University of TehranPhilosophy and Kalam2008-942251220190121Evaluating the Attribution of Buridan and Barcan Formulas to Ibn Sina in Sinavi LogicEvaluating the Attribution of Buridan and Barcan Formulas to Ibn Sina in Sinavi Logic2612786958210.22059/jitp.2018.249859.522996FAAsadollah Fallahi. Associate Professor of Logic, The Iranian Institute of Philosophy, Tehran, Iran0000-0002-1878-8866Journal Article20180109In modern modal logic, the relations between modality and quantification are shown by Buridan and Barcan formulas. Zia Movahed, Lotfollah Nabavi and Mahdi Azimi have shown Ibn Sina’s anticipation of the formulas. In this paper, I show that Ibn Sina anticipated just in <em>de re</em> and <em>de dicto</em> modalities and his points in <em>Shifa</em> and <em>Isharat</em> do not verify the attribution of the formulas to him. Even his followers, beginning from Bahmanyar to Fakhr Al-Din Razi, have not deducted the formulas from his writings. The first who stipulated the formulas was Afdal Al-Din Khunaji, who, as we shall show, denied them for the actualist reading of the quantifiers, and in his discussion of the formulas for the possibilist reading, there were some ambiguities, which are present in his commentators and his followers. Then came shams Al-Din Samarqandi and Qutb Al-Din Razi, who opposed Khunaji; so, we cannot attribute the belief in the formulas to Ibn Sina, nor his followers.In modern modal logic, the relations between modality and quantification are shown by Buridan and Barcan formulas. Zia Movahed, Lotfollah Nabavi and Mahdi Azimi have shown Ibn Sina’s anticipation of the formulas. In this paper, I show that Ibn Sina anticipated just in <em>de re</em> and <em>de dicto</em> modalities and his points in <em>Shifa</em> and <em>Isharat</em> do not verify the attribution of the formulas to him. Even his followers, beginning from Bahmanyar to Fakhr Al-Din Razi, have not deducted the formulas from his writings. The first who stipulated the formulas was Afdal Al-Din Khunaji, who, as we shall show, denied them for the actualist reading of the quantifiers, and in his discussion of the formulas for the possibilist reading, there were some ambiguities, which are present in his commentators and his followers. Then came shams Al-Din Samarqandi and Qutb Al-Din Razi, who opposed Khunaji; so, we cannot attribute the belief in the formulas to Ibn Sina, nor his followers.https://jitp.ut.ac.ir/article_69582_24270a5b597f466f50d4cf5793e25cbd.pdf