Benson Mates (1919-2009) received his B.A. at the University of Oregon in 1941. His graduate study at Cornell University was interrupted by the Second World War, and he completed his Ph.D. studies at the University of California, Berkeley in 1948. Quoting the obituary written by Barry Stroud and Hans Sluga, Mates "made lasting contributions to philosophy, the history of philosophy, the history of logic, and the understanding of antiquity. His work was of the highest clear, precise, illuminating, thoroughly reliable, and always at the highest level of logical and philological expertise." His Stoic Logic, based on his Ph.D. thesis, first published in 1953 and then reprinted in 1973 with a new preface, "was one of the first works to open the way for serious study and proper appreciation of the Stoics as philosophers and logicians. Greater sophistication in mathematical logic made it possible for Benson to demonstrate clearly for the first time the intricate ways in which the logical ideas of the Stoics were well in advance of those of Aristotle and in many respects closer to our own. The book remains a landmark in both fields." The Advanced Reasoning Forum is pleased to make available this exact reproduction of the 1973 text in its Classic Reprints series.
This is a book of fundamental importance. Though C.S. Peirce had early on realized that the Stoics had already anticipated what we would now call the sentential logic, it was Mates' breakthrough book that demonstrated that they had quite fully (though not systematically) grasped it. This is an important book, a work of impeccable scholarship (and in a field that is very difficult to work in).
His recent book on the Skeptics is no good, in my opinion. He was old when he did it.
Buen libro con una profundidad excepcional. Pero le falta un poco de aplicación a la actualidad especialmente al neoestoicismo que se queda corto con lo expuesto en este libro.
An amazing book with solid historical evidence. The author provides an interesting and thorough account of stoic logic, already interesting in its own right. Remarkably, he also makes a point of not going beyond the written historic evidence, whilst also giving translations of original sources in the first appendix. I strongly recommend this to anyone with an interest in the subject.