Aristotle gave seven arguments for the law of non-contradiction. The first one is against a special case of dialetheism, the view that only some contradictions are true, and other six arguments are mostly against trivialism, the view that everything and consequently every contraction is true. Aristotle never argued that dialetheism entails trivialism. Unlike Aristotle, Avicenna, in his defense of LNC, not only considers trivialism and argues against it, but also argues that dialetheism entails trivialism. The argument that dialetheism entails trivialism is called explosion. It is usually known that the first argument for explosion is given by the twelfth century logician William of Soissons. In this paper, we will meet Avicenna’s different argument for explosion and then I will demonstrate that this argument is a non-sequitur.

中文翻译：

---

阿维森纳关于不矛盾律

亚里士多德为不矛盾律给出了七个论证。第一个是反对唯心论的一个特例，即只有某些矛盾是真的观点，其他六个论点大多反对琐碎主义，即一切以及因此每一个收缩都是正确的观点。亚里士多德从未论证过，辩证法必然带来琐碎主义。与亚里士多德不同的是，阿维森纳在为 LNC 辩护时，不仅考虑了琐碎主义并反对它，而且认为辩证法必然包含琐碎主义。辩证法必然带来琐碎主义的论点被称为爆炸。众所周知，爆炸的第一个论点是由 12 世纪逻辑学家苏瓦松的威廉提出的。在这篇论文中，我们将遇到阿维森纳关于爆炸的不同论点，然后我将证明这个论点是不成立的。