The Doctrine of Descent in Jerónimo Pardo: Meaning, Inference, Truth

In I. Angelelli & M. Cerezo (eds.), Studies on the History of Logic. Walter de Gruyter (1996)
Authors
Paloma Perez-Ilzarbe
University of Navarra
Abstract
The complexity of the scholastic view of descent stems from the attempt to find a reply to three different questions at the same time: those pertaining to the meaning of propositions, the relationships of inference between propositions, and the truth conditions of propositions. From each of these issues there arises a different sequence of developments to this doctrine, each of which has its own problems and solutions. Initially, the concept of descent is introduced in response to the problem of determining the meaning of quantified propositions. This is the first axis of the development of the doctrine of descent, according to which descent consists of the construction of individual propositions which make explicit the meaning of the quantified proposition. The appearance of these new propositions, however, gives rise to the second axis in the development of the doctrine of descent. As soon as we have this multiplicity of singular propositions, it is possible to forget where they came from and how, simply considering the problem of their logical relationship with the original quantified proposition. This is how descent comes to be viewed not as an analysis of the meaning of the proposition, but as a relationship of consequence: that which could be established between a quantified proposition and a set of singular propositions. Lastly, when descent is considered as a relationship of consequence, it is possible to develop this doctrine in a third direction, given that this relationship between a quantified proposition and a set of singular propositions can be used as a means of showing the truth or falsehood of the quantified proposition. Pardo’s text is a good example of the problems which the concept of descent inevitably encounters when it is approached from three points of view which are superimposed upon each other without regard for their radical diversity.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 33,723
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Time and Propositions in Jerónimo Pardo.Paloma Pérez-Ilzarbe - 2000 - In I. Angelelli & P. Pérez-Ilzarbe (eds.), Medieval and Renaissance Logic in Spain. G. Olms. pp. 54--251.
John Buridan and Jerónimo Pardo on the Notion of Propositio.Paloma Pérez-Ilzarbe - 2003 - In R. L. Friedman & S. Ebbesen (eds.), John Buridan and Beyond. Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters. pp. 89--153.
Singular Propositions and Modal Logic.Christopher Menzel - 1993 - Philosophical Topics 21 (2):113-148.
Wittgenstein, Anti-Realism and Mathematical Propositions.Jacques Bouveresse - 1992 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 42:133-160.
Belief and Degrees of Belief.Franz Huber - 2009 - In F. Huber & C. Schmidt-Petri (eds.), Degrees of Belief. Springer.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-01-27

Total downloads
0

Recent downloads (6 months)
0

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes

Sign in to use this feature