Hostname: page-component-669899f699-swprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T02:19:31.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conditionals, Inference, and Possibility in Ancient Mesopotamian Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2009

Francesca Rochberg
Francesca Rochberg*
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Argument

This paper argues that ancient Babylonian signs (omens) reflect a mode of inferential reasoning as a function of their syntactic and logical structure as conditionals. Taking into account the institutional context that produced a systematic written body of omens, the paper is principally interested in the cognitive disposition of such texts. Investigating what constitutes system in these works, formal aspects of the material are examined in terms of the nature of conditionals and the logic of conditional statements. It is argued that conditional statements about ominous phenomena speak as much to a notion of conceivability and possibility as to empirical physical actuality. It is claimed that the epistemological character of the Babylonian compendia of signs cannot be understood without due attention to epistemic possibility and further, that the cuneiform omen texts comprise a different kind of scientific knowledge from that limited to a knowledge of physical phenomena and their laws.

Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , March 2009 , pp. 5 - 25
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anjum, Rani Lill. “Conditionals and Truth Functionality,” <http://uit.no/getfile.php?PageId=1669&FileId=36>..>Google Scholar
Balzer, N. 1990. “The Logic of Implication.” Journal of Value Inquiry 24:253–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, Jonathan. 2003. A Philosophical Guide to Conditionals. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berggren, J. Lennart and Thomas, R. S. D.. 1996. Euclid's Phaenomena: A Translation and Study of a Hellenistic Treatise in Spherical Astronomy. New York and London: Garland.Google Scholar
cdl.museum.upenn.edu/dcclt (=new site for Veldhuis, <http://cuneiform.ucla.edu/dcclt/web/Q000001/xQ000001.html>).).>Google Scholar
Chicago Assyrian Dictionary vol. Š III [1992]. Chicago: Oriental Institute Publications.Google Scholar
Clay, Albert Tobias. 1917. Babylonian Records in the Library of J. Pierpont Morgan. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Edgington, Dorothy. 1995. “On Conditionals.” Mind 104:235–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, R. J. 1979. “Material Implication, Confirmation, and Counterfactuals.” Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 20:383–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gendler, Tamar and Hawthorne, John, eds. 2004. Conceivability and Possibility. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guinan, Ann Kessler. 2002. “A Severed Head Laughed: Stories of Divinatory Interpretation.” In Magic and Divination in the Ancient World, edited by Ciraolo, Leda and Seidel, Jonathan, 7–40. Leiden, Boston, and Köln: Brill/Styx.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunger, Hermann. 1992. Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings. State Archives of Assyria, vol. 8. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.Google Scholar
Hunger, Hermann and Pingree, David. 1999. Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia. Leiden, Boston: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Frank. 1987. Conditionals. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1971. “Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances.” In Fundamentals of Language, edited by Jakobson, Roman and Halle, Morris, 67–96. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Lehoux, Daryn. 2004. “Observation and Prediction in Ancient Astrology.”Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 35:227–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehoux, Daryn. 2007. Astronomy, Weather, and Calendars in the Ancient World: Parapegmata and Related Texts in Classical and Near Eastern Societies. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lloyd, Geoffrey E. R. 1990. Demystifying Mentalities. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, Anthony A. and Sedley, David N.. 1987. The Hellenistic Philosophers, Vol 1: Translations of the Principal Sources with Philosophical Commentary. Cambridge and London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mates, Benson. 1953. Stoic Logic. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Needham, Rodney. 1972. Belief, Language, and Experience. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Neugebauer, Otto. 1975. A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy, 3 vols. Berlin and New York: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oppenheim, A. Leo. 1974. “A Babylonian Diviner's Manual.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies (JNES) 33:197–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oppenheim, A. Leo. 1975. Ancient Mesopotamia: Portrait of a Dead Civilization. Revised edition by Reiner, E.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Parpola, Simo. 1993. Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars. State Archives of Assyria, vol. 10. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.Google Scholar
Quine, Willard vanOrman and Ullian, Joseph Silbert. [1970] 1978. The Web of Belief. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Reiner, Erica and Pingree, David. 2005. Babylonian Planetary Omens, Part 4. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rochberg, Francesca. 2004. The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy and Astronomy in Mesopotamian Culture. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Seth L., ed. 2006. Margins of Writing, Origins of Cultures. Chicago: Oriental Institute Publications.Google Scholar
Sanford, David H. 1989. If P, then Q: Conditionals and the Foundations of Reasoning. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de. [1916] [1960] rev. ed. 1974. Course in General Linguistics. Edited by Charles, Bally and Sechehaye, Albert in collaboration with Reidlinger, Albert, translated by Baskin, Wade. London: Peter Owen.Google Scholar
Steele, John M. 2000. Observations and Predictions of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swerdlow, Noel M. 1998. The Babylonian Theory of the Planets. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veldhuis, Niek. 1998. “TIN.TIR = Babylon, the Question of Canonization and the Production of Meaning.” Journal of Cuneiform Studies (JCS) 50:77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veldhuis, Niek. 1999. “Continuity and Change in the Mesopotamian Lexical Tradition.” In Aspects of Genre and Type in Pre-Modern Literary Cultures, edited by Roest, Bert and Vanstiphout, Herman, 101–118. Groningen: Styx.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veldhuis, Niek. <http://cdl.museum.upenn.edu/dcclt>..>Google Scholar
Westbrook, Raymond. 2005. “Judges in Cuneiform Sources.” In Judge and Society in Antiquity, edited by Skaist, Aaron and Levinson, Bernard M.. MAARAV A Journal for the Study of the Northwest Semitic Languages and Literatures 12:27–39.Google Scholar
Woods, Michael. 1997. Conditionals. Edited by Wiggins, David with a commentary by Edgington, Dorothy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yablo, Stephen. 2004. “Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda.” In Conceivability and Possibility, edited by Gendler, T. S. and Hawthorne, J., 441–492. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar