Russell Reductio Redux

J. Studd
{"title":"Russell Reductio Redux","authors":"J. Studd","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198719649.003.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"By far and away the strongest argument against there being an absolutely comprehensive domain of quantification comes from the set-theoretic paradoxes. The argument from indefinite extensibility can be rigorously regimented with the help of schematic or modal resources. After dispensing with the charge that the argument relies on an incoherent conception of set, this chapter offers a defence of its premisses. Advocates of the orthodox absolutist means to defend absolute generality have yet to give a non-ad-hoc response to the paradoxes. A heterodox absolutist view, which seeks to give an absolutist-friendly account of indefinite extensibility, leads to severe problems with impure set theory. The chapter closes by considering a revenge problem for hybrid relativists, who take modalized quantifiers to achieve absolute generality.","PeriodicalId":272038,"journal":{"name":"Everything, more or less","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Everything, more or less","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198719649.003.0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

By far and away the strongest argument against there being an absolutely comprehensive domain of quantification comes from the set-theoretic paradoxes. The argument from indefinite extensibility can be rigorously regimented with the help of schematic or modal resources. After dispensing with the charge that the argument relies on an incoherent conception of set, this chapter offers a defence of its premisses. Advocates of the orthodox absolutist means to defend absolute generality have yet to give a non-ad-hoc response to the paradoxes. A heterodox absolutist view, which seeks to give an absolutist-friendly account of indefinite extensibility, leads to severe problems with impure set theory. The chapter closes by considering a revenge problem for hybrid relativists, who take modalized quantifiers to achieve absolute generality.
罗素还原法
到目前为止,反对存在一个绝对全面的量化领域的最有力的论据来自集合论悖论。无限可扩展性的论证可以借助示意图或模态资源严格地加以规范。在排除了对论证依赖于不连贯的集合概念的指责之后,本章为其前提提供了辩护。捍卫绝对普遍性的正统绝对主义手段的倡导者尚未对这些悖论作出非特别的回应。一个非正统的绝对主义观点,试图给出一个绝对主义友好的无限可扩展性的解释,导致了不纯集合论的严重问题。本章以考虑混合相对主义者的复仇问题作为结束,混合相对主义者采用形式化量词来达到绝对的普遍性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信