Treatise on Jaina philosophy; critical edition.

Als Schiiler Ernst Mallys hatte ich das Gluck, mitzuerleben, wie sich urn 1930 die Philosophie Mallys von der reichen Vielfalt der Meinongschen Lehre zu eigenen geschlosseneren Konturen wandelte. Es folgten Jahre intensiven Weiterbaus bis zum Todesjahr 1944. Durch widrige Um­ sHinde, Krankheit und Krieg, kamen Mallys Erkenntnisse nicht zu brei­ terer Wirkung. Urn so erfreulicher ist es, daB im Jahre des 25. Todestages und 90. Geburtstages ein Kreis Interessierter zusammenfand, urn ein Opus postumum MalIys, ein groBes logisches Fragment, von Mally (...) einmal Schwanberger Logik genannt, herauszugeben, das in den letzten Lebens­ jahren des Philosophen entstand. Auf Anregung von Professor Dr. Roderick M. Chisholm (Brown University, Rhode Island) wird gleich­ zeitig auch ein 'basic work' der Deontik, Mallys Grundgesetze des Sol/ens aus dem Jahr 1926, im Neudruck publiziert. Damit ist auch Gelegenheit gegeben, eine erste zusammenfassende Darstellung uber die Philosophie Mallys mit Schriftenverzeichnis etc. zu veroffentlichen, so daB diese Edition auch als Gedenkschrift fUr Mally gelten kann. (shrink)

In 1926, Mally proposed the first formal deontic system. As Mally and others soon realized, this system had some rather strange consequences. We show that the strangeness of Mally's system is not so much due to Mally's informal deontic principles as to the fact that he formalized those principles in terms of the propositional calculus. If they are formalized in terms of relevant logic rather than classical logic, one obtains a system which is related to Anderson's relevant deontic logic and (...) not nearly as strange as Mally's own system. (shrink)

Mally succeeded in developing two theories of properties, passing from the distinction between Sein and Sosein (1904) to the theory of nuclear and extranuclear properties (1912). According to the first one, the Sein of an object depends on the Sosein of the object, whereas the Sein of the Sosein of an object does not depend on the Sein of the object. These Principles allow the distinction between possible and impossible objects (in respect to Sosein) and between real and ideal objects (...) (in respect to Sein). In his second theory, Mally distinguishes between first order properties that determine the object, and higher order properties, like difference or simplicity, ending with the distinction between impossible objects and non-satisfiable objects. (shrink)

Mally succeeded in developing two theories of properties, passing from the distinction between Sein and Sosein (1904) to the theory of nuclear and extranuclear properties (1912). According to the first one, the Sein of an object depends on the Sosein of the object, whereas the Sein of the Sosein of an object does not depend on the Sein of the object. These Principles allow the distinction between possible and impossible objects (in respect to Sosein) and between real and ideal objects (...) (in respect to Sein). In his second theory, Mally distinguishes between first order properties that determine the object, and higher order properties, like difference or simplicity, ending with the distinction between impossible objects and non-satisfiable objects. (shrink)

This paper analyzes Mally’s system of deontic logic, introduced in his The Basic Laws of Ought: Elements of the Logic of Willing (1926). We discuss Mally’s text against the background of some contributions in the literature which show that Mally’s axiomatic system for deontic logic is flawed, in so far as it derives, for an arbitrary A, the theorem “A ought to be the case if and only if A is the case”, which represents a collapse of obligation. We then (...) try to sort out and understand which axioms are responsible for the collapse and consider two ways of amending Mally’s system: (i) by changing its original underlying logical basis, that is classical logic, and (ii) by modifying Mally’s axioms. (shrink)

The consistent formalization of Meinong's object theory in recent mathematical logic requires either plural modes of predication, or distinct categories of nuclear or constitutive and extranuclear or nonconstitutive properties. The plural modes of predication approach is rejected because it is reducible to the nuclear extranuclear property distinction, but not conversely, and because the nuclear extranuclear property distinction offers a more satisfactory solution to object theory paradoxes.

In 1926, Mally presented the first formal system of deontic logic. His system had several consequences which Mally regarded as surprising but defensible. It also, however, has the consequence that A is obligatory if and only if A is the case, which is unacceptable from the point of view of any reasonable deontic logic. We describe Mally's system and discuss how it might reasonably be repaired.

In this paper, I respond to D. Jacquette's paper, "Mally's Heresy and the Logic of Meinong's Object Theory" (History and Philosophy of Logic, 10 (1989): 1-14), in which it is claimed that Ernst Mally's distinction between two modes of predication, as it is employed in the theory of abstract objects, is reducible to, and analyzable in terms of, a single mode of predication plus the distinction between nuclear and extranuclear properties. The argument against Jacquette's claims consists of counterexamples to his (...) reductions and analyses. Reasons are offered for thinking that no such reduction/analysis of the kind Jacquette proposes could be successful. (shrink)

This article considers the contribution of Ernst Mally to the theory of objects, namely he introduced a distinction of two types of properties (determinations) — formal and extraformal, that allowed Meinongian theory of objects to provide a satisfactory response to the criticism of Bertrand Russell, related to the question of the existence of the golden mountain. According to Meinong, object's so-being (Sosein) is logically independent of its ontic status (Sein). In this case Russell asks, how the existent golden mountain can (...) be existent, golden and a mountain, because golden mountains do not exit (as well as round squares). So it was obvious that the independence of Sosein from Sein thesis should be revised. That's why Mally made a remark that the properties that make object's Sosein are extraformal. Later these ideas have formed the basis of the contemporary study of nonexistent objects, the basis of the theories of Terens Parsons, Richard Routley etc. In particular Parsons's distinction of nuclear and extranuclear properties is a revised version of Mally's distinction.In addition, the article analyzes Ernst Mally's critics of epistemological idealism and its connection with the famous psychologism dispute in logic and semantics in the late 19th and early 20th century. This dispute is more associated with the works of G. Frege and E. Husserl, which accused of psychologism many representatives of Brentano's School. Particularly Alexius Meinong was also called a psychologist. That's it's important to find out, which side was Mally on in this dispute. (shrink)

Ernst Mally’s Gegenstandstheoretische Grundlagen der Logik und Logistik (1912) proposes that the abstract object “the circle” does not satisfy the properties of circles, but instead “determines” the class of circles. In this he anticipates the notion of “encoding” that Edward Zalta proposes for his theory of Abstract Objects. It is argued that Mally did anticipate the notion of “encoding”, but sees it as a way of taking the concept as the subject of a proposition, rather than as a primitive notion (...) in the theory of a new ontological category of abstract objects, as Zalta does. (shrink)

In 1926, Mally presented the first formal system of deontic logic. His system had several consequences which Mally regarded as surprising but defensible. It also, however, has the consequence that A is obligatory if and only if A is the case, which is unacceptable from the point of view of any reasonable deontic logic. We describe Mally's system and discuss how it might reasonably be repaired.

In 1926, Mally presented the first formal system of deontic logic. His system had several consequences which Mally regarded as surprising but defensible. It also, however, has the consequence that A is obligatory if and only if A is the case, which is unacceptable from the point of view of any reasonable deontic logic. We describe Mally's system and discuss how it might reasonably be repaired.

In this paper, the author analyzes critically some of the ideas found in Karel Lambert's recent book, Meinong and the Principle of Independence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Lambert attempts to forge a link between the ideas of Meinong and the free logicians. The link comes in the form of a principle which, Lambert says, these philosophers adopt, namely, Mally's Principle of Independence, which Mally himself later abandoned. Instead of following Mally and attempting to formulate the principle in the material (...) mode as the claim that an object can have properties without having any sort of being, Lambert formulates the principle in the formal mode, as (something equivalent to) the rejection of the traditional constraint on the principle of predication. The principle of predication is that a formula of the form Fa' is true iff the general term F' is true of the object denoted by the object term a'. The traditional constraint on this predication principle is that for the sentence Fa' to be true, not only must the object term have a denotation, but it must also denote an object that has being. According to Lambert, the free logicians violate this constraint by suggesting that Fa' can be true even if the object term has no denotation, whereas Meinong violates this constraint by proposing Fa' can be true even when the object term denotes an object that has no being. Lambert then tries to `vindicate' the Principle of Independence, thereby justifying both the work of the free logicians and Meinong. (shrink)

In this paper, the author compares passages from two philosophically important texts and concludes that they have fundamental ideas in common. What makes this comparison and conclusion interesting is that the texts come from two different traditions in philosophy, the analytic and the phenomenological. In 1912, Ernst Mally published *Gegenstandstheoretische Grundlagen der Logik und Logistik*, an analytic work containing a combination of formal logic and metaphysics. In 1913, Edmund Husserl published *Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie*, a seminal (...) work in phenomenology in which noemata are defined and given a crucial role in directing our mental states. In the passages from these two texts reproduced below, the author shows that the abstract `determinates' postulated by Mally in 1912 are assigned much the same role that Husserl assigned to noemata in 1913. Though Mally's determinates are not as highly structured as Husserl's noemata, they have a feature that explains how they manage to play the role assigned to them. The corresponding feature is missing, or at least, not emphasized in Husserl's account of noemata. Therefore, insights from both philosophers, and thus from both the analytic and phenomenological traditions, are needed to give a more complete account of directed mental states. (shrink)

In a recent book, K. Lambert argues that philosophers should adopt Mally's Principle of Independence (the principle that an object can have properties even though it lacks being of any kind) by abandoning a constraint on true predications, namely, that all of the singular terms in a true predication denote objects which have being. The constraint may be abandoned either by supposing there is a true predication in which one of the terms denotes a beingless object (Meinong) or by supposing (...) there is a true predication in which one of the terms denotes nothing at all (free logic). However, Lambert's conclusions can be undermined by showing that the data he produces in support of his position can be explained by either of two recent theories of abstract and nonexistent objects, both of which are couched in languages which conform to the traditional constraint. (shrink)

We discuss three aspects of the intuitionistic reformulation of Mally’s deontic logic that was recently proposed ). First, this reformulation is more similar to Standard Deontic Logic than appears at first sight: like Standard Deontic Logic, it is Kanger reducible and Anderson reducible to alethic logic and it has a semantical interpretation that can be read in deontic terms. Second, this reformulation has an extension that provides 100% of the theorems stated by Mally himself. Third, it is interesting to view (...) Mally’s original deontic logic as an extension of this reformulation. (shrink)

In a recent book, K. Lambert argues that philosophers should adopt Mally's Principle of Independence (the principle that an object can have properties even though it lacks being of any kind) by abandoning a constraint on true predications, namely, that all of the singular terms in a true predication denote objects which have being. The constraint may be abandoned either by supposing there is a true predication in which one of the terms denotes a beingless object (Meinong) or by supposing (...) there is a true predication in which one of the terms denotes nothing at all (free logic). However, Lambert's conclusions can be undermined by showing that the data he produces in support of his position can be explained by either of two recent theories of abstract and nonexistent objects, both of which are couched in languages which conform to the traditional constraint. (shrink)

In this paper, the author responds to D. Jacquette's paper, "Mally's Heresy and the Logic of Meinong's Object Theory'' (History and Philosophy of Logic, 10, 1989, 1-14), in which it is claimed that Ernst Mally's distinction between two modes of predication, as it is employed in the theory of abstract objects, is reducible to, and analyzable in terms of, a single mode of predication plus the distinction between nuclear and extranuclear properties. The argument against Jacquette's claims consists of counterexamples to (...) his reductions and analyses. Reasons are offered for thinking that no such reduction/analysis of the kind Jacquette proposes could be successful. (shrink)

In 1926, Ernst Mally proposed a number of deontic postulates. He added them as axioms to classical propositional logic. The resulting system was unsatisfactory because it had the consequence that A is the case if and only if it is obligatory that A. We present an intuitionistic reformulation of Mally’s deontic logic. We show that this system does not provide the just-mentioned objectionable theorem while most of the theorems that Mally considered acceptable are still derivable. The resulting system is unacceptable (...) as a deontic logic, but it does make sense as a lax logic in the modern sense of the word. (shrink)

We present a new axiomatization of the deontic fragment of Anderson's relevant deontic logic, give an Andersonian reduction of a relevant version of Mally's deontic logic previously discussed in this journal, study the effect of adding propositional quantification to Anderson's system, and discuss the meaning of Anderson's propositional constant in a wide range of Andersonian deontic systems.

Presented here are translations of two essays of the Austrian logician, philosopher and experimental psychologist Ernst Mally, originally delivered at the Third International Congress of Philosophy in Heidelberg, Germany. Both essays conclude with discussion between Mally and Kurt Grelling. Mally was a student of Alexius Meinong and a contributor to logical investigations in the field of object theory (Gegenstandstheorie). In these essays, Mally introduces a vital distinction between formal and extra-formal ?determinations? (Bestimmungen), and he argues that formal determinations are not (...) part of the identity conditions for intended objects, but provide the basis for a theory of pure logical and mathematical relations. Mally then proceeds to develop a formal logic of formal and extra-formal determinations, whose interrelations of ontic and modal predications provide an analysis of fundamental object theory concepts. (shrink)

Some years ago, Lokhorst proposed an intuitionistic reformulation of Mally's deontic logic. This reformulation was unsatisfactory, because it provided a striking theorem that Mally himself did not mention. In this paper, we present an alternative reformulation of Mally's deontic logic that does not provide this theorem.