more from this thinker
|
more from this text
Single Idea 15457
[filed under theme 2. Reason / D. Definition / 1. Definitions
]
Full Idea
All circles of interdefinition are useless by themselves. But if we reach one of the interdefined pair, then we have them both.
Gist of Idea
Interdefinition is useless by itself, but if we grasp one separately, we have them both
Source
David Lewis (Defining 'Intrinsic' (with Rae Langton) [1998], IV)
Book Ref
Lewis,David: 'Papers in Metaphysics and Epistemology' [CUP 1999], p.121
The
19 ideas
with the same theme
[specifying one word by means of others]:
|
10953
|
The parts of a definition are isomorphic to the parts of the entity
[Aristotle]
|
|
10957
|
The material element may be essential to a definition
[Aristotle]
|
|
10960
|
If we define 'man' as 'two-footed animal', why does that make man a unity?
[Aristotle]
|
|
12291
|
There can't be one definition of two things, or two definitions of the same thing
[Aristotle]
|
|
12292
|
Definitions are easily destroyed, since they can contain very many assertions
[Aristotle]
|
|
19426
|
'Nominal' definitions just list distinguishing characteristics
[Leibniz]
|
|
15927
|
Definition just needs negation, known variables, conjunction, disjunction, substitution and quantification
[Weyl, by Lavine]
|
|
19179
|
For a definition we need the words or concepts used, the rules, and the structure of the language
[Tarski]
|
|
1623
|
Definition rests on synonymy, rather than explaining it
[Quine]
|
|
15227
|
Logically, definitions have a subject, and a set of necessary predicates
[Harré/Madden]
|
|
5831
|
The new view is that "water" is a name, and has no definition
[Schwartz,SP]
|
|
15457
|
Interdefinition is useless by itself, but if we grasp one separately, we have them both
[Lewis]
|
|
6052
|
Definitions identify two concepts, so they presuppose identity
[McGinn]
|
|
11215
|
Notable definitions have been of piety (Plato), God (Anselm), number (Frege), and truth (Tarski)
[Gupta]
|
|
11223
|
Definitions usually have a term, a 'definiendum' containing the term, and a defining 'definiens'
[Gupta]
|
|
23744
|
Defining a set of things by paradigms doesn't pin them down enough
[Smith,M]
|
|
14100
|
Figuring in the definition of a thing doesn't make it a part of that thing
[Rosen]
|
|
11257
|
The Pythagoreans were the first to offer definitions
[Politis, by Politis]
|
|
20389
|
A definition of a thing gives all the requirements which add up to a guarantee of it
[Davies,S]
|