# Dictionary of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute

[german]

Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.

Enhanced Search:
Search term 1: Author or Term Search term 2: Author or Term

together with

The author or concept searched is found in the following 2 entries.
Disputed term/author/ism Author
Entry
Reference
Constructivism Quine XIII 33
Constructivism/Mathematics/Quine: (VsUniversals). Thesis: theorems that can be shown constructively should be preferred.
Def Constructivism/Mathematics/Quine: Thesis: any abstract object is specifiable.
Against:
Predicative Set Theory: is too weak to prove that there must be unspecifiable classes and unspecifiable real numbers.
Quantification/Variables/Quine: the quantification is different if it is certain that every object in the domain is specifiable. For example, the natural numbers are such a domain. This is because there is an Arabic number for each of them.
Def Substitutional Quantification/sQ/Quine: (Universal Quantification (x)): the formula preceding the quantifier becomes true under any grammatically permissible substitution for the letter "x".
Referential Quantification/refQ/Substitutional Quantification: For example, natural numbers: here both are the same.
>Substitutional Quantification/Quine.
On the other hand:
If not all objects can be specified:
If not all objects in a domain can be specified by singular terms of the language used, then the two types of quantification diverge.
For example, if the universal quantifier is fulfilled by all specifiable objects, but not by the non-specifiable ones, then the substitutional quantification is true and the referential quantification is false.
Existential Quantification/EQu/Substitutional Quantification/refQ/Quine: behaves accordingly.
XIII 35
Substitutional Quantification/Referential Quantification: diverge in the case of existential quantification if the formula is satisfied by some unspecifiable, but not by any specifiable one. Substitutional Quantification/Quine: is unrealistic for concrete objects.
Specifiability/Name/Namability/namable/Quine: Question: is each concrete object individually specifiable? For example every past or future bee, every atom and every electron? Yes, by numerical coordinates with rational numbers. But unlimited referential quantification is simply more natural here.
Predicative set theory: here substitutional quantification is more attractive and manageable because abstract objects are parasitic in relation to language, in a way that concrete objects are not.
Abstract/Charles Parsons/Quine: abstract objects are parasitic in relation to language, concrete objects are less parasitic.
Substitutional Quantification/Quine: does not simply eliminate abstract objects from ontology, but grants them a "thinner" kind of existence.
Abstract/Quine: expressions themselves are abstract, but not as wild as the inhabitants of higher set theory.
Substitutional Quantification/Quine: is a compromise with militant nominalism.
Abstract Objects/Quine: are then classes, like those of predicative set theory (RussellVs).
>Abstractness/Quine.
Substitutional Quantification/Referential Quantification/Parsons: has shown how both go together (Lit). By using two kinds of variables. Then you can also link them together (intertwine).
Problem/Russell: predicative set theory is inadequate for the classical mathematics of real numbers.
XIII 36
Real Numbers/Russell/Quine: their theory leads to unspecifiable real numbers and other unspecifiable classes. Substitutional Quantification/Quine: this problem did not lead to the substitutional quantification by itself.
Constructive Mathematics/Constructivism/QuineVsBrouwer: heated minds developed and still develop constructive mathematics that are suitable for all sciences.
Problem: this leads to unattractive deviations from standard logic.
Standard Logic/Constructivism/Quine: Experiments with standard logic: Weyl, Paul Lorenzen,
Erret Bishop. Hao Wang, Sol Feferman. These are solutions with predicative set theory together with artistic circles.
Problem: you do not know exactly how much mathematics scientists need.
Nominalism/Quine: we probably do not need nominalism through and through, but an attractive approach to it.

Quine I
W.V.O. Quine
Word and Object, Cambridge/MA 1960
German Edition:
Wort und Gegenstand Stuttgart 1980

Quine II
W.V.O. Quine
Theories and Things, Cambridge/MA 1986
German Edition:
Theorien und Dinge Frankfurt 1985

Quine III
W.V.O. Quine
Methods of Logic, 4th edition Cambridge/MA 1982
German Edition:
Grundzüge der Logik Frankfurt 1978

Quine V
W.V.O. Quine
The Roots of Reference, La Salle/Illinois 1974
German Edition:
Die Wurzeln der Referenz Frankfurt 1989

Quine VI
W.V.O. Quine
Pursuit of Truth, Cambridge/MA 1992
German Edition:

Quine VII
W.V.O. Quine
From a logical point of view Cambridge, Mass. 1953

Quine VII (a)
W. V. A. Quine
On what there is
In
From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA 1953

Quine VII (b)
W. V. A. Quine
Two dogmas of empiricism
In
From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA 1953

Quine VII (c)
W. V. A. Quine
The problem of meaning in linguistics
In
From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA 1953

Quine VII (d)
W. V. A. Quine
Identity, ostension and hypostasis
In
From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA 1953

Quine VII (e)
W. V. A. Quine
New foundations for mathematical logic
In
From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA 1953

Quine VII (f)
W. V. A. Quine
Logic and the reification of universals
In
From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA 1953

Quine VII (g)
W. V. A. Quine
Notes on the theory of reference
In
From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA 1953

Quine VII (h)
W. V. A. Quine
Reference and modality
In
From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA 1953

Quine VII (i)
W. V. A. Quine
Meaning and existential inference
In
From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA 1953

Quine VIII
W.V.O. Quine
Designation and Existence, in: The Journal of Philosophy 36 (1939)
German Edition:
Bezeichnung und Referenz
In
Zur Philosophie der idealen Sprache, J. Sinnreich (Hg) München 1982

Quine IX
W.V.O. Quine
Set Theory and its Logic, Cambridge/MA 1963
German Edition:
Mengenlehre und ihre Logik Wiesbaden 1967

Quine X
W.V.O. Quine
The Philosophy of Logic, Cambridge/MA 1970, 1986
German Edition:
Philosophie der Logik Bamberg 2005

Quine XII
W.V.O. Quine
Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, New York 1969
German Edition:
Ontologische Relativität Frankfurt 2003

Quine XIII
Willard Van Orman Quine
Quiddities Cambridge/London 1987

Excluded Middle d’Abro A. d'Abro Die Kontroversen über das Wesen der Mathematik 1939 in Kursbuch 8 Mathematik 1967

53
The sentence of the excluded middle/VsBrouwer: the sentence of the excluded middle speaks for the fact that the antinomies occur not only in connection with infinite quantities.
E.g. Liar Paradox. Here, too, the principle of the logically excluded middle did not seem to apply.
---
54
E.g. Russell's barber's paradox, with the barber shaving everyone in town except those who shave themselves. Here, too, the sentence of the excluded middle does not apply without infinite quantities.

The intuitionists assert with Poincaré that antinomies without any infinities are lopish.
Poincaré: The antinomies of certain logicians are simply circular.

The author or concept searched is found in the following controversies.
Disputed term/author/ism Author Vs Author
Entry
Reference
Brouwer, L.E.J. Verschiedene Vs Brouwer, L.E.J. A. d’Abro Die Kontroversen über das Wesen der Mathematik in Kursbuch IV S. 53 Frankfurt 1967

According to Weyl, the concept of irrational number must either be abandoned or thoroughly modified.
Brouwer: in the treatment of infinite sets, the sentence from the excluded middle does not apply.
The sentence of the excluded middle/VsBrouwer: speaks of the fact that antinomies do not only occur in connection with infinite sets.
Example liar paradox. Here the principle of the logically excluded third party also did not seem to apply.
IV 54
E.g. Russell's Barber Paradox, where the barber shaves everyone in town except those who shave themselves. Again, no sentence of the excluded middle without infinite sets. The intuitionists claim with Poincaré that antinomies are ridiculous without infinity.
Poincaré: The antinomies of certain logicians are simply circular.