Contents: PART 1. MODELS IN SCIENTIFIC PROCESSES. Joseph AGASSI: Why there is no theory of models. Ma??l??gorzata CZARNOCKA: Models and symbolic nature of knowledge. Adam GROBLER: The representational and the non-representational in models of scientific theories. Stephan HARTMANN: Models as a tool for the theory construction; some strategies of preliminary physics. William HERFEL: Nonlinear dynamical models as concrete construction. Elzbieta KA??L??USZY??N??SKA: Styles of thinking. Stathis PSILLOS: The cognitive interplay between theories and models: the case of 19th century optics. PART 2. (...) TOOLS OF SCIENCE. Nancy D. CARTWRIGHT, Towfic SHOMAR, Maricio SUAREZ: The tool-box of science. Javier ECHEVERRIA: The four contexts of scientific activity. Katline HAVAS: Continuity and change; kinds of negation in scientific progress. Matthias KAISER: The independence of scientific phenomena. W??l??adys??l??aw KRAJEWSKI: Scientific meta-philosophy. Ilkka NIINILUOTO: The emergence if scientific specialities: six models. Leszek NOWAK: Antirealism, realism and idealization. Rinat M. NUGAYEV: Classic, modern and postmodern scientific unification. Veikko RANTALA: Translation and scientific change. Gerhard SCHURZ: Theories and their applications - a case of nonmonotonic reasoning. Witold STRAWI??N??SKI: The unity of science today. Vardan TOROSIAN: Are the ethic and logic of science compatible. PART 3. UNSHARP APPROACHES IN SCIENCE. Ernest W. ADAMS: Problems and prospects in a theory of inexact first-order theories. Wolfgang BALZER and Gerhard ZOUBEK: On the comparison of approximative empirical claims. Gianpierro CATTANEO, Maria Luisa DALLA CHIARA, Roberto GIUNTINI: The unsharp approaches to quantum theory. Theo A.F. KUIPERS: Falsification versus efficient truth approximation. Bernhard LAUTH: Limiting decidability and probability. Jaros??l??aw PYKACZ: Many-valued logics in foundations of quantum mechanics. Roman R. ZAPATRIN: Logico-algebraic approach to spacetime quantization. (shrink)

The general aim of this book is to provide an elementary exposition of some basic concepts in terms of which both classical and non-dassicallogirs may be studied and appraised. Although quantificational logic is dealt with briefly in the last chapter, the discussion is chiefly concemed with propo gjtional cakuli. Still, the subject, as it stands today, cannot br covered in one book of reasonable length. Rather than to try to include in the volume as much as possible, I have put (...) emphasis on some selected topics. Even these could not be roverrd completely, but for each topic I have attempted to present a detailed and precise t’Xposition of several basic results including some which are non-trivial. The roots of some of the central ideas in the volume go back to J. Luka siewicz’s seminar on mathematicallogi. (shrink)

Review of Paweł Kawalec, Przyczyna i wyjaśnianie. Studium z metodologii i filozofii nauki, Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.

"Williams's masterful translation satisfies (at last!) a long-standing need. There are lots of good translations of Augustine's great work, but until now we have been forced to choose between those that strive to replicate in English something of the majesty and beauty of Augustine's Latin style and those that opt instead to convey the careful precision of his philosophical terminology and argumentation. Finally, Williams has succeeded in capturing both sides of Augustine's mind in a richly evocative, impeccably reliable, elegantly readable (...) presentation of one of the most impressive achievements in Western thought--Augustine's Confessions." --Scott MacDonald, Professor of Philosophy and Norma K. Regan Professor in Christian Studies, Cornell University. (shrink)

The Moral Nexus develops and defends a new interpretation of morality—namely, as a set of requirements that connect agents normatively to other persons in a nexus of moral relations. According to this relational interpretation, moral demands are directed to other individuals, who have claims that the agent comply with these demands. Interpersonal morality, so conceived, is the domain of what we owe to each other, insofar as we are each persons with equal moral standing. The book offers an interpretative argument (...) for the relational approach. Specifically, it highlights neglected advantages of this way of understanding the moral domain; explores important theoretical and practical presuppositions of relational moral duties; and considers the normative implications of understanding morality in relational terms. The book features a novel defense of the relational approach to morality, which emphasizes the special significance that moral requirements have, both for agents who are deliberating about what to do and for those who stand to be affected by their actions. The book argues that relational moral requirements can be understood to link us to all individuals whose interests render them vulnerable to our agency, regardless of whether they stand in any prior relationship to us. It also offers fresh accounts of some of the moral phenomena that have seemed to resist treatment in relational terms, showing that the relational interpretation is a viable framework for understanding our specific moral obligations to other people. (shrink)

11 original. Modifications which I introduced are radical and often far going. In my opinion the Polish text had two main drawbacks. It was overloaded with informal considerations and at the same time formal concepts included in some parts of the book were presented in a too complicated way. Of course one of the motives to revise it was also the fact that much time has passed since I finished writing the Polish version and obviously certain decisions and ideas contained (...) in the first edition seem not quite relevant now. So it is not only the desire to make the exposition clearer but also the reasons of substantial nature which motivated writing a revised version. I do not think it desirable to bother the reader with a detailed discussion of all changes to which the Polish version was subjected and that is why I will confine myself to pointing out only the most significant ones. Explanations concerning logical and set-theoretical notions applied in the book have been shortened as much as possible, in the Polish version one whole chapter was devoted to the discussion of them. (shrink)

As Chinese Studies in Philosophy enters its twenty-fifth year, we wish to thank the editor since its inception, Professor Cheng Chung-ying of the University of Hawaii, for his many years of service, and to welcome with this issue our new editor, Professor Michael Schoenhals of Stockholm University.

The anthology presents a selection of methodological writings pub lished by Polish logicians after World War 11. All the papers belong to what may be called Logical Methodology or Logical Theory of Science. The epithet 'logical' characterizes rather the general point of view than the particular methods employed by the authors. Apart from articles which make an essential use of different formal methods, there are many which do not involve any formal apparatus whatsoever. The problems the papers deal with may (...) be characterized as problems of the general methodology of empirical science. The papers do not consider the methodological problems of formal knowledge, and, as a rule, they are concerned with empirical science as a whole and not with some of its specific branches. The topics covered by the selected writings include the main issues and controversies discussed within the contemporary methodology of science. A considerable part of the anthology is con cerned with the semantics of empirica1languages and considers problems such as interpretation of observational and theoretical terms, analyticity, empirical meaningfulness, etc. Another group of papers deals with the problem of induction and examines various ways of its justification. Some articles discuss the nature and the status of methodology itself. The materials have been selected so as to make up a whole representative of what has been done in this field in Poland since 1945. The book comprises 33 articles by 20 authors. (shrink)

In this note I am reflecting on interrelations between three concepts of truth: that employed by Hilbert arguing his formalist view on the nature of mathematics, Freges idea of truth supported by mathematical intuition, and known as Aristotelian correspondence idea of truth concerning any propositions not merely mathematical.

Ryszard Wójcicki's book „Ajdukiewicz. A Theory of Meaning” opens a series of publications Filozofia polska XX wieku [Polish Philosophy of XXth Century], created by Wójcicki. The main subject of the book is a theory of the meaning of linguistic expressions, which was formulated in the thirties and is known as a directival theory of meaning. The aim that the author has set for himself is not only to present and popularise that theory (these aims are implied by the character of (...) the series), but also the evaluation of its material adequacy and its significance for further investigations of language as a means of representation and transmission of knowledge. Adam Nowaczyk tries to show that Wójcicki's critique of Ajdukiewicz's conception is unjustified, for the fallacy allegedly committed in this conception is either only apparent or else easily remediable. Wójcicki disagrees with Nowaczyk's objection. (shrink)

The title of this paper is a theorem, which I am going to state and prove. The theorem extends from prepositional to predicate languages the result I presented in [5].

The title of this paper is a theorem, which I am going to state and prove. The theorem extends from prepositional to predicate languages the result I presented in [5].

This paper was presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Logic, Melbourne, November, 1979. The present note being complementary to [1], I shall only brie y recall the key notions to be exploited here, and for more details the reader is advised to consult [1]. By a propositional logic we mean a couple , where L is a propo- sitional language and C a structural consequence de- ned on L. A couple W = is said to be (...) a referential matrix for the language L i there exists a non-empty set T such that the following two conditions are satised: i. A is an abstract algebra similar to L, whose all elements belong to f0; 1g T , i.e. they are mappings from T into the two-element set f0; 1g. ii. D = ffa 2 A : a = 1g : t 2 Tg. (shrink)

I shall assume that the reader is familiar with the notions dened in [2] and [3]. A consequence C dened over a propositional language L will be said to be d-structural i the consequence dC dual with respect to C is structural. The following propositions holds true.