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will not be published.

 
I 16ff
Negation/Geach: the problem with compound expressions is always the negation (with "all", "some").
>All/Geach, >Each/every/Geach, >Sentences, >Quantification, cf. >Someone/Geach.
I, 45ff
Negation/Geach: in the subject-predicate-sentence: negation is only possible from the predicate, not from the subject.
Modernity: quantification: also the negation of "there is" is possible.
New: also subject negation is possible: E.g. "not everyone is ..."
I 75
Negation/Russell: cannot be applied as a primitive term to propositions, therefore: All x are F: Negation: some x are not F ".
Negation: not via a sentence: "Do not open the door" is on the same level as "Open the door".
Negation is not "logical secondary".
>Negation/Frege, >Thought/Frege.
Asymmetry: only with identifying predicates: e.g. the same man/not the same man - subject negation: "not everyone is ..." - predicate negation: Socrates is not ... ".
Negation is not parasitic to affirmation. - There is no added meaning. - Otherwise there would be a summation with double negation.
>Double negation.
I 260
Negation/assertion/Geach: propositions can be put forward without asserting them. For example, "p > q" therefore we need a negation which is not polar to the assertion.
>Proposition, >Assertion.

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.