Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
IV 144
Metalanguage/Object Language/Tarski/Black: the distinction has to be heeded very thoroughly. Example (c) The statement in italics is wrong - then:
(1) c is identical with the statement "c is false".
On the other hand you cannot deny:
(2) "c is false" is true iff c is false - from (1) and (2) follows:
(3) c is true iff c is false.
This is a contradiction.
Solution/Black: the contradiction arises, because the term "statement" is ambiguous (primary/secondary).
Then "the primary statement in italics is false" - (that is secondary) - with that, no primary statement itself is in italics. >Object language, >Description levels.
IV 145
T Def/Tarski/Black: Method: "true" is regarded as predicate of the object language - Important argument: the statement "S is true" then also belongs to the metalanguage.
IV 151
Metalanguage/Names/Black: Important argument: the metalanguage contains no rule for converting the names from the object language! It must be seen as a kind of logical coincidence that E.g. names were always enclosed in commas. No structural relationship could be found between a word in the object language and its name in the metalanguage. >Proper names, >Rules, >Singular terms.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.