Combining Philosophers

Ideas for Lynch,MP/Glasgow,JM, Marcus Rossberg and David Bostock

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these philosophers

display all the ideas for this combination of philosophers


4 ideas

5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 1. Logical Form
In proof-theory, logical form is shown by the logical constants [Rossberg]
     Full Idea: A proof-theorist could insist that the logical form of a sentence is exhibited by the logical constants that it contains.
     From: Marcus Rossberg (First-order Logic, 2nd-order, Completeness [2004], §2)
     A reaction: You have to first get to the formal logical constants, rather than the natural language ones. E.g. what is the truth table for 'but'? There is also the matter of the quantifiers and the domain, and distinguishing real objects and predicates from bogus.
5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 2. Logical Connectives / a. Logical connectives
Truth-functors are usually held to be defined by their truth-tables [Bostock]
     Full Idea: The usual view of the meaning of truth-functors is that each is defined by its own truth-table, independently of any other truth-functor.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.7)
5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 5. Functions in Logic
A 'zero-place' function just has a single value, so it is a name [Bostock]
     Full Idea: We can talk of a 'zero-place' function, which is a new-fangled name for a familiar item; it just has a single value, and so it has the same role as a name.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 8.2)
A 'total' function ranges over the whole domain, a 'partial' function over appropriate inputs [Bostock]
     Full Idea: Usually we allow that a function is defined for arguments of a suitable kind (a 'partial' function), but we can say that each function has one value for any object whatever, from the whole domain that our quantifiers range over (a 'total' function).
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 8.2)
     A reaction: He points out (p.338) that 'the father of..' is a functional expression, but it wouldn't normally take stones as input, so seems to be a partial function. But then it doesn't even take all male humans either. It only takes fathers!