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will not be published.

 
II 322
Ontology/Necessity/Theory T1/Peacocke: we accept the abstractions as unanalyzed predicates for the use in logical axioms and rules of inference.
We assume properties not as entities that meet the object language - i.e. not that there is no one.
>Object language, >Properties.
Even though the object language has no quantification over objects, a finite treatment of infinitely many singular terms requires an attribution of entities:
E.g.
denote (Cleopatra) = Cleopatra
the (father of t1) = father of the (t1 )
Tr (t1 is greater than t2) ↔ den(t1) is greater than den(t2) -
(((s) see the original text: underlined: wellformed phrases).
Wiggins: but this identity is needed only if one assumes properties in the object language.
>Denotation, >Reference.

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.