结构化命题论

IF 2.8 1区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Andrew Bacon
{"title":"结构化命题论","authors":"Andrew Bacon","doi":"10.1215/00318108-10294409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper argues that the theory of structured propositions is not undermined by the Russell-Myhill paradox. I develop a theory of structured propositions in which the Russell-Myhill paradox doesn’t arise: the theory does not involve ramification or compromises to the underlying logic, but rather rejects common assumptions, encoded in the notation of the λ-calculus, about what properties and relations can be built. I argue that the structuralist had independent reasons to reject these underlying assumptions. The theory is given both a diagrammatic representation and a logical representation in a novel language. In the latter half of the paper I turn to some technical questions concerning the treatment of quantification and demonstrate various equivalences between the diagrammatic and logical representations and a fragment of the λ-calculus.","PeriodicalId":48129,"journal":{"name":"PHILOSOPHICAL REVIEW","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Theory of Structured Propositions\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Bacon\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/00318108-10294409\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper argues that the theory of structured propositions is not undermined by the Russell-Myhill paradox. I develop a theory of structured propositions in which the Russell-Myhill paradox doesn’t arise: the theory does not involve ramification or compromises to the underlying logic, but rather rejects common assumptions, encoded in the notation of the λ-calculus, about what properties and relations can be built. I argue that the structuralist had independent reasons to reject these underlying assumptions. The theory is given both a diagrammatic representation and a logical representation in a novel language. In the latter half of the paper I turn to some technical questions concerning the treatment of quantification and demonstrate various equivalences between the diagrammatic and logical representations and a fragment of the λ-calculus.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PHILOSOPHICAL REVIEW\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PHILOSOPHICAL REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/00318108-10294409\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PHILOSOPHICAL REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00318108-10294409","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为结构命题理论并没有受到罗素-迈希尔悖论的影响。我发展了一个结构化命题的理论,在这个理论中不会出现罗素-迈希尔悖论:这个理论不涉及对底层逻辑的分支或妥协,而是拒绝那些用λ微积分符号编码的关于可以建立哪些属性和关系的常见假设。我认为结构主义者有独立的理由拒绝这些潜在的假设。用一种新的语言给出了该理论的图解表示和逻辑表示。在本文的后半部分,我转向一些关于量化处理的技术问题,并证明了图解和逻辑表示与λ-微积分片段之间的各种等价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Theory of Structured Propositions
This paper argues that the theory of structured propositions is not undermined by the Russell-Myhill paradox. I develop a theory of structured propositions in which the Russell-Myhill paradox doesn’t arise: the theory does not involve ramification or compromises to the underlying logic, but rather rejects common assumptions, encoded in the notation of the λ-calculus, about what properties and relations can be built. I argue that the structuralist had independent reasons to reject these underlying assumptions. The theory is given both a diagrammatic representation and a logical representation in a novel language. In the latter half of the paper I turn to some technical questions concerning the treatment of quantification and demonstrate various equivalences between the diagrammatic and logical representations and a fragment of the λ-calculus.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PHILOSOPHICAL REVIEW
PHILOSOPHICAL REVIEW PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: In continuous publication since 1892, the Philosophical Review has a long-standing reputation for excellence and has published many papers now considered classics in the field, such as W. V. O. Quine"s “Two Dogmas of Empiricism,” Thomas Nagel"s “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” and the early work of John Rawls. The journal aims to publish original scholarly work in all areas of analytic philosophy, with an emphasis on material of general interest to academic philosophers, and is one of the few journals in the discipline to publish book reviews.
×
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