Online research in philosophy

John Mair (1467–1550) was an influential post-medieval scholar. This paper focuses on his Tractatus insolubilium, in which he proposed semantic analysis of self-referential phenomena, in particular on his solution to alethic and correspondence paradoxes and his treatment of their general semantic aspects as well as particular applications. His solution to paradoxes is based on the so-called “network evaluation”, i.e. on a semantics which defines the concepts of truth and correspondence with reality in contextual terms. Consequently, the relation between semantic valuation, (...) synonymy and contradiction must be redefined. (shrink)

The construction of mediaeval semantic theories is based on defining semantic concepts introduced by means of paradigmatic examples. One of the commonly discussed expressions is the promise “Debeo tibi equum”. This study deals with analyses of this proposition in fourteenth century logic done by means of instruments of terminist semantics. We may distinguish between realist and nominalist analyses, the nominalist may further be classified according to how the propositional context is interpreted – whether as extensional, intensional or hyperintensional. If we (...) take the function terminist logic has with respect to grounded elimination of false inferences as the criterion of its effectivity, all solutions must be considered comparably effective, and therefore acceptable.Medio aevo doctrinae semanticae super notionum semanticarum definitiones, quae exem plorum allatorum auxilio communiter introducebantur, construi solebant. Inter exempla saepius pertractata est etiam hoc promissum “Debeo tibi equum”. In dissertatione nostra explicationes, quae instrumentis semantices terministicae 14. saeculo in logica propositae sunt, investigamus, quorum aliae sunt realisticae, aliae nominalisticae. Inter hasce aliud porro discrimen notaripotest, scilicet quod aliae contextum dicti “extensionalem”, aliae “intensionalem”, aliae “hyperintensionalem” interpretantur. Quae omnes explicationes fere aeque efficaces esse inveniuntur, inquantum scilicet sufficientia praebent fundamenta ad argumenta fallacia eliminanda, quod et aeque acceptabiles. (shrink)

This paper deals with the simple paradoxes of validity and with the possibility of solving them in terms of Bradwardinian-Buridanian semantics. The paradoxes of validity as conceived here are cases of semantic pathology, which result due to the use of terms signifying the validity of inference. Semantic paradoxes are a semantico-epistemological phenomenon which is a symptom of the need to revise several apparently acceptable semantic assumptions. The analysis of possible solutions to the paradoxes focuses on Bradwardinian-Buridanian semantics and as a (...) result on the closed, token-based semantic theories that assume the existence of an implicit meaning of propositions. The key theses, as far as the solution to the paradoxes is concerned, are the principle of truth-implication which claims that every proposition expresses or implies its own truth and the closure principle which claims that every proposition asserts or expresses everything that follows from it logically. The present paper advances on recent research in claiming that (with certain reservations) the application of these principles can effectively solve inconsistency-paradoxes but not indeterminacy-paradoxes of validity.Haec dissertatio circa simplices “consequentias insolubiles” modumque eos solvendi iuxta doctrinam semanticam Bradwardiniano-Buridanianam versatur. Consequentiae insolubiles, quae hic considerantur, “pathologiam semanticam” exhibunt, quae ex usu terminorum validitatem consequentiae significantium resultat. Insolubilia ut phaenomenon semantico-epistemologicum necessitatem corrigendi nonnula principia semantica, quae secundum primam suiapparentiam bona esse videntur. Inquisitio in divorsos modos solvendi ista insolubilia praecipue doctrinas semanticas Thomae de Bradwardino Ioannisque Buridani respicit, scilicet doc trinas semanticas “clausas” (seu distinctionem inter “meta-linguam” et “linguam obiectualem” non ponentes), nominalisticas, propositionibus etiam significationem quandam “implicitam” ascribentes. Assertiones principales, ex quibus huiusmodi insolubilium solutio pendet, sunt duo: 1. ex omni propositione assertionem sequi sui ipsius veritatis; 2. omnem propositionem quodcumque ex ea logice sequatur asserere. Extendentes investigationem recentiorum conclusionem tractatione nostra defendimus, principiis praedictis adhibendis bene solvi posse consequentias insolubiles ratione inconsistentiae, non tamen consequentias insolubiles ratione indeterminationis. (shrink)

Joannis Buridani de semantice propositionum doctrinaDissertatio proposita Joannis Buridani de semantice propositionum sententiam, quae in suis operibus logicis continetur, pertractat. Quaestio de semantice propositionali duplici modo sumi potest: scil. vel pure semantice (quarendo definitionem veritatis) vel ontologice (inquirendo de statu ontologico “complexesignificabilium”). In utraque quaestione solvenda Buridanus doctrinam semanticam quae “terminismus” dicitur assumit. Notionem veritatis Buridanus non ex significatione sed ex suppositione explicat, quo pacto possibile redditur, veritatem inductive per valorem semanticum propositionis partium definiri. Quaestionem alteram circa semanticen complexionis “accusativi (...) cum infinitivo” seu “dicti” propositionis Buridanus ad semanticen terminorum reducit, propositionis structuram logicam explicando. Buridani principalis modus procedendi ergo in hoc consistit, quod ipse “obligationibus ontologicis” alicuius discursus evadere studet, abnegando “denotativam” doctrinam semanticam. Translatio: Lukáš NovákJohn Buridan’s Propositional SemanticsThe paper deals with Buridan’s approach to the problems of propositional semantics, contained in his logical works. This question can be conceived both as semantic (definition of truth) and ontological (ontological status of states of affairs). Buridan’s solution of both of these questions is based upon a terminist theory of meaning. Theory of truth is constructed as suppositional, not as significational, which enables the definition of truth in terms of the semantic values of components of a particular kind of proposition. The other important problem, the semantic analysis of accusative and infinitive constructions (i.e. of sentential nominalizations), is solved within the semantics of terms by exhibiting the logical structure of a proposition. Buridan’s crucial strategy is therefore the elimination of the apparent ontological commitments of a particular discourse in terms of dismissing the denotative theory of meaning. (shrink)

Doctrinae Cassantium analysis historica et systematicaDissertatio haec circa modum quendam solvendi paradoxorum semanticorum seu “insolubilium”, ut scholastici aiunt, versatur, quem doctores mediaevales, qui “Cassantes” dici solebant, proposuerunt. Secundum Cassantium sententiam, in cuius analysi perficienda huius tractationis scopus principaliter consistit, propositiones insolubiles “nihil dicunt”; sunt enim incongruae seu male formatae, et consequenter nec veritatis nec falsitatis capabiles. Cassantes igitur solvunt insolubilia abnegando iis capacitatem veritatis ac falsitatis, quam mere apparentem esse existimant. Praesuppositum fundamentale huiusmodi doctrinae est distinctio inter logicam et grammaticam (...) structuram propositionis, seu inter meram prolationem sententiae et actualem assertionem. Similitudo quoque notabilis apparet inter distinctionem praedictam et distinctionem inter duas conceptiones “congruentiae”, quae apud grammaticos 12. saeculi inveniuntur. Praesenti tempore sententia Cassantium ut solutio paradoxorum semanticorum in “logica illocutionum” proponi solet. Translatio: Lukáš NovákHistorical and systematical reflexion of cassantesThe article deals with the analysis of one medieval solution of semantic paradoxes, namely with the position of the so-called “cassantes” (i.e. “those who nullify”). The solution is based upon designating problematical sentences to be agrammatical and thus “saying nothing”: paradoxes are solved by means of deyning apparent truth-apts. Theoretically fundamental supposition of this step is drawing the distinction between grammatical and logical structure of a sentence, or (from a speech-act theoretical point of view) the distinction between a sentence and a statement. Remarkable analogies can also be shown between this distinction and the distinction between two conceptions of congruence in the twelfth-century grammar. Nowadays the cassationist approach is the solution of paradoxes proposed in the theoretical framework of the illocutionary logic. (shrink)

Semantica logicalis Ioannis Buridani eiusque explicatio necnon censuraHuius dissertationis scopus est analysis terminologiae logico-semanticae, quae Iohannes Buridanus (c. 1295–1360), logicus mediaevalis ad scholam Nominalium spectans, utitur. Inquisitio haec praecipue circa conceptus „causae veritatis“ et „consequentiae“ versatur, ad quos conceptus autem clarificandosduo apparent praerequisita: primo quidem explicatio significationis terminorum modalium (ut quid sit neessitas, quid possibilitas), secundo solutio (saltem attemptata) „insolubilium“ seu (ut moderni aiunt) paradoxorum semanticorum, ut paradoxi Epimenidis. Ex analysi Buridani discursus patet, eius intellegentiam logicae de facto parum successisse, (...) propter errores nonnulos in analysi conceptuali modalis semanticaeque terminologiae. Auctor igitur aliam explicationem notionis consequentiae proponit, quam ex conceptione semantica modalitatis, qua Buridanus implicite tantum innixus est, hausit. Auctor credit hanc explicationem possibilitatem aperit, systema logicum, quod conceptualiter et consequenter explicative „clausum“ sit, conficere. Translatio: L. NovákPerspectives of the Logical Semantics of Jean BuridanThe subject of the present article is the analysis of fundamental logical-semantical terminology of late-medieval nominalistic logician Jean Buridan (c. 1295–1360). The analysis focuses on the concepts of truth conditions and logical consequence, whose clarification presupposes explication of modal terminology as well as a solution of semantical antinomies such as “Liar” (or an attempt to solve them). The analysis of Buridan’s argumentation suggests that Buridan’s project of logic actually fails due to several failures of conceptual analysis of semantical and modal terminology. An alternative solution of the question concerning logical consequence is thus proposed in terms of Buridan’s implicit (and unused) semantical conception of modalities that makes it possible to establish conceptually and therefore explicatively closed logical framework. (shrink)