Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Works of Love', 'works' and 'Intro to III: Quantifiers'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts

---

4 ideas

2. Reason / D. Definition / 1. Definitions

15927	Definition just needs negation, known variables, conjunction, disjunction, substitution and quantification [Weyl, by Lavine]
	Full Idea: For mathematics, Weyl arrived (by 1917) at a satisfactory list of definition principles: negation, identification of variables, conjunction, disjunction, substitution of constants, and existential quantification over the domain.
	From: report of Hermann Weyl (works [1917]) by Shaughan Lavine - Understanding the Infinite V.3
	A reaction: Lavine summarises this as 'first-order logic with parameters'.

5. Theory of Logic / G. Quantification / 4. Substitutional Quantification

9465	Substitutional universal quantification retains truth for substitution of terms of the same type [Jacquette]
	Full Idea: The substitutional interpretation says the universal quantifier is true just in case it remains true for all substitutions of terms of the same type as that of the universally bound variable.
	From: Dale Jacquette (Intro to III: Quantifiers [2002], p.143)
	A reaction: This doesn't seem to tell us how it gets started with being true.

9466	Nominalists like substitutional quantification to avoid the metaphysics of objects [Jacquette]
	Full Idea: Some substitutional quantificationists in logic hope to avoid philosophical entanglements about the metaphysics of objects, ..and nominalists can find aid and comfort there.
	From: Dale Jacquette (Intro to III: Quantifiers [2002], p.143)
	A reaction: This has an appeal for me, particularly if it avoids abstract objects, but I don't see much problem with material objects, so we might as well have a view that admits those.

22. Metaethics / B. Value / 2. Values / g. Love

15998	Perfect love is not in spite of imperfections; the imperfections must be loved as well [Kierkegaard]
	Full Idea: To love another in spite of his weaknesses and errors and imperfections is not perfect love. No, to love is to find him lovable in spite of, and together with, his weaknesses and errors and imperfections.
	From: Søren Kierkegaard (Works of Love [1847], p.158)
	A reaction: A true romantic at heart, Kierkegaard ideally posits perfect love as unconditional love, and not just of good attributes, predicates and conditions. However, the real question for both me and Kierkegaard is, is perfect love desirable or even possible?[SY]