Review: A. N. Prior, The Parva Logicalia in Modern Dress

chapter the point is brought out that Aristotle clearly uses various non-syllogistic forms of inference, even though he does not describe such forms when he talks about logic. The second chapter contains a good discussion of the contributions of Theophrastus and of the Stoics. The third chapter takes up the long history of Scholastic logic, from Boethius to Ockham. The author shows that not only were the major Scholastics aware of many laws of the sentential calculus, but also they regarded it as basic to all other theories, including the theory of the categorical syllogism. In view of this he rightly considers it absurd that any one who wishes to remain in the Scholastic tradition should repudiate or minimize the importance of the sentential calculus. The bibliography of nearly forty pages contains evaluative comments by the author on most of the entries. Consequently, it makes unusually good reading for a bibliography. One of the more interesting entries refers to an unpublished doctoral dissertation entitled How is Scholastic logic facing modern logic?, by Frank C. Dillhoff. On the basis of questionnaires sent to 413 Catholic institutions of higher learning, Dr. Dillhoff reached the following conclusions (as summarized by the author): "(1) there is no visible authoritarian and rigid uniformity imposed by administrators, (2) there is a considerable amount of open-mindedness toward newer developments, most of all in colleges for women conducted by Sisters, less so in male institutions, and least of all in the major seminaries, (3) there is mounting evidence for a forthcoming change in the attitude of thinkers within the field of Scholastic logic, and (4) there is a seriously felt need for a complete text for use in the task of teaching Scholastic logic." In his Preface, Quine justly deplores the widespread tendency to regard modern logic as something entirely new and inextricably bound up with positivism. Corrigenda (submitted by the author): p. 7, line 10, for "repeated twice" read "taken twice"; p. 25, lines 1, 2, delete "the statement"; p. 31, lines 21, 22, 24, for "being" read in each case " is" ; pp. 54, 92, for "Joseph Salamucha" read "Jan Salamucha"; p. 56, line 29, for "antecedentis" read "consequentis." BENSON MATES