For these artefacts, see the GrunksDin El-Ebherî, Discovery al-Ebririr’d-Dakâik, (Thk. And NŞR. Hüseyin Sarıoğlu), Bagay Bay., Ist., 1998; Tenzîlu’lef Sufi Fi-Ta’dili’l-Esrâr, Süleymaniye KTP., Reisu’l-Koltap Mustafa Efendi BL., Nr. 569; Kitbu Beyaz’l-Esrâr, Sulayaniye KTP., Bridge B., NR.1618, B.N; Telhîsi’l-Hakaik, Sulaymaniye KTP., Bridge B., NR.1618, B.N; Bookmark, Sulayaniye KTP., Bridge B., NR.1618, B.N; Zübdetü’l-alright. Suleymaniye KTP., Bridge B., NR.1618, B.N; Hidayaniye’l-Hikme, Suleymaniye KTP., Carullah Efendi B., Nr. 1410. B.n; For the references to ebherî’s Fâsh and Ibn Sînâ, see Ebheri, Discovery’l-Alright, s., 21,31,60,66,89,95,111, etc. 5 Ebu Nasr El-Fârangî, Counting of Sciences, (Transit, A. Arslan) Valley Bow. Ank., 1999, p., 63. 63., EBI NASR Hand-Family, Kitâbu’l-Burhan, (Çev., Ö. Türker, Ö. M. Alper), Classic Yay., Ist., 2008, s., 39; Ibn Sînâ is the name of ES-Safsata to the seventh book that Heals divided into this art; Cazvînî said this art to Safash. See., Kazvînî, Necmeddin Ömer B. Ali al-Catibi, Risperature-umbreye Fî-Kavâidi-MANTIKYE, ismail master printing, ismail master, ismail, ist., 1301, p., 57. 7 Fârangî, detached, detached, Kitâbu’l-eminuketi ‘ named as L-Mugalatati. See also., Ebu Hamid Gazâlî, Miyaru’l-ilm, (NŞR., Ahmet Semirdin) Dâru’l-Kutubi’l-ilmiyye, Beirut, 1990, p., 89; Fenâârî, Semseddin Muhammad b. Hamza, Sharı-U Isaguer, Dersaad Printing Printing, ist., 1309, p., 25; Muhammad Ibn Yusuf, Tarifatu’l-Aziziyye, ist., 1308, p., 30. 8 Ibn Sînâ, Age., P., 45. 9, Ahmet Cevdet Pasha, Mi, Sedâd, (NŞR. , HT Feyizi) FECR Yay., Ank., 1998, p., 170; Recommend, Necati, Classic Mantic, A.Ü.i.F. Yay., Ank, 1986, p., 188. 10 Emiroğlu, İbrahim, Logic wrongs, Elis Yay., Ank., 2004, p., 22.
named a mugalata, has not used the expression of the Safsata. We will also use the name of the mugalata for this art. After this preliminary information now we can now be defined. Aristoteles tries to emphasize that there is also the right one, as well as the correct one, as well as the fact that there may be a fake of the fact that, as it may be a fake of the fact that there may be a fake of a fact that, as fake beauty in the entrance of Sophistic Reases. Aristotle sophistication refutes, ie the mugalate, real compared to the fact that they do not have actual comparison and rebuttals, it reveals as fake evidence. In the discussion, the objects do not appear to be the wrongdogs in reasoning because of the use of their indicators, ie their indicators, ie the use of linguistic statements. However, they have identified as compared to the premises that are not so. They are misleading people, cheating; Something that is not true is the correct, accurate one thing that mislead something that is right and is similar words .1