A fortiori argument
The Latin phrase argumentum a fortiori is linguistically (mainly in the case law, theology or mathematics ) with the meanings:
- "From forth the fittest "
- " More than ever"
- " The more " and " the less "
- " After the more compelling reason "
Used to express a proof of an assertion by an already proven stronger claim. A logic circuit according to this method is also referred to as " first- right - circuit" (Example: If it is forbidden for two people to ride on a bicycle, it is only forbidden right to third to go on a bike). For the " first- right - closing " a distinction is made
- A maiore ad minus: Final from the larger to the smaller
- A minore ad majus: Final from the smaller to the greater
The argumentum a fortiori is usually used for emphasis of assertions, sometimes to a logical conclusion to pretend where none exists ( begs ).
The concept
After school grammar it would have taken a strictly fortiore hot. Occasionally, however, the suffix- ī occurs already in classical Latin ablative in the place of the usual -e, although this is rare in comparatives.
The argumentum a fortiori is a controversial subject of philosophical relativism debates, because an important argumentative - hermeneutic final form in the Talmud, Kol va- homer, is related to it. While authors such as Daube, of the thesis of the fundamentally same conclusion form of argumentum a fortiori and Kol va- homer 1949 scientifically established, and Dov Gabbay defend the cultural invariance of reason, which uses inter alia, of Eilberg - Schwartz represented relativistic counter-position the ratio of the two conclusions to argue rationality in this debate for the culturally -related validity of the restriction of the logic.