for no apparent reason.
859:
383:
I have come across several references to Islamic logic being dualistic—capable of admitting contradictory theses. Can anyone comment on this?--
736:
844:
839:
410:
244:
191:
134:
864:
713:
655:
479:
436:
854:
61:
682:
609:
510:
326:
196:
125:
86:
474:
is the main contributor to this article by far (2nd: 5 edits). The issues are a repeat of what had been exemplarily shown
133:-related articles on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
27:
678:
605:
506:
732:, but also ventured deeply into modal logic (cf. Aristotle's Modal Logic: Essence and Entailment in the Organon
67:
490:. Since the youngest pre-Jagged85 version (08 December 2007) is unreferenced, I stub the article completely.
414:
794:
765:
744:
544:
495:
709:
651:
618:
You should call for help before you delete. You have given your word to help these articles get put right.
440:
432:
406:
717:
659:
594:
418:
701:
590:
49:
20:
623:
529:
388:
811:
790:
761:
740:
540:
491:
739:). So, why don't you expand the article on the development of Greek logic by Muslim scholars.
733:
236:
780:
670:
487:
815:
798:
784:
769:
748:
721:
686:
663:
627:
613:
548:
533:
514:
499:
444:
392:
675:
development of modal logic in Islamic civilization... Look up the cosmological argument
619:
582:
568:
525:
471:
426:
384:
350:
334:
318:
823:
807:
117:
775:
Coulkd you give an example of the kind of issue that you are concerned about? —
586:
572:
729:
249:
226:
107:
505:
I'm obliged to agree. Simply restoring the text wholesale isn't acceptable
248:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to
220:
185:
101:
80:
130:
702:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/arabic-islamic-language/#ModSyl
677:. Nope, not seeing the connection. Can you expand on it, please?
591:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/346217/history-of-logic
589:
mention this supposed connection, and the first reference given,
425:
Why not? Logic in a major non-Western civilization. Also compare
43:
15:
349:
333:
317:
597:
doesn't seem terribly plausible either. The section
129:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
300:
875:Low-importance philosophy of religion articles
8:
258:about philosophy content on Knowledge (XXG).
890:Low-importance Eastern philosophy articles
880:Philosophy of religion task force articles
297:
180:
75:
870:C-Class philosophy of religion articles
457:For background information, please see
182:
77:
47:
895:Eastern philosophy task force articles
706:Luckily you can't edit that website.
264:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Philosophy
835:Low-importance Islam-related articles
7:
563:I'm not an expert in this area, but
242:This article is within the scope of
123:This article is within the scope of
30:on 8 June 2013 (UTC). The result of
885:C-Class Eastern philosophy articles
641:are purposely retroactively wiped.
66:It is of interest to the following
850:Low-importance Philosophy articles
14:
581:looks problematic to me. Neither
143:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Islam
398:What is meant by 'Islamic' here?
229:
219:
184:
110:
100:
79:
48:
19:
284:This article has been rated as
267:Template:WikiProject Philosophy
163:This article has been rated as
26:This article was nominated for
830:C-Class Islam-related articles
601:is entirely without citations.
1:
860:Low-importance logic articles
445:16:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
393:18:15, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
137:and see a list of open tasks.
397:
845:C-Class Philosophy articles
911:
840:WikiProject Islam articles
816:17:51, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
799:20:38, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
785:10:16, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
770:22:46, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
628:00:55, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
614:21:20, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
549:20:30, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
534:17:55, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
515:21:10, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
500:23:48, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
290:project's importance scale
169:project's importance scale
146:Template:WikiProject Islam
865:Logic task force articles
357:
341:
325:
296:
283:
214:
162:
95:
74:
749:23:40, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
419:21:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
722:16:12, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
687:16:00, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
664:15:39, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
599:Logic in Arabic grammar
301:Associated task forces:
855:C-Class logic articles
595:Propositional calculus
354:
343:Philosophy of religion
338:
322:
245:WikiProject Philosophy
149:Islam-related articles
56:This article is rated
353:
337:
321:
60:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
679:William M. Connolley
606:William M. Connolley
507:William M. Connolley
270:Philosophy articles
755:Unrealistic Claims
470:. With 166 edits,
359:Eastern philosophy
355:
339:
323:
255:general discussion
62:content assessment
783:
737:978-0-521-52233-5
712:comment added by
654:comment added by
435:comment added by
421:
409:comment added by
376:
375:
372:
371:
368:
367:
364:
363:
237:Philosophy portal
179:
178:
175:
174:
126:WikiProject Islam
42:
41:
902:
779:
724:
666:
447:
404:
308:
298:
272:
271:
268:
265:
262:
239:
234:
233:
232:
223:
216:
215:
210:
207:
188:
181:
151:
150:
147:
144:
141:
120:
115:
114:
113:
104:
97:
96:
91:
83:
76:
59:
53:
52:
44:
23:
16:
910:
909:
905:
904:
903:
901:
900:
899:
820:
819:
777:Charles Stewart
757:
707:
649:
454:
452:Stub and rework
430:
400:
381:
306:
269:
266:
263:
260:
259:
235:
230:
228:
208:
194:
148:
145:
142:
139:
138:
116:
111:
109:
89:
57:
12:
11:
5:
908:
906:
898:
897:
892:
887:
882:
877:
872:
867:
862:
857:
852:
847:
842:
837:
832:
822:
821:
804:
803:
802:
801:
756:
753:
752:
751:
690:
689:
645:civilization.
639:
637:
636:
635:
634:
633:
632:
631:
630:
602:
583:temporal logic
579:
578:
577:
569:temporal logic
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
518:
517:
472:User:Jagged 85
453:
450:
449:
448:
427:Buddhist Logic
399:
396:
380:
377:
374:
373:
370:
369:
366:
365:
362:
361:
356:
346:
345:
340:
330:
329:
324:
314:
313:
311:
309:
303:
302:
294:
293:
286:Low-importance
282:
276:
275:
273:
241:
240:
224:
212:
211:
209:Low‑importance
189:
177:
176:
173:
172:
165:Low-importance
161:
155:
154:
152:
135:the discussion
122:
121:
105:
93:
92:
90:Low‑importance
84:
72:
71:
65:
54:
40:
39:
32:the discussion
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
907:
896:
893:
891:
888:
886:
883:
881:
878:
876:
873:
871:
868:
866:
863:
861:
858:
856:
853:
851:
848:
846:
843:
841:
838:
836:
833:
831:
828:
827:
825:
818:
817:
813:
809:
800:
796:
792:
791:Andiar.rohnds
788:
787:
786:
782:
778:
774:
773:
772:
771:
767:
763:
762:Andiar.rohnds
754:
750:
746:
742:
741:Gun Powder Ma
738:
735:
731:
727:
726:
725:
723:
719:
715:
711:
704:
703:
699:
698:
694:
688:
684:
680:
676:
672:
669:
668:
667:
665:
661:
657:
653:
646:
642:
629:
625:
621:
617:
616:
615:
611:
607:
603:
600:
596:
592:
588:
584:
580:
576:
574:
570:
565:
564:
562:
561:
560:
559:
558:
557:
550:
546:
542:
541:Gun Powder Ma
537:
536:
535:
531:
527:
522:
521:
520:
519:
516:
512:
508:
504:
503:
502:
501:
497:
493:
492:Gun Powder Ma
489:
485:
481:
477:
473:
469:
468:
467:
462:
461:
451:
446:
442:
438:
434:
428:
424:
423:
422:
420:
416:
412:
411:98.209.55.235
408:
395:
394:
390:
386:
378:
360:
352:
348:
347:
344:
336:
332:
331:
328:
320:
316:
315:
312:
310:
305:
304:
299:
295:
291:
287:
281:
278:
277:
274:
257:
256:
251:
247:
246:
238:
227:
225:
222:
218:
217:
213:
206:
202:
198:
193:
190:
187:
183:
170:
166:
160:
157:
156:
153:
136:
132:
128:
127:
119:
108:
106:
103:
99:
98:
94:
88:
85:
82:
78:
73:
69:
63:
55:
51:
46:
45:
37:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
805:
776:
758:
714:110.37.26.43
705:
700:
696:
695:
691:
674:
656:110.37.26.43
647:
643:
638:
598:
566:
464:
458:
456:
455:
401:
382:
285:
253:
243:
164:
124:
118:Islam portal
68:WikiProjects
35:
708:—Preceding
650:—Preceding
587:modal logic
573:modal logic
437:59.93.209.2
431:—Preceding
405:—Preceding
824:Categories
730:logic laws
261:Philosophy
250:philosophy
192:Philosophy
620:Redheylin
526:Redheylin
385:Adoniscik
808:Dimadick
710:unsigned
652:unsigned
433:unsigned
407:unsigned
201:Religion
28:deletion
466:Cleanup
379:Dualism
288:on the
205:Eastern
167:on the
58:C-class
781:(talk)
671:WP:NPA
64:scale.
460:RFC/U
327:Logic
197:Logic
140:Islam
131:Islam
87:Islam
812:talk
795:talk
766:talk
745:talk
734:ISBN
718:talk
683:talk
660:talk
624:talk
610:talk
585:nor
545:talk
530:talk
511:talk
496:talk
488:here
484:here
480:here
476:here
463:and
441:talk
415:talk
389:talk
36:keep
34:was
575:...
486:or
429:.
280:Low
159:Low
826::
814:)
797:)
768:)
747:)
720:)
685:)
673:.
662:)
626:)
612:)
571:,
547:)
532:)
513:)
498:)
482:,
478:,
443:)
417:)
391:)
307:/
203:/
199:/
195::
810:(
793:(
764:(
743:(
716:(
681:(
658:(
622:(
608:(
543:(
528:(
509:(
494:(
439:(
413:(
387:(
292:.
171:.
70::
38:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
