{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,6]],"date-time":"2026-04-06T10:18:46Z","timestamp":1775470726910,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":8,"publisher":"Cambridge University Press (CUP)","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2014,3,12]],"date-time":"2014-03-12T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1394582400000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":15076,"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/terms"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["J. symb. log."],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[1972,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>In previous articles ([4], [5]) it has been shown that the deductive system developed by Aristotle in his \u201csecond logic\u201d (cf. Bochenski [2, p. 43]) is a natural deduction system and not an axiomatic system as previously had been thought [6]. It was also pointed out that Aristotle's logic is self-sufficient in two senses: First, that it presupposed no other logical concepts, not even those of propositional logic; second, that it is (strongly) complete in the sense that every valid argument formable in the language of the system is demonstrable by means of a formal deduction in the system. Review of the system makes the first point obvious. The purpose of the present article is to prove the second. Strong completeness is demonstrated for the Aristot\u00e9lian system.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.2307\/2272415","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2006,5,6]],"date-time":"2006-05-06T17:19:43Z","timestamp":1146935983000},"page":"696-702","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":86,"title":["Completeness of an ancient logic"],"prefix":"10.1017","volume":"37","author":[{"given":"John","family":"Corcoran","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"56","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2014,3,12]]},"reference":[{"key":"S0022481200078506_ref003","volume-title":"Introduction to mathematical logic","volume":"I","author":"Church","year":"1956"},{"key":"S0022481200078506_ref004","first-page":"437","volume":"37","author":"Corcoran","year":"1972","journal-title":"Aristotle's natural deduction system"},{"key":"S0022481200078506_ref006","volume-title":"Aristotle's syllogistic from the standpoint of modern formal logic","author":"\u0141ukasiewcz","year":"1951"},{"key":"S0022481200078506_ref002","volume-title":"A history of formal logic","author":"Bochenski","year":"1970"},{"key":"S0022481200078506_ref001","unstructured":"Aristotle, Prior analytics ."},{"key":"S0022481200078506_ref005","volume-title":"Archiv f\u00fcr Geschichte der Philosophie","author":"Corcoran"},{"key":"S0022481200078506_ref007","volume-title":"Aristotle's syllogistic","author":"Rose","year":"1968"},{"key":"S0022481200078506_ref008","volume-title":"Aristotle's prior and posterior analytics","author":"Ross","year":"1965"}],"container-title":["Journal of Symbolic Logic"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/services\/aop-cambridge-core\/content\/view\/S0022481200078506","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2019,5,30]],"date-time":"2019-05-30T16:32:35Z","timestamp":1559233955000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/product\/identifier\/S0022481200078506\/type\/journal_article"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[1972,12]]},"references-count":8,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[1972,12]]}},"alternative-id":["S0022481200078506"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2307\/2272415","relation":{},"ISSN":["0022-4812","1943-5886"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0022-4812","type":"print"},{"value":"1943-5886","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[1972,12]]}}}