Search results for 'objectual quantification' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1. Universally Free First Order Quantification (forthcoming). A Note on Universally Free First Order Quantification Theory Ap Rao. Logique Et Analyse.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  15
    Bjørn Jespersen & Marie Duží (2015). Transparent Quantification Into Hyperintensional Objectual Attitudes. Synthese 192 (3):635-677.
    We demonstrate how to validly quantify into hyperintensional contexts involving non-propositional attitudes like seeking, solving, calculating, worshipping, and wanting to become. We describe and apply a typed extensional logic of hyperintensions that preserves compositionality of meaning, referential transparency and substitutivity of identicals also in hyperintensional attitude contexts. We specify and prove rules for quantifying into hyperintensional contexts. These rules presuppose a rigorous method for substituting variables into hyperintensional contexts, and the method will be described. We prove the following. First, it (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  3.  53
    James E. Tomberlin (1997). Quantification: Objectual or Substitutional? Philosophical Issues 8:155-167.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4.  29
    Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (1982). Indenumerability and Substitutional Quantification. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 23 (4):358-366.
    We here establish two theorems which refute a pair of what we believe to be plausible assumptions about differences between objectual and substitutional quantification. The assumptions (roughly stated) are as follows: (1) there is at least one set d and denumerable first order language L such that d is the domain set of no interpretation of L in which objectual and substitutional quantification coincide. (2) There exist interpreted, denumerable, first order languages K with indenumerable domains such (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Berit Brogaard (2008). Inscrutability and Ontological Commitment. Philosophical Studies 141 (1):21 - 42.
    There are two doctrines for which Quine is particularly well known: the doctrine of ontological commitment and the inscrutability thesis—the thesis that reference and quantification are inscrutable. At first glance, the two doctrines are squarely at odds. If there is no fact of the matter as to what our expressions refer to, then it would appear that no determinate commitments can be read off of our best theories. We argue here that the appearance of a clash between the two (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  6.  65
    Philip Percival (2011). Predicate Abstraction, the Limits of Quantification, and the Modality of Existence. Philosophical Studies 156 (3):389-416.
    For various reasons several authors have enriched classical first order syntax by adding a predicate abstraction operator. “Conservatives” have done so without disturbing the syntax of the formal quantifiers but “revisionists” have argued that predicate abstraction motivates the universal quantifier’s re-classification from an expression that combines with a variable to yield a sentence from a sentence, to an expression that combines with a one-place predicate to yield a sentence. My main aim is to advance the cause of predicate abstraction while (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  18
    Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (1991). Prior and Lorenzen on Quantification. Grazer Philosophishe Studien 41:150-173.
    A case against Prior’s theory of propositions goes thus: (1) everyday propositional generalizations are not substitutional; (2) Priorean quantifications are not objectual; (3) quantifications are substitutional if not objectual; (4) thus, Priorean quantifications are substitutional; (5) thus that Priorean quantifications are not ontologically committed to propositions provides no basis for a similar claim about our everyday propositional generalizations. Prior agrees with (1) and (2). He rejects (3), but fails to support that rejection with an account of quantification (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Ryan Christensen (2011). Propositional Quantification. Russell 31 (1).
    Ramsey defined truth in the following way: x is true if and only if ∃p. This definition is ill-formed in standard first-order logic, so it is normally interpreted using substitutional or some kind of higher-order quantifier. I argue that these quantifiers fail to provide an adequate reading of the definition, but that, given certain adjustments, standard objectual quantification does provide an adequate reading.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  15
    David Dolby, The Ineliminability of Non-Nominal Quantification.
    Objectual interpretations of non-nominal quantification seems to offer a non-substitutional treatment of quantification which respects differences of grammatical category in the object language whilst only employing nominal quantification in the metalanguage. I argue that the satisfaction conditions of such interpretations makes use concepts that must themselves be explained through non-nominal quantification. As a result, the interpretation misrepresents the structure of non-nominal quantification and the relationship between nominal and non-nominal forms of generality.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  8
    Thomas Macaulay Ferguson (2014). On Non-Deterministic Quantification. Logica Universalis 8 (2):165-191.
    This paper offers a framework for extending Arnon Avron and Iddo Lev’s non-deterministic semantics to quantified predicate logic with the intent of resolving several problems and limitations of Avron and Anna Zamansky’s approach. By employing a broadly Fregean picture of logic, the framework described in this paper has the benefits of permitting quantifiers more general than Walter Carnielli’s distribution quantifiers and yielding a well-behaved model theory. This approach is purely objectual and yields the semantical equivalence of both α-equivalent formulae (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11.  1
    Par Jocelyne Couture (1983). Les classes dans les Principia Mathematica sont‐elles des expressions incomplétes? Dialectica 37 (4):249-267.
    RésuméLa théorie des expressions incomplétes dans Principia Mathematica, se fonde sur le principe déja appliqué par Russell dans “On Denoting”, selon lequel il est souhaitable dans certains cas, ?on;établir le statut syntaxique des expressions catégorématiques. Grâce à la théorie intensionnelle ramifyée des types, les expressions incomplétes réféientiellement pourront être logiquement caractérisées par un mode de dérivation principalement basé sur la quantification non‐objectuelle. Ľintroduction des classes cependant, n'est en aucune façon reliée à ce mode intensionnel de dérivation; il en résulte (...)
    Translate
      Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. Sten Carl Lindstrom (1981). Formal Languages and Intensional Semantics. Dissertation, Stanford University
    This is a thesis in formal semantics. It consists of two parts corresponding to the distinction, due to Richard Montague, between universal grammar and specific semantic theories. The first part concerns universal grammar and is intended to provide a precise and unified conceptual framework within which different theories of formal semantics can be represented and compared. ;The second part of the thesis is concerned with intensional logic, i.e., with the logical analysis of disclosure involving so called oblique contexts. These contexts (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  11
    Kai F. Wehmeier (forthcoming). Identity and Quantification. Philosophical Studies:1-12.
    It is a philosophical commonplace that quantification involves, invokes, or presupposes, the relation of identity. There seem to be two major sources for this belief: the conviction that identity is implicated in the phenomenon of bound variable recurrence within the scope of a quantifier; memories of Quine’s insistence that quantification requires absolute identity for the values of variables. With respect to, I show that the only extant argument for a dependence of variable recurrence on identity, due to John (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. Stephen Barker (2015). Expressivism About Reference and Quantification Over the Non-Existent Without Meinongian Metaphysics. Erkenntnis 80 (S2):215-234.
    Can we believe that there are non-existent entities without commitment to the Meinongian metaphysics? This paper argues we can. What leads us from quantification over non-existent beings to Meinongianism is a general metaphysical assumption about reality at large, and not merely quantification over the non-existent. Broadly speaking, the assumption is that every being we talk about must have a real definition. It’s this assumption that drives us to enquire into the nature of beings like Pegasus, and what our (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  79
    William Craig (2014). Peter van Inwagen, Substitutional Quantification, and Ontological Commitment. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 55 (4):553-561.
    Peter van Inwagen has long claimed that he doesn’t understand substitutional quantification and that the notion is, in fact, meaningless. Van Inwagen identifies the source of his bewilderment as an inability to understand the proposition expressed by a simple sentence like “,” where “$\Sigma$” is the existential quantifier understood substitutionally. I should think that the proposition expressed by this sentence is the same as that expressed by “.” So what’s the problem? The problem, I suggest, is that van Inwagen (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Andrea Iacona (2015). Quantification and Logical Form. In Alessandro Torza (ed.), Quantifiers, Quantifiers, and Quantifiers. Springer 125-140.
    This paper deals with the logical form of quantified sentences. Its purpose is to elucidate one plausible sense in which quantified sentences can adequately be represented in the language of first-order logic. Section 1 introduces some basic notions drawn from general quantification theory. Section 2 outlines a crucial assumption, namely, that logical form is a matter of truth-conditions. Section 3 shows how the truth-conditions of quantified sentences can be represented in the language of first-order logic consistently with some established (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Øystein Linnebo, Plural Quantification. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Ordinary English contains different forms of quantification over objects. In addition to the usual singular quantification, as in 'There is an apple on the table', there is plural quantification, as in 'There are some apples on the table'. Ever since Frege, formal logic has favored the two singular quantifiers ∀x and ∃x over their plural counterparts ∀xx and ∃xx (to be read as for any things xx and there are some things xx). But in recent decades it (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  18. Fabrice Correia (2006). Generic Essence, Objectual Essence, and Modality. Noûs 40 (4):753–767.
    When thinking about the notion of essence or of an essential feature, philosophers typically focus on what I will call the notion of objectual essence. The main aim of this paper is to argue that beside this familiar notion stands another one, the notion of generic essence, which contrary to appearance cannot be understood in terms of the familiar notion, and which also fails to be correctly characterized by certain other accounts which naturally come to mind as well. Some (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  19.  66
    Salvatore Florio (2014). Unrestricted Quantification. Philosophy Compass 9 (7):441-454.
    Semantic interpretations of both natural and formal languages are usually taken to involve the specification of a domain of entities with respect to which the sentences of the language are to be evaluated. A question that has received much attention of late is whether there is unrestricted quantification, quantification over a domain comprising absolutely everything there is. Is there a discourse or inquiry that has absolute generality? After framing the debate, this article provides an overview of the main (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  78
    Friederike Moltmann (2015). Quantification with Intentional and with Intensional Verbs. In Alessandro Torza (ed.), Quantifiers, Quantifiers, and Quantifiers. Springer
    The question whether natural language permits quantification over intentional objects as the ‘nonexistent’ objects of thought is the topic of a major philosophical controversy, as is the status of intentional objects as such. This paper will argue that natural language does reflect a particular notion of intentional object and in particular that certain types of natural language constructions (generally disregarded in the philosophical literature) cannot be analysed without positing intentional objects. At the same time, those intentional objects do not (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (1987). Why Substitutional Quantification Does Not Express Existence. Theory and Decision 50:67-75.
    Fundamental to Quine’s philosophy of logic is the thesis that substitutional quantification does not express existence. This paper considers the content of this claim and the reasons for thinking it is true.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  42
    Geoff Georgi (2015). A Propositional Semantics for Substitutional Quantification. Philosophical Studies 172 (5):1183-1200.
    The standard truth-conditional semantics for substitutional quantification, due to Saul Kripke, does not specify what proposition is expressed by sentences containing the particular substitutional quantifier. In this paper, I propose an alternative semantics for substitutional quantification that does. The key to this semantics is identifying an appropriate propositional function to serve as the content of a bound occurrence of a formula containing a free substitutional variable. I apply this semantics to traditional philosophical reasons for interest in substitutional (...), namely, theories of truth and ontological commitment. (shrink)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  7
    Kristen A. Greer (2014). Extensionality in Natural Language Quantification: The Case of Many and Few. Linguistics and Philosophy 37 (4):315-351.
    This paper presents an extensional account of manyand few that explains data that have previously motivated intensional analyses of these quantifiers :599–620, 2000). The key insight is that their semantic arguments are themselves set intersections: the restrictor is the intersection of the predicates denoted by the N’ or the V’ and the restricted universe, U, and the scope is the intersection of the N’ and V’. Following Cohen, I assume that the universe consists of the union of alternatives to the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24.  48
    Massimiliano Carrara & Enrico Martino (2011). On the Infinite in Mereology with Plural Quantification. Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (1):54-62.
    In Lewis reconstructs set theory using mereology and plural quantification (MPQ). In his recontruction he assumes from the beginning that there is an infinite plurality of atoms, whose size is equivalent to that of the set theoretical universe. Since this assumption is far beyond the basic axioms of mereology, it might seem that MPQ do not play any role in order to guarantee the existence of a large infinity of objects. However, we intend to demonstrate that mereology and plural (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  25.  32
    Juha Kontinen & Jakub Szymanik (2008). A Remark on Collective Quantification. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 17 (2):131-140.
    We consider collective quantification in natural language. For many years the common strategy in formalizing collective quantification has been to define the meanings of collective determiners, quantifying over collections, using certain type-shifting operations. These type-shifting operations, i.e., lifts, define the collective interpretations of determiners systematically from the standard meanings of quantifiers. All the lifts considered in the literature turn out to be definable in second-order logic. We argue that second-order definable quantifiers are probably not expressive enough to formalize (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  26.  89
    Ori Simchen (2010). Polyadic Quantification Via Denoting Concepts. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (3):373-381.
    The question of the origin of polyadic expressivity is explored and the results are brought to bear on Bertrand Russell's 1903 theory of denoting concepts, which is the main object of criticism in his 1905 "On Denoting." It is shown that, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding, the background ontology of the earlier theory of denoting enables the full-blown expressive power of first-order polyadic quantification theory without any syntactic accommodation of scopal differences among denoting phrases such as 'all φ', 'every (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  73
    Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (2002). There Is A Problem with Substitutional Quantification. Theoria 68 (1):4-12.
    Whereas arithmetical quantification is substitutional in the sense that a some-quantification is true only if some instance of it is true, it does not follow (and, in fact, is not true) that an account of the truth-conditions of the sentences of the language of arithmetic can be given by a substitutional semantics. A substitutional semantics fails in a most fundamental fashion: it fails to articulate the truth-conditions of the quantifications with which it is concerned. This is what is (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28.  1
    Maria Bittner, NASSLLI 2016 Dynamic Semantics (5): Quantification.
    Featured course on "Dynamic Semantics" at NASSLLI 2016. Day 5: Quantification. Abstract: In discourse, quantifiers can function as antecedents or anaphors. We analyze a sample discourse in Dynamic Plural Logic (DPlL, van den Berg 1993, 1994), which represents not only current discourse referents, but also current relations by means of plural information states. This makes it possible to analyze quantification as structured discourse reference. Finally, the DPlL analysis is transposed into Update with Centering, to simplify the formalism and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  27
    Patrick Dieveney (2014). Quantification and Metaphysical Discourse. Theoria 80 (4):292-318.
    It is common in metaphysical discourse to make claims like “Everything is self-identical” in which “everything” is intended to range over everything. This sort of “unrestricted” generality appears central to metaphysical discourse. But there is debate whether such generality, which appears to involve quantification over an all-inclusive domain, is even meaningful. To address this concern, Shaughan Lavine and Vann McGee supply competing accounts of the generality expressed by this use of “everything.” I argue that, from the perspective of the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  40
    Takashi Yagisawa (2012). Unrestricted Quantification and Reality: Reply to Kim. [REVIEW] Acta Analytica 27 (1):77-79.
    In my book, Worlds and Individuals, Possible and Otherwise , I use the novel idea of modal tense to respond to a number of arguments against modal realism. Peter van Inwagen’s million-carat-diamond objection is one of them. It targets the version of modal realism by David Lewis and exploits the fact that Lewis accepts absolutely unrestricted quantification. The crux of my response is to use modal tense to neutralize absolutely unrestricted quantification. Seahwa Kim says that even when equipped (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  29
    Bert Mosselmans (2008). Aristotle's Logic and the Quest for the Quantification of the Predicate. Foundations of Science 13 (3-4):195-198.
    This paper examines the quest for the quantification of the predicate, as discussed by W.S. Jevons, and relates it to the discussion about universals and particulars between Plato and Aristotle. We conclude that the quest for the quantification of the predicate can only be achieved by stripping the syllogism from its metaphysical heritage.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  32.  53
    John Bacon (1979). The Logical Form of Perception Sentences. Synthese 41 (2):271 - 308.
    The perceptual logic of j hintikka and r thomason is imbedded in a more general framework of quantification over individual-concepts. two intensional predicates for physical individuation and perceptual individuation are required in place of thomason's two variable-sorts. objectual perception of x by s is then definable as "for some y there is a perceptually individuated object z, in fact identical with x, such that s perceives that y is z.".
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33.  43
    Stephen Donaho (2002). Standard Quantification Theory in the Analysis of English. Journal of Philosophical Logic 31 (6):499-526.
    Standard first-order logic plus quantifiers of all finite orders ("SFOLω") faces four well-known difficulties when used to characterize the behavior of certain English quantifier phrases. All four difficulties seem to stem from the typed structure of SFOLω models. The typed structure of SFOLω models is in turn a product of an asymmetry between the meaning of names and the meaning of predicates, the element-set asymmetry. In this paper we examine a class of models in which this asymmetry of meaning is (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  35
    Mark Textor (2005). Truth Via Sentential Quantification. Dialogue 44 (3):539-550.
    This paper is a critical evaluation of Kuenne's attempt to define truth via quantification into the position of a sentence.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  4
    Peter Hallman (2009). Proportions in Time: Interactions of Quantification and Aspect. [REVIEW] Natural Language Semantics 17 (1):29-61.
    Proportional quantification and progressive aspect interact in English in revealing ways. This paper investigates these interactions and draws conclusions about the semantics of the progressive and telicity. In the scope of the progressive, the proportion named by a proportionality quantifier (e.g. most in The software was detecting most errors) must hold in every subevent of the event so described, indicating that a predicate in the scope of the progressive is interpreted as an internally homogeneous activity. Such an activity interpretation (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  36.  26
    Mirosław Szatkowski (2011). Partly Free Semantics for Some Anderson-Like Ontological Proofs. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 20 (4):475-512.
    Anderson-like ontological proofs, studied in this paper, employ contingent identity, free principles of quantification of the 1st order variables and classical principles of quantification of the 2nd order variables. All these theories are strongly complete wrt. classes of modal structures containing families of world-varying objectual domains of the 1st order and constant conceptual domains of the 2nd order. In such structures, terms of the 1st order receive only rigid extensions, which are elements of the union of all (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37.  10
    Peter Schroeder-Heister (2014). The Calculus of Higher-Level Rules, Propositional Quantification, and the Foundational Approach to Proof-Theoretic Harmony. Studia Logica 102 (6):1185-1216.
    We present our calculus of higher-level rules, extended with propositional quantification within rules. This makes it possible to present general schemas for introduction and elimination rules for arbitrary propositional operators and to define what it means that introductions and eliminations are in harmony with each other. This definition does not presuppose any logical system, but is formulated in terms of rules themselves. We therefore speak of a foundational account of proof-theoretic harmony. With every set of introduction rules a canonical (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  18
    James Franklin, Accountancy and the Quantification of Rights: Giving Moral Values Legal Teeth. Centre for an Ethical Society Papers.
    If a company’s share price rises when it sacks workers, or when it makes money from polluting the environment, it would seem that the accounting is not being done correctly. Real costs are not being paid. People’s ethical claims, which in a smaller-scale case would be legally enforceable, are not being measured in such circumstances. This results from a mismatch between the applied ethics tradition and the practice of the accounting profession. Applied ethics has mostly avoided quantification of rights, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  18
    Charles F. Kielkopf (1977). Quantifiers in Ontology. Studia Logica 36 (4):301-307.
    This paper is a reaction to G. Küng's and J. T. Canty's Substitutional Quantification and Leniewskian quantifiers'Theoria 36 (1970), 165–182. I reject their arguments that quantifiers in Ontology cannot be referentially interpreted but I grant that there is what can be called objectual — referential interpretation of quantifiers and that because of the unrestricted quantification in Ontology the quantifiers in Ontology should not be given a so-called objectual-referential interpretation. I explain why I am in agreement with (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  40.  18
    Mireille Staschok (2008). Non-Traditional Squares of Predication and Quantification. Logica Universalis 2 (1):77-85.
    . Three logical squares of predication or quantification, which one can even extend to logical hexagons, will be presented and analyzed. All three squares are based on ideas of the non-traditional theory of predication developed by Sinowjew and Wessel. The authors also designed a non-traditional theory of quantification. It will be shown that this theory is superfluous, since it is based on an obscure difference between two kinds of quantification and one pays a high price for differentiating (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  9
    Edward Martin (1982). Referentiality in Frege'sgrundgesetze. History and Philosophy of Logic 3 (2):151-164.
    In ??28-31 of his Grundgesetze der Arithmetik, Frege forwards a demonstration that every correctly formed name of his formal language has a reference. Examination of this demonstration, it is here argued, reveals an incompleteness in a procedure of contextual definition. At the heart of this incompleteness is a difference between Frege?s criteria of referentiality and the possession of reference as it is ordinarily conceived. This difference relates to the distinction between objectual and substitutional quantification and Frege?s vacillation between (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  42.  14
    John A. Barnden & Kankanahalli Srinivas (1996). Quantification Without Variables in Connectionism. Minds and Machines 6 (2):173-201.
    Connectionist attention to variables has been too restricted in two ways. First, it has not exploited certain ways of doing without variables in the symbolic arena. One variable-avoidance method, that of logical combinators, is particularly well established there. Secondly, the attention has been largely restricted to variables in long-term rules embodied in connection weight patterns. However, short-lived bodies of information, such as sentence interpretations or inference products, may involve quantification. Therefore short-lived activation patterns may need to achieve the effect (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  4
    Gregory McColm (2004). Guarded Quantification in Least Fixed Point Logic. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 13 (1):61-110.
    We develop a variant of Least Fixed Point logic based on First Orderlogic with a relaxed version of guarded quantification. We develop aGame Theoretic Semantics of this logic, and find that under reasonableconditions, guarding quantification does not reduce the expressibilityof Least Fixed Point logic. But we also find that the guarded version ofa least fixed point algorithm may have a greater time complexity thanthe unguarded version, by a linear factor.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Heidi Savage, The Contingencies of Ontological Commitment.
    Some time ago, Quine once asserted that to be is to be value of a variable. This entails that if one wishes to accept any theory as true, we must be committed to the existence of those objects over which we existentially quantify. I suggest instead that we are committed to the existence only of those things that have at least some intrinsic contingent properties. Any discourse that involves existential quantification over entities whose instrinsic properties can change will, of (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. Gabriel Uzquiano, Quantification and Quantifiers. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  46. Saul A. Kripke (2013). Fregean Quantification Theory. Journal of Philosophical Logic (5):1-3.
    Frege’s system of first-order logic is presented in a contemporary framework. The system described is distinguished by economy of expression and an unusual syntax.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47. John-Michael Kuczynski (2010). Boguslawski's Analysis of Quantification in Natural Language. Journal of Pragmatics 42 (10):2836-2844.
    The semantic rules governing natural language quantifiers (e.g. "all," "some," "most") neither coincide with nor resemble the semantic rules governing the analogues of those expressions that occur in the artificial languages used by semanticists. Some semanticists, e.g. Peter Strawson, have put forth data-consistent hypotheses as to the identities of the semantic rules governing some natural-language quantifiers. But, despite their obvious merits, those hypotheses have been universally rejected. In this paper, it is shown that those hypotheses are indeed correct. Moreover, data-consistent (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  79
    Graham Oppy (1997). Pantheism, Quantification and Mereology. The Monist 80 (2):320-336.
    I provide a classification of varieties of pantheism. I argue that there are two different kinds of commitments that pantheists have. On the one hand, there is an ontological commitment to the existence of a sum of all things. On the other hand, there is an ideological commitment: either collectively or distributively, the sum of all things is divine.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49. Eric T. Olson (2012). Identity, Quantification, and Number. In T. Tahko (ed.), Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics. Cambridge University Press 66-82.
    E. J. Lowe and others argue that there can be 'uncountable' things admitting of no numerical description. This implies that there can be something without there being at least one such thing, and that things can be identical without being one or nonidentical without being two. The clearest putative example of uncountable things is portions of homogeneous stuff or 'gunk'. The paper argues that there is a number of portions of gunk if there is any gunk at all, and that (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  50.  55
    Sarah-Jane Leslie (2008). 'If', 'Unless', and Quantification. In R. Stainton & C. Viger (eds.), Compositionality, Context, and Semantic Values.
    Higginbotham argues that conditionals embedded under quantifiers constitute a counterexample to the thesis that natural language is semantically compositional. More recently, Higginbotham and von Fintel and Iatridou have suggested that compositionality can be upheld, but only if we assume the validity of the principle of Conditional Excluded Middle. I argue that these authors’ proposals deliver unsatisfactory results for conditionals that, at least intuitively, do not appear to obey Conditional Excluded Middle. Further, there is no natural way to extend their accounts (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000