Matharat al-Ghalat fi al-Adilla
- Author died
- 771 AH
- Editions
- al-Maktabah al-Makkiyyah
Matharat al-Ghalat fi al-Adilla (Sources of Error in Proofs) is a concise treatise on logical fallacies, semantic errors, and argumentation in rational and legal reasoning by the Maliki scholar and jurist al-Sharif al-Tilimsani (710–771 AH / 1310–1370 CE).
Purpose and Composition
Al-Sharif al-Tilimsani authored the work in response to an inquiry requesting a systematic and technical classification of the pitfalls and sources of error (matharat al-ghalat) occurring in demonstration (burhan) and other forms of proof and disputation. The author designed the treatise to enumerate these fallacies methodically while providing concrete illustrations drawn from both rational theology (aqlīyāt) and Islamic jurisprudence (fiqhīyāt). The treatise was copied from the author's own fair draft (mubayyaḍah) in the month of his death, Dhu al-Hijjah 771 AH.
Structure and Content
The treatise classifies fallacies into two main divisions: verbal fallacies (al-ghalaṭ al-lafẓī) and conceptual or material fallacies (al-ghalaṭ al-maʿnawī).
Verbal Fallacies
The first part divides verbal errors into six distinct types:
- Ambiguity in single words (al-lafẓ al-mufrad):
- Substantive ambiguity (ishtirāk al-jawhar): Equivocation arising from lexical homonymy, metaphor, or transferred meaning (such as the term nikāḥ signifying either marriage contract or cohabitation, or qarʾ meaning either ritual purity or menstruation).
- Morphological ambiguity (ishtirāk al-ṣīghah): Ambiguity in grammatical form, such as a verb form that can be read as active or passive (e.g., in لا تُضَارَّ وَالِدَةٌ بِوَلَدِهَا ).
- Accidental ambiguity (ishtirāk al-lawāḥiq): Ambiguities arising from external phonetic factors (such as the definite article al- oscillating between specific reference and genus) or orthographic variations in diacritical dots (nuqaṭ) and vowels (tashkīl).
- Ambiguity in compound expressions (al-lafẓ al-murakkab):
- Syntactic or compositional ambiguity (ishtirāk al-taʾlīf): Structural ambiguity in sentences, such as qualifying phrases in propositions or the scope of conditional exceptions (e.g., the exception clause إِلَّا الَّذِينَ تَابُوا applying to all preceding sentences or only the immediately preceding one).
- Fluctuation between simple and compound:
- Fallacy of composition (tarkīb al-mufaṣṣal): Taking items separately affirmed and combining them into an unwarranted composite judgment.
- Fallacy of division (tafṣīl al-murakkab): Dissecting a compound whole and attributing properties of the whole to an isolated part.
Conceptual Fallacies
The second part addresses errors arising from meaning and argument structure, dividing evidence into matter (premises and terms) and form (syllogistic arrangement):
- Propositional errors (al-taʾlīf al-juzʾī): Includes conflating multiple questions into a single proposition (jamʿ al-masāʾil fī masʾalah wāḥidah) and misconstruing the nature, modality, or conditions of predication (sūʾ iʿtibār al-ḥaml or ighfāl tawābiʿ al-ḥaml).
- Syllogistic errors (al-taʾlīf al-qiyāsī):
- In direct syllogisms (qiyās al-istiqāmah), errors include begging the question (al-muṣādarah ʿalā al-maṭlūb) and treating a non-cause as a cause (waḍʿ mā laysa bi-ʿillah ʿillah).
- In indirect proofs or reductio ad absurdum (qiyās al-khalf), an additional fallacy involves neglecting true contradictories (ihmāl al-mutaqābilāt) by using non-contradictory alternatives as if they were contradictory.
- Psychological and imaginative errors (al-khiyālāt): Fallacies caused by the intellect's reliance on bodily imagery, leading thinkers to conceptualize immaterial realities as corporeal dimensions, such as imagining the pre-eternal state before creation as temporal duration or external space as a physical void.
Method and Sources
In the conclusion of the text, al-Sharif al-Tilimsani cites Avicenna's Kitab al-Shifa on the classification of fallacies established by Aristotle, noting the remark of his teacher Abu Abd Allah al-Abili regarding Avicenna's subtle allusion to al-Farabi (Abu Nasr). The author positions his own contribution as providing a concise, systematically bounded presentation of these sources of error accompanied by clarifying examples from rational sciences and legal deduction.
Answer updated