Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

 
Books on Amazon
II 176
Independence / Logic / Cresswell: misunderstanding: independence of an axiom does not mean that you can discard it at will - e.g. an independence proof within the axiomatic propositional calculus, for example, the independence of (p v q)> (q v p). - Such proof indicates that one can give a semantic definition of an operator that meets all other axioms of disjunction, but is not commutative - but it does not show that disjunction itself is not commutative, and it also does not show that (p v q)> (q v p) is not a logical truth about classic disjunction.

Cr I
M. J. Cresswell
Semantical Essays (Possible worlds and their rivals) Dordrecht Boston 1988

Cr II
M. J. Cresswell
Structured Meanings Cambridge Mass. 1984


> Counter arguments against Cresswell



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-30