The falsehood found in the books of logic
Ibn Taymiyya outlined the falsehood in the books of logic saying that it is almost all to be found in negation. So [according to this] most of what the logicians established is sound, yet some of what they negated is false. This is the reality of Ibn Taymiyya’s view, however he says here that “Much or most of the truth found within it is not needed.” This view of his is not completely accepted like this. If he intended that that most of the people—which includes the commonality—in their pursuit of knowledge, do not need the majority of the details found in logic, then this might be accepted from him. On the other hand, if he intended that most of the people do not need the universals of logic, then this is false. If he intended that most of the people do not need logic the majority of the time, then this view is in need of some detail. The specialists in rational sciences are always in need of it and its details. As for others among the commonality, it is possible that they only need some of its universals. On the other hand, if we were to investigate the reality, we might find that the commonality use logical principles all the time, without them having studied it in any books.
