Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Propositions, philosophy: propositions are defined as the meanings of sentences, whereby a sentence is interpreted as a character string, which must still be interpreted in relation to a situation or a speaker. E.g. “I am hungry” has a different meaning from the mouth of each new speaker. On the other hand, the sentence “I am hungry” from the mouth of the speaker, who first expressed the German sentence, has the same meaning as the German sentence uttered by him. See also meaning, propositional attitudes, identity conditions, opacity, utterances, sentences.
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

Books on Amazon
I 16 (33)
Proposition/Chisholm: that, what changes when someone else says "I'm hungry" - Thesis: there is no proposition of the 1st person. "I'm F" - no properties like "sitting-next-to-someone". "living opposite" (impure predication) - no "nonplatonic entities": "the property of being identical with this thing" - primary form: not accepting propositions but self-attribution properties.
I 19
Proposition: Subtype of facts.
I 20
Properties/Chisholm: Problem: E.g. ""French" is not applicable to itself ": here one cannot say that it has the property, not to itself ... otherwise paradox - solution:" ... has not the property ... "- not every proposition corresponds to a property, therefore not every sentence expresses a proposition.
I 27
Proposition/Chisholm: if there is no property of the "sitting-next-to-someone", then there is also no proposition "someone sits next to this man", instead we can define them by properties, we just do not need them in addition.
I 66
Proposition/Chisholm: from the proposition "There is something that is F" does not follow that there is the property of being such that there is something that is F (E.g. round square). - Accepting a proposition: Considering that something ...
I 86
Proposition/Chisholm: real: e.g. "All human beings are mortal", "There are mountains", "two and two are four" but not: "Socrates is wise", "Emil stands" - attribution: no "accepting of propositions" - "Proper name-fallacy". To believe that there is a proposition "Emil stands" - just as unlikely as the property "to be identical with Emil".
I 124
Proposition/Chisholm: involves an eternal object (property or relation), and also a state of affairs. Sentence: does not involve an eternal object.

Chi I
R. Chisholm
Die erste Person Frankfurt 1992

Roderick M. Chisholm
Erkenntnistheorie Graz 2004

> Counter arguments against Chisholm
> Counter arguments in relation to Propositions

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-24