Online research in philosophy

Concept maps are found to be useful in eliciting knowledge, meaningful learning, evaluation of understanding and in studying the nature of changes taking place during cognitive development, particularly in the classroom. Several experts have claimed the effectiveness of this tool for learning science. We agree with the claim, but the effectiveness will improve only if we gradually introduce a certain amount of discipline in constructing the maps. The discipline is warranted, we argue, because science thrives to be an unambiguous and rigorously structured body of knowledge. Since learning science may be seen as a process where a novice is expected to be transformed into an expert, we use the context of learning science for making the proposal. Further, we identify certain anomalies in the evaluation of concept maps, and suggest that the evaluation should be based on semantics of the linking words (relation types) and not on graphical criteria alone.

A primary goal of research in the semantics/pragmatics interface is to investigate the division of labor between the truth-conditional component of the meaning of an expression and other factors of a more pragmatic nature. One favorite strategy, associated foremost with Grice (1967, 1989), is to keep to a rather austere semantics and to derive the overall meaning of an utterance by predictable additional inferences, called ``implicatures,'' which are seen as based on certain principles of rational and purposeful interaction. In this chapter, I will explore a di¨erent way in which the truth-conditional component is complemented in context. Imagine that we have persuasive evidence that an expression a in context c expresses a proposition p. The straightforward way of capturing this in a semantic system is to attribute to a a context-dependent meaning that maps c to p in a systematic and adequate way.

"Scientific theories are maps of the natural world." This metaphor is often used as part of a deflationary argument for a weak but relatively global version of scientific realism, a version that recognizes the place of conventions, goals, and contingencies in scientific representations, while maintaining that they are typically true in a clear and literal sense. By examining, in a naturalistic way, some relationships between maps and what they map, we question the scope and value of realist construals of maps-and by extension of scientific representations. Deflationary philosophy of science requires more variegated stances.

In this book we study the concepts of Fuzzy Cognitive Maps (FCMs) and their Neutrosophic analogue, the Neutrosophic Cognitive Maps (NCMs).

Preface 1 Partially ordered sets 1.1 Posets introduced 1.2 Partial orders and strict orders 1.3 Maps between posets 1.4 Compounding maps 1.5 Order similarity 1.6 Inclusion posets as typical..

Let CH be the class of compacta (i.e., compact Hausdorff spaces), with BS the subclass of Boolean spaces. For each ordinal α and pair $\langle K,L\rangle$ of subclasses of CH, we define Lev ≥α K,L), the class of maps of level at least α from spaces in K to spaces in L, in such a way that, for finite α, Lev ≥α (BS,BS) consists of the Stone duals of Boolean lattice embeddings that preserve all prenex first-order formulas of quantifier rank α. Maps of level ≥ 0 are just the continuous surjections, and the maps of level ≥ 1 are the co-existential maps introduced in [8]. Co-elementary maps are of level ≥α for all ordinals α; of course in the Boolean context, the co-elementary maps coincide with the maps of level ≥ω. The results of this paper include: (i) every map of level ≥ω is co-elementary; (ii) the limit maps of an ω-indexed inverse system of maps of level ≥α are also of level ≥α; and (iii) if K is a co-elementary class, k ≥ k (K,K) = Lev ≥ k+1 (K,K), then Lev ≥ k (K,K) = Lev ≥ω (K,K). A space X ∈ K is co-existentially closed in K if Lev ≥ 0 (K, X) = Lev ≥ 1 (K, X). Adapting the technique of "adding roots," by which one builds algebraically closed extensions of fields (and, more generally, existentially closed extensions of models of universal-existential theories), we showed in [8] that every infinite member of a co-inductive co-elementary class (such as CH itself, BS, or the class CON of continua) is a continuous image of a space of the same weight that is co-existentially closed in that class. We show here that every compactum that is co-existentially closed in CON (a co-existentially closed continuum) is both indecomposable and of covering dimension one.

"Seienlil·ic theories are maps ol`lhc natural worlti." This metaphor is often used as part ot`a dellationary argument lor a weak but relatively global version ot` scienlitic realism. a version that recognizes the place olconventions, goals. and contingencies in seientilic rcpresentationsr while maintaining that they are typically true in a clear and literal sense. By examining. in a naturalistic wayt some relationships between maps and what they map. we question the scope and valttc oi` realist constrtials ol` maps and by extension ot` scicntiiic representationse Dcllationary philosophy ol` science requires more variegatecl stances.

Many philosophers who advocate broadly pragmatist accounts of belief or language treat maps as paradigm examples of representation and they often assume that a pragmatic account of representation is obviously correct for maps (e.g. Dewey, Dretske, Millikan, Putnam and Ramsey). By examining mapping activities and the representational properties of maps in detail, this paper argues that no single notion of representation can fit every map or every mapping activity. This is bad news for pragmatists: if there are maps they can’t cope with, we should question whether they can tell the full story about belief or language.

I argue that maps do not feature predication, as analyzed by Frege and Tarski. I take as my foil (Casati and Varzi, Parts and places, 1999), which attributes predication to maps. I argue that the details of Casati and Varzi’s own semantics militate against this attribution. Casati and Varzi emphasize what I call the Absence Intuition: if a marker representing some property (such as mountainous terrain) appears on a map, then absence of that marker from a map coordinate signifies absence of the corresponding property from the corresponding location. Predication elicits nothing like the Absence Intuition. “F(a)” does not, in general, signify that objects other than a lack property F. On the basis of this asymmetry, I argue that attaching a marker to map coordinates is a different mode of semantic composition than attaching a predicate to a singular term.

It’s often hypothesized that the structure of mental representation is map-like rather than language-like. The possibility arises as a counterexample to the argument from the best explanation of productivity and systematicity to the language of thought hypothesis—the hypothesis that mental structure is compositional and recursive. In this paper, I argue that the analogy with maps does not undermine the argument, because maps and language have the same kind of compositional and recursive structure.