According to Hurley, the modern Boolean standpoint "does not recognize universal premises as having existential import" (pg 275) The Boolean standpoint is often viewed as a more simplistic standpoint than the Aristotelian standpoint. Contrary, the traditional Aristotelian standpoint "recognizes their existence, and universal statements about those things have existential import. "(pg 210) The Aristotelian standpoint portrays that existences have meaning to its theory whereas modern Boolean does not. The Boolean standpoint doesn't recognizes the existence within universal statements. The two are referred to as "closed standpoints" and "open standpoints" Aristotelian being the later. Examples of each are provided below. The Boolean standpoint …show more content…
The first of which being contradictory relation. "contradictory relation is the same as that found in the modern square. Thus, if a certain A proposition is given as true, the corresponding O proposition is false, and vice versa, and if a certain A proposition is given false, the corresponding O proposition is true and vice versa." You will also find that this same for E and I propositions as well. Furthermore, the second of the four is contrary relations which convey only partial oppositions. To break down each element of the square we (A, I, E, O) we find that contrary relation means "If a certain A proposition is given as true the corresponding E proposition is false" (pg 232) as a general rule at least one proposition must be false. (pg 232) Whereas, according to Hurley, "if an E proposition is given as true, the corresponding A proposition is false."(pg 232). Additionally, the third of the four contrary relations is subcontrary relation. Within a subcontrary relation at least one proposition must be true and there cannot be two false propositions. This means "if a certain I proposition is given as false, the corresponding O proposition is true, and if an O proposition is given false, the corresponding I proposition is given true." (pg