The Comparative Approach of Aristotle and Suhrawardi on the Problem of Analogy

Document Type : Original Article

Author

;Philosophy Department, Babol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babol, Iran

prt/prt.2026.73269.1017

Abstract

This study aims to comparatively examine Aristotle’s and Suhrawardi’s perspectives on the problem of syllogism by analyzing their similarities and differences regarding the nature and validity of deductive reasoning. The significance of this research lies in addressing the widespread assumption that Suhrawardi merely rejected Aristotelian logic. A closer investigation of his logical thought provides a more accurate understanding of the relationship between Illuminationist philosophy and the Aristotelian logical tradition, thereby contributing to the study of the development of logic in Islamic philosophy. The research adopts a descriptive–analytical and comparative method, relying on library-based sources and a systematic examination of the logical works of Aristotle and Suhrawardi. The findings indicate that Suhrawardi did not reject Aristotelian logic in its entirety; rather, while preserving its general framework, he sought to refine and strengthen it through innovations such as simplifying the rules governing the conversion of propositions, reconsidering certain syllogistic forms, and emphasizing the epistemic roles of self-evident principles, intuition, and illumination. The study concludes that Suhrawardi’s logical project represents not a rupture with the Aristotelian tradition but a critical reconstruction of it within the framework of Illuminationist philosophy.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 04 July 2026
  • Revise Date: 14 August 2026
  • Accept Date: 01 September 2026

Share

How to cite

Statistics