more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
In a proper demonstrative argument, the middle term must be explanatory of the conclusion, in a very specific sense: the middle term must state what properly belongs to the definition of the kind of phenomenon in question.
Clarification
The 'middle term' is the transitional term in a syllogism
Gist of Idea
In a demonstration the middle term explains, by being part of the definition
Source
Kathrin Koslicki (Essence, Necessity and Explanation [2012], 13.3.1)
Book Ref
'Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics', ed/tr. Tahko,Tuomas [CUP 2012], p.199
A Reaction
So 'All men are mortal, S is a man, so S is mortal'. The middle term is 'man', which gives a generic explanation for why S is mortal. Explanation as categorisation? I don't think this is the whole story of Aristotelian explanation.
| 15110 | An essence and what merely follow from it are distinct [Koslicki] |
| 15111 | In demonstration, the explanatory order must mirror the causal order of the phenomena [Koslicki] |
| 15112 | If an object exists, then its essential properties are necessary [Koslicki] |
| 15115 | In a demonstration the middle term explains, by being part of the definition [Koslicki] |
| 15113 | Individuals are perceived, but demonstration and definition require universals [Koslicki] |
| 15118 | A successful Aristotelian 'definition' is what sciences produces after an investigation [Koslicki] |
| 15116 | Essences cause necessary features, and definitions describe those necessary features [Koslicki] |
| 15114 | Discovering the Aristotelian essence of thunder will tell us why thunder occurs [Koslicki] |
| 15117 | Greek uses the same word for 'cause' and 'explanation' [Koslicki] |