18 ideas
10476 | The idea that groups of concepts could be 'implicitly defined' was abandoned [Hodges,W] |
10478 | Since first-order languages are complete, |= and |- have the same meaning [Hodges,W] |
13827 | Logical consequence isn't a black box (Tarski's approach); we should explain how arguments work [Prawitz] |
10477 | |= in model-theory means 'logical consequence' - it holds in all models [Hodges,W] |
10474 | |= should be read as 'is a model for' or 'satisfies' [Hodges,W] |
13826 | Model theory looks at valid sentences and consequence, but not how we know these things [Prawitz] |
10473 | Model theory studies formal or natural language-interpretation using set-theory [Hodges,W] |
10475 | A 'structure' is an interpretation specifying objects and classes of quantification [Hodges,W] |
10481 | Models in model theory are structures, not sets of descriptions [Hodges,W] |
10480 | First-order logic can't discriminate between one infinite cardinal and another [Hodges,W] |
17954 | Essence is a thing's necessities, but what about its possibilities (which may not be realised)? [Vetter] |
17953 | Real definition fits abstracta, but not individual concrete objects like Socrates [Vetter] |
17952 | Modal accounts make essence less mysterious, by basing them on the clearer necessity [Vetter] |
17959 | Metaphysical necessity is even more deeply empirical than Kripke has argued [Vetter] |
17955 | Possible worlds allow us to talk about degrees of possibility [Vetter] |
17957 | Maybe possibility is constituted by potentiality [Vetter] |
17958 | The apparently metaphysically possible may only be epistemically possible [Vetter] |
17956 | Closeness of worlds should be determined by the intrinsic nature of relevant objects [Vetter] |