MCP For Claude Marketplace
Aristotle Logic Prover

Aristotle Logic Prover MCP Connector for Claude

A+

Your AI used a term without defining it. 'Platform,' 'scalable,' 'efficient' — what do these MEAN in your context? Aristotle defined every concept with genus + differentia: 'Man is a RATIONAL ANIMAL.' Category: animal. Distinguishing property: rational. This tool forces precise definition, essential vs. accidental categorization, valid syllogistic proof, teleological purpose analysis, and dialectical counterargument examination.

1 tools Official Updated Oct 1, 2026 Official Vinkius Partner
More Details Connect to Claude

AI agents use terms without defining them. They confuse essential properties with accidental. They assert conclusions without valid logical structure. They describe mechanisms without understanding purpose. They never examine the strongest counterargument.

The Problem

  • Definition Vague — 'We need a scalable platform.' What IS a platform in your context? What category does it belong to? What distinguishes it? Aristotle: genus + differentia. 'Man is a RATIONAL ANIMAL' — genus: animal, differentia: rational.
  • Category Error — 'It also does X, Y, and Z.' Which properties are ESSENTIAL (remove them and it becomes something else) vs. ACCIDENTAL (remove them and it remains the same thing)? Aristotle: being rational is essential to being human. Being 180cm tall is accidental.
  • Syllogism Invalid — 'Therefore obviously this is the right approach.' 'Obviously' is assertion, not proof. Aristotle: 'All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore Socrates is mortal.' Valid syllogism — conclusion follows NECESSARILY.
  • Purpose Blind — 'The implementation processes data through pipeline X.' That describes HOW, not WHY. Aristotle's four causes: material (resources), formal (structure), efficient (process), FINAL (telos/purpose). What is it FOR?
  • Dialectic Absent — 'This is the only option.' Aristotle's students debated every position from BOTH sides. His 'Topics' catalogues 28 topoi for systematic dialectic.

How It Works

  1. definitionPrecise — Terms defined with genus + differentia.
  2. categorizedCorrectly — Essential vs. accidental properties separated.
  3. syllogismValid — Conclusion follows necessarily from premises.
  4. purposeIdentified — Four causes identified, especially the telos.
  5. counterargumentExamined — Strongest opposing argument steel-manned.

Verdict Matrix

Pivot Verdict Meaning
definitionPrecise = false DEFINITION_VAGUE Terms used without precise meaning.
categorizedCorrectly = false CATEGORY_ERROR Essential confused with accidental.
syllogismValid = false SYLLOGISM_INVALID Conclusion does not follow from premises.
purposeIdentified = false PURPOSE_BLIND Mechanism described, purpose unknown.
counterargumentExamined = false DIALECTIC_ABSENT No opposing argument examined.
All pass LOGIC_PROVEN Defined. Categorized. Proven. Purposed. Examined.
formal-logicsyllogismcategorizationteleologydialecticsdefinitionaristotlefour-causes

1 tools expose this connector's capabilities to your AI agent.

validate_aristotle_logic

Think like Aristotle — the father of formal logic and systematic categorization. You must: (1) DEFINE PRECISELY — every key term with genus (the broader category it belongs to) + differentia (the property that distinguishes it from other members of that genus). Aristotle: "Man is a RATIONAL ANIMAL" — genus: animal, differentia: rational. "A type of system" has no genus and no differentia, (2) CATEGORIZE CORRECTLY — separate essential properties (without which it would be a DIFFERENT thing entirely) from accidental properties (which can change without changing WHAT it is). Use Aristotle's 10 categories: substance, quantity, quality, relation, place, time, position, state, action, affection. Misclassifying accidental as essential is a category error, (3) PROVE SYLLOGISTICALLY — major premise (universal claim) + minor premise (specific case) + conclusion (necessary result). The conclusion must follow NECESSARILY from the premises. "Therefore obviously" is an assertion, not a valid inference. Test: would the conclusion hold even if the premises were hypothetically about different subjects? (4) IDENTIFY PURPOSE — Aristotle's four causes: material (what it is made of), formal (its essential structure), efficient (what process creates it), and FINAL (its telos — what it is FOR). The final cause is the most important. "How it works" answers the efficient cause. "What it is FOR" answers the final cause. Do not confuse mechanism with purpose, (5) EXAMINE THE STRONGEST COUNTERARGUMENT — dialectically. Aristotle's students debated every position from BOTH sides. Find the BEST argument against your position (steel-man, not straw-man), identify which of your premises it challenges, respond substantively, and note what residual doubt remains. If rejected, your logic has a formal deficiency — strengthen the argument.Send ALL parameters in ONE call — the analyses above plus YOUR OWN verdict: every PIVOT boolean, verdict and clarification. The engine cross-checks the pivots against the verdict and rejects incomplete or self-contradictory calls. Structured reflection tool for Aristotelian formal logic. Forces the agent to define terms with genus and differentia, classify essential vs accidental properties, prove conclusions through valid syllogisms, identify purpose through the four causes, and examine the strongest counterargument dialectically. Catches Definition Vagueness ("a type of system" — no genus, no differentia), Category Errors (treating accidental properties as essential — confusing what something IS with what it HAPPENS TO BE), Syllogism Invalidity (conclusions that do not follow necessarily from premises — "therefore obviously" masking logical leaps), Purpose Blindness (describing HOW something works without identifying WHAT it is FOR — mechanism without telos), and Dialectic Absence (no counterargument examined — claiming "there is no alternative" instead of steel-manning the strongest opposing position). Call once per classification, logical argument, or definitional analysis

See how to talk to your AI agent using Aristotle Logic Prover.

We need a scalable platform that is sort of like a hub for all our data. It also does reporting and analytics and additionally handles notifications. Therefore obviously we should build it as a single unified system.

DEFINITION_VAGUE — 'Platform,' 'scalable,' 'hub' — none of these terms are defined. Aristotle: genus + differentia. What CATEGORY does 'platform' belong to? What DISTINGUISHES it from a database, a service, or an application? 'Sort of like a hub' is not a definition. Additionally: 'it also does X, Y, Z' conflates essential and accidental properties. Is reporting ESSENTIAL (remove it and the system is no longer what it is) or ACCIDENTAL (remove it and the core thing remains)? Define first. Then categorize.

Definition: 'Order tracker' — genus: operational record-keeping system; differentia: tracks the lifecycle of customer requests from intake to delivery, distinguished from inventory systems (which track objects, not processes). Category: essential properties are (1) lifecycle tracking, (2) status transitions, (3) completion verification. Accidental: notification method (email vs. SMS), display format, report scheduling. Syllogism: All lifecycle tracking systems require status transition definitions. Our order tracker is a lifecycle tracking system. Therefore our order tracker requires status transition definitions. Purpose: Final cause (telos): ensure every customer request reaches completion within committed timelines. Material: order data, team assignments, deadline rules. Formal: sequential status pipeline with validation gates. Efficient: triggered by incoming customer request. Counterargument: Strongest counter — 'A spreadsheet achieves the same tracking with less effort.' This attacks the formal cause — is the pipeline structure necessary? Response: at <50 orders/week, a spreadsheet suffices. At our volume (380/week), manual status tracking produces 12% missed deadlines. The pipeline with validation gates reduced missed deadlines to 1.8%. Residual doubt: the 1.8% may reflect team behavior change, not the system itself.

LOGIC_PROVEN — Aristotelian logic complete. Definition precise: genus (operational record-keeping system) + differentia (lifecycle of customer requests), with boundary (distinguished from inventory systems). Category correct: essential (lifecycle, transitions, verification) separated from accidental (notification method, display format). Syllogism valid: major premise (all lifecycle systems need transitions), minor (our system is a lifecycle system), conclusion necessarily follows. Purpose identified through four causes, telos first (completion within timelines). Counterargument steel-manned (spreadsheet suffices at <50/week), addressed with data (380/week, 12%→1.8%), residual doubt acknowledged. This reasoning survives the Lyceum.

Definition: 'Workflow engine' — a system that automates tasks. Essential: does everything — routing, notifications, reporting, scheduling, approvals. Syllogism: Good organizations need automation. We are a good organization. This proves we need a workflow engine.

CATEGORY_ERROR — Definition passes partially ('automates tasks' is a start), but the category classification fails. 'Does everything — routing, notifications, reporting, scheduling, approvals' lists 5 properties as essential. Remove notifications — is it still a workflow engine? Yes. Remove reporting — still a workflow engine? Yes. Those are ACCIDENTAL properties. The ESSENTIAL property is task-state-transition management. Additionally, the syllogism is invalid: 'Good organizations need automation' is a vague major premise. What IS 'good'? What IS 'automation'? The conclusion 'this proves we need' does not follow necessarily — it follows ONLY if ALL automation is beneficial in ALL contexts, which is false.

Archimedes forces DECOMPOSITION — break the problem into irreducible components. Aristotle forces FORMAL LOGIC — define terms precisely, prove conclusions through valid syllogisms, identify purpose through four causes, and examine counterarguments dialectically. Archimedes asks 'what are the components?' Aristotle asks 'is the argument VALID?'

Related Connectors

NEW
Mobility Routine Generator

Mobility Routine Generator MCP

4 tools Official

Construct personalized mobility routines using joint-by-joint progression principles.

A+ View details →
Deterministic 50/30/20 Budget Engine

Deterministic 50/30/20 Budget Engine MCP

1 tools Official

Transform your AI into a hyper-precise financial controller. Mathematically enforce the 50/30/20 budgeting rule on pre-categorized expense pipelines to detect exact capital deviations.

A+ View details →
Tencent Youtu / 腾讯优图

Tencent Youtu / 腾讯优图 MCP

8 tools Official

China's leading computer vision platform — perform facial recognition, analysis, and liveness checks via AI.

A+ View details →
Chainlit

Chainlit MCP

6 tools Official

Empower your AI agents to audit chat threads, analyze model steps, and track LLM observability metrics securely.

A+ View details →