Johan Calvin ja syllogismus practicus

Abstract

Johan Calvin and Syllogismus practicus
The controversy over Calvin’s possible use of practical syllogism (syllogismus practicus) is centuries-old. Closer examination of Calvin’s texts indicates that in some cases he indeed explores argumentum ab effectu and syllogismus practicus - in commenting on others’ texts. In all these cases without exception Calvin simultaneously stresses the causal foundations of the deductive procedure. In fact, describing the patterns of argumentum ab effectu, he has contextually actualized the corresponding argumentum a causa. So it becomes clear why Calvin did not use and could not use practical syllogism: it was not insomuch impossible as became senseless. It is not sensible to conclude something that has been simultaneously presumed. Calvin presumed genuine faith, syllogismus practicus concluded it - from works. Calvin did have Bewährungsgedanke - idea of proof but he did not have syllogismus practicus, contrary to the claims of many prominent Calvin scholars. Obviously Max Weber made an error, identifying syllogismus practicus with Bewahrungsgedanke and negating the presence of the latter in Calvin’s texts.