Hermann Grassmann’s 1861 work [2] was probably the first attempt at an axiomatic approach to arithmetic. The historical significance of this work is enormous, even though the set of axioms has proven to be incomplete. Basing on the interpretation of Grassmann’s theory provided by Hao Wang in [4], I present its detailed discussion, define the class of models of Grassmann’s arithmetic and discuss a certain axiom system for integers, modeled on Grassmann’s theory. At the end I propose to modify the (...) set of axioms of Grassmann’s arithmetic, which consists in adding an elementary sentence and removing a non-elementary one. I prove that after this modification the only model of the theory up to isomorphism is the standard model. (shrink)

In 1931–1934 Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz formulated two versions of the theory of meaning (A1 and A2). Tarski showed that A2 allows synonymous names to exist with different denotations. Tarski and Ajdukiewicz found that this feature disparages the theory. The force of Tarski’s argument rests on the assumption that none of adequate theories of meaning allow synonymous names to exist with different denotations. In the first part of this paper we present an appropriate fragment of A2 and Tarski’s argument. In the second (...) part we consider an elementary interpreted language in which individual constants occur, but not functional symbols. For such a language we define semantically a relation of synonymity for simple names and show that it fulfills syntactical conditions formulated by Ajdukiewicz in A2 and allows synonymous names to exist with different denotations. (shrink)

W latach 1931-1934 Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz sformułował dwie wersje teorii znaczenia. Tarski wykazał, że druga wersja teorii dopuszcza moż- liwość istnienia równoznacznych nazw o różnej denotacji. Cecha ta zo- stała uznana przez Tarskiego i Ajdukiewicza za dyskwalifikującą teorię. W artykule dokonuję porównania obu wersji teorii, przede wszystkim ze względu na podstawową definicję wzajemnej wymienialności wyrażeń. Pokazuję, że wbrew rozpowszechnionej opinii zarzut Tarskiego dotyczy także pierwszej wersji teorii. Siła argumentu Tarskiego opiera się na założeniu, że żadna adekwatna teoria znaczenia nie może dopuszczać (...) istnienia równoznacznych nazw o różnej denotacji. Podejmuję dyskusję z tym stanowiskiem. (shrink)

Jerzy Perzanowski s ideas were based on an original blend of logic and ontology in what he called onto/logic, where the slash is meant to suggest a quotient of ontology by logic. Perzanowski began as a logician, his early works being on modal logic, then gradually shifted his interest to logical philosophy, meaning not so much philosophy of logic as philosophy informed by logic. Perzanowski was a rare breed of analytical philosopher who thought that a philosophical theory of everything (...) was worthwhile. In this systematic spirit, he began with method. He presented his method of total analysis and synthesis quite simply: reduce the object of research to its simplest possible constituents, and then combine them in some way. Better still, combine them in every possible way, thereby producing a space of possibilities analogous to (and in certain cases identical with) the logical space. Thus, analysis and synthesis differ from a trivial disassembly and reassembly.". (shrink)

Chciałem Go pożegnać. Kilkakrotnie próbowałem napisać choć parę słów. O Nim samym. Okazało się, że nie potrafię. Udało mi się tylko przedstawić Jego poglądy na reizm Tadeusza Kotarbińskiego, ale uczyniłem to gdzie indziej. Muszę tu poprzestać na ofiarowaniu Mu tego, co napisałem na Jego dziewięćdziesiąte urodziny, w osiemdziesięciolecie naszej przyjaźni.

Science and Convention: Essays on Henri Poincare's Philosophy of Science and The Conventionalist Tradition contains essays concerned with Henri Poincare's philosophy of science, physics in particular, and with the conventionalist tradition in philosophy that he revived and reshaped, simultaneously with, but independently of, Pierre Duhem. Separating five essays as chapters, the book discusses the main ideas of the philosophy (Essays 1 and 5), traces at least some of its historical background (Essays 1, 2, and 3), and provides some of its (...) developments (Essays 2 and 4). (shrink)

Resumo Este artigo analisa, as recentes versões, da objecção à existência de um fluxo do tempo, com base na pergunta: “Com que velocidade flui o tempo?”. O autor mostra que as soluções existentes para o problema não são plausíveis e, que em vez disso, a resolução deve ser encontrada numa nova concepção de fluxo temporal, que evite tais dificuldades. A teoria metafísica proposta desenvolve as ideias de Broad e Prior sob um novo enquadramento, que invalida a objecção resultante da questão (...) sobre o ritmo da passagem do tempo e das respostas “segundo a segundo”. Neste texto também se procura mostrar, que esta teoria metafísica, aqui proposta, possui outras virtudes que testemunham a seu favor. Palavras-chave : existência dinâmica, fluxo do tempo, presentismo, velocidade de passagem do tempoThe paper analyzes some recent versions of the objection to the existence of the flow of time based on the question: “How fast does time flow?”. It shows that the replies given to the problem are implausible and instead proposes a solution for the issue in the form of a conception of the flow of time which can avoid such a difficulty. The proposed metaphysical theory develops the ideas of Broad and Prior in a radical way and invalidates the objection resulting from the question about the rate of passage and answers “second per second”. The paper also tries to show that this metaphysical theory has other virtues which testify in favor of it. Keywords : flow of time; rate of time’s passage; presentism; dynamic existence. (shrink)

Journal Name: Philologus Issue: Ahead of print.

This book examines the fundamental issues in neuroscience from methodological and philosophical perspectives. The reader will learn about the methodological difficulties connected with the use of neuroscientific experiments in philosophical argumentation and about the nature of scientific explanation in neuroscience. In addition, the book includes case studies of several issues lying at the intersection of neuroscience and philosophy, such as theory of mind, self-consciousness, self-deception, depression, and morality.

The so-called ‘type method’ widely employed in biological taxonomy is often seen as conforming to the causal-historical theory of reference. In this paper, I argue for an alternative account of reference for biological nomenclature in which taxon names are understood as descriptive names. A descriptive name, as the concept came to be known from the work of Gareth Evans, is a referring expression introduced by a definite description. There are three main differences between the DN and the causal account. First, (...) according to the DN account, rather than fixing a name to a referent, the assignment of a type specimen to serve as the name-bearer for a taxon should be seen as performatively establishing a synonymy between a name and a definite description of the form “the taxon whose type is t”. Each taxon name is therefore associated with a criterion of application, a semantic rule that establishes the connection between the name and the descriptive content. This is the second major difference from the causal account: taxon names do have some descriptive content associated with them. The final locus of dissent concerns the strength of the modality resulting from the usage of taxon names. In order to address this point, I use the DN account to focus on the debate between Matt Haber and Joeri Witteveen concerning misidentification of type specimens, misapplication of names, and the truth conditions of Joseph LaPorte’s de dicto necessary sentence “Necessarily, any species with a type specimen contains its type specimen”. Using a pragmatic variant of the distinction between attributive and referential uses of descriptions, I argue that a metalinguistic version of the de dicto sentence is in fact falsified, as previously argued by Haber. (shrink)