Formalizing medieval logical theories: Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Dordrecht
Springer
2007
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science
7 |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltstext Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| Beschreibung: | XII, 314 S. graph. Darst. |
| ISBN: | 9781402058523 1402058527 9781402058530 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV022404965 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20110412 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 070427s2007 gw d||| |||| 00||| eng d | ||
| 015 | |a 07,N05,0104 |2 dnb | ||
| 016 | 7 | |a 982477562 |2 DE-101 | |
| 020 | |a 9781402058523 |c Gb. : ca. EUR 144.45 (freier Pr.), ca. sfr 228.50 (freier Pr.) |9 978-1-4020-5852-3 | ||
| 020 | |a 1402058527 |c Gb. : ca. EUR 144.45 (freier Pr.), ca. sfr 228.50 (freier Pr.) |9 1-4020-5852-7 | ||
| 020 | |a 9781402058530 |9 978-1-4020-5853-0 | ||
| 024 | 3 | |a 9781402058523 | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a 11936114 |
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)238869972 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV022404965 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakddb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 044 | |a gw |c XA-DE-BE | ||
| 049 | |a DE-29 |a DE-12 |a DE-19 | ||
| 084 | |a CC 2000 |0 (DE-625)17606: |2 rvk | ||
| 084 | |a CE 1060 |0 (DE-625)17843: |2 rvk | ||
| 084 | |a 100 |2 sdnb | ||
| 084 | |a 5,1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Dutilh Novaes, Catarina |d 1976- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)1029530815 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Formalizing medieval logical theories |b Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes |c by Catarina Dutilh Novaes |
| 264 | 1 | |a Dordrecht |b Springer |c 2007 | |
| 300 | |a XII, 314 S. |b graph. Darst. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science |v 7 | |
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 500-1500 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Formalization (Philosophy) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Logic, Medieval | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Formalisierung |0 (DE-588)4123217-3 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Logik |0 (DE-588)4036202-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Logik |0 (DE-588)4036202-4 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Formalisierung |0 (DE-588)4123217-3 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Geschichte 500-1500 |A z |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 830 | 0 | |a Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science |v 7 |w (DE-604)BV019709027 |9 7 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |q text/html |u http://deposit.dnb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?id=2896147&prov=M&dok_var=1&dok_ext=htm |3 Inhaltstext |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m V:DE-604 |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015613545&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 943 | 1 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015613545 | |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1805088925857873920 |
|---|---|
| adam_text |
CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PART 1 SUPPOSITION THEORY: ALGORITHMIC
HERMENEUTICS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 THEORIES ON THEORIES OF SUPPOSITION
1.1.1 TWO KINDS OF APPROACH: PROJECTIONS I .1.2 COMMENTATORS 1.1.3
THEORIES OF REFERENCE 1.1.3.1 THE MECHANISMS OF REFERENCE 1.1.3.2
DETERMINATION 1.1.3.3 MANY-ONE MAPPING 1.2 WHAT SUPPOSITION THEORIES DO
NOT DO? 1.2.1 THEORIES OF SUPPOSITION DO NOT EXP1AIN THE MECHANISMS OF
REFERENCE 1.2.2 SUPPOSITION THEORIES DO NOT DETERMINE REFERENT: ONLY THE
WILL OF THE SPEAKER DOES 1.2.3 GENERAL AND AMBIGUOUS DESIGNATION:
ONE-MANY CORRESPONDENCE 1.2.4 SIMILARITIES 1.3 WHAT ARE SUPPOSITION
THEORIES THEN? 1.3.1 HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS 1.3.1.1 FALLACIES 1.3.1.2
COMMENTARIES 1.3.2 CONCEPTUAL ARGUMENTS 1.3.2.1 DENOTATUR 1.3.2.2
PROPOSITIO EST DISTINGUENDA 1.4 THE STRUCTURE OFOCKHAM'S THEORY OF
SUPPOSITION 1.4.1 QUASI-SYNTACTIC RULES VII 1 7 7 8 8 10 12 13 14 15 17
18 20 26 29 30 31 31 33 35 35 40 46 47 VIII 1.4.2 1.4.3 1.4.4 1.4.1.1
PERSONAL, SIMPLE AND MATERIAL SUPPOSITION 1.4.1.2 MODES OF PERSONAL
SUPPOSITION SEMANTIC MIES 1.4.2.1 PERSONAL, SIMPLE AND MATERIAL
SUPPOSITION 1.4.2.2 MODES OFPERSONAL SUPPOSITION COMBINATION CONCLUSION
CONTENTS 47 47 49 49 50 51 51 1.5 FORMALIZATION 52 1.5.1 PERSONAL,
SIMPLE, AND MATERIAL SUPPOSITION. 53 1.5.1.1 PRELIMINARY NOTIONS 54
1.5.1.2 DEFINITIONS OFTHE THREE KINDS OF SUPPOSITION 57 1.5.1.3
QUASI-SYNTACTICAL MIES FOR PERSONAL, SIMPLE, AND MATERIAL SUPPOSITION 58
1.5.1.4 TABLE 59 1.5.2 MODES OFPERSONAL SUPPOSITION 60 1.5.2.1 THE
SEMANTIC MIES FOR THE MODES OF PERSONAL SUPPOSITION 63 1.5.2.2
QUASI-SYNTACTICAL MIES FOR THE MODES OF PERSONAL SUPPOSITION 70 1.5.3
EXAMPLES 76 1.6 CONCLUSION 77 PART 2 8URIDAN'S NOTION OF C(}NSEQLLENT;A
2.1 INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY 2.1.1 INTRODUCTION 2.1.2 HISTORY OF THE
NOTION OF CONSEQUENCE 79 79 79 80 2.2 INFERENCE AND CONSEQUENCE 84 2.2.1
FUNDAMENTAL NOTIONS: TOKENS AND TYPES, INFERENCE, (FORMAL) CONSEQUENCE,
CONSEQUENTIA 86 2.2.2 8URIDAN'S DEFINITION OF CONSEQUENCE 89 2.2.2.1
FIRST ATTEMPT 90 2.2.2.2 SECOND ATTEMPT 91 2.2.2.3 THIRD AND FINAL
ATTEMPT 93 2.2.3 MODALITIES 94 2.2.3.1 ' . HOLDS IN . ' AND ' . IS
TME IN . .' 94 2.2.3.2 MATRICES 96 2.2.3.3 OPPOSITIONS 97 2.2.3.4
EXAMPLE 99 2.2.4 CONSEQUENTIA 100 2.2.4.1 CONSEQUENTIA AS INFERENCE 100
2.2.4.2 CONSEQUENTIA AS CONSEQUENCE 101 CONTENTS IX 2.3 2.4 2.2.4.3
EXAMPLE 2.2.5 CONSEQUENTIAJHRMALIS COMPARISONS 2.3.1 TWO-DIMENSIONAL
SEMANTICS 2.3.1.1 INDEXICALS 2.3.1.2 CHARACTER VS. CONTENT 2.3.1.3
INFERENCE AND CONSEQUENCE IN A TOKEN-BASED SEMANTICS 2.3.1.4 CONC1USION
2.3.2 THE CONCEPT OFLOGICAL CONSEQUENCE 2.3.2. I FOUR NOTIONS OF LOGICAL
CONSEQUENCE 2.3.2. I. I MODEL-THEORETIC NOTION 2.3.2.1.2
INTERPRETATIONAL NOTION 2.3.2.1.3 REPRESENTATIONA1 NOTION 2.3 .2.1.4
INTUITIVE (PRE-THEORETIC) NOTION 2.3.2.2 BURIDAN'S HYBRID NOTION
OFFORMA1 CONSEQUENCE 2.3.2.2.1 MATERIAL AND FORMAL CONSEQUENCE 2.3.2.2.2
SHAPIRO AND BURIDAN: THE HYBRID NOTION 2.3.2.2.3 EXTENSION 2.3.2.3
CONC1USION AND OPEN QUESTIONS THE BURIDANIAN THEORY OF INFERENTIAL
RELATIONS BETWEEN DOUBLY QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS 2.4.1 REVIEW OFKARGER'S
RESULTS 2.4.2 MODES OFPERSONAL SUPPOSITION 2.4.2.1 DETERMINATE
SUPPOSITION 2.4.2.2 CONFUSED AND DISTRIBUTIVE SUPPOSITION 2.4.2.3 MERELY
CONFUSED SUPPOSITION 2.4.3 THE MODELS VERIFYING EACH INTERPRETATIONAL
SCHEMA 2.4.3. I SCHEMA (1) - A DIST. B DIST. 2.4.3.2 SCHEMA (2) - A
DIST. B DET. 2.4.3.3 SCHEMA (3) - A DIST. B CONF. 2.4.3.4 SCHEMA (4) - A
DET. B DET. 2.4.4 THE RELATIONS OF INFERENCE 2.4.4.1 PROOFS BY ABSURDITY
2.4.4.1.1 SCHEMA (1) IMPLIES SCHEMA (2) 2.4.4.1.2 SCHEMA (2) IMPLIES
SCHEMA (3) 2.4.4.1.3 SCHEMA (3) IMPLIES SCHEMA (4) 2.4.4.2 PROOFBY
RELATION OF CONTAINMENT 2.4.4.2.1 SCHEMA (1) IMPLIES SCHEMA (2)
2.4.4.2.2 SCHEMA (2) IMPLIES SCHEMA (3) 2.4.4.2.3 SCHEMA (3) IMPLIES
SCHEMA (4) 2.4.5 CONC1UDING REMARKS 101 103 105 105 106 109 109 113 114
115 116 117 118 120 120 120 121 122 123 124 124 127 129 132 132 134 134
135 136 137 138 138 138 139 139 140 140 141 141 142 X 2.5 CONCLUSION
APPENDIX: A VISUAL RENDERING OFTHE HEXAGON OFINFERENTIAL RELATIONS
CONTENTS 142 144 PART 3 OBLIGATIONE.'L AS LOGICAL GAMES 3.0 INTRODUCTION
3.1 HISTORY 3.2 3.3 3.4 OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 3.2.1 DIFFERENT
SUGGESTIONS 3.2.2 ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE COUNTERFACTUAL HYPOTHESIS 3.2.3
CONCLUSION BURLEY'S OBLIGATIONES: CONSISTENCY MAINTENANCE 3.3.1 THE
RULES OFTHE GAME 3.3.1.1 PRELIMINARY NOTIONS 3.3.1.2 TWO INTERPRETATIONS
OFTHE RULES 3.3.1.2.1 DETERMINISTIC INTERPRETATION 3.3.1.2.2 'POINT
SYSTEM' 3.3.1.3 STAGES OFTHE GAME 3.3.2 MOVES AND TREES 3.3.3 STRATEGIES
3.3.3.1 CAN RESPONDENT ALWAYS WIN? 3.3.3.2 WHY DOES RESPONDENT NOT
ALWAYS WIN? 3.3.3.3 THE GAME IS DYNAMIC 3.3.4 PROBLEMS 3.3.5 CONCLUSION
SWYNESHED'S OBLIGATIONES: INFERENCE RECOGNITION 3.4.1 RECONSTRUCTION
3.4.1.1 CENTRAL NOTIONS 3.4.1.2 RULES OFTHE GAME 3.4.1.2.1
POSITUM/OBLIGATUM 3.4.1.2.2 PROPOSITA 3.4.1.2.3 OUTCOME 3.4.2
CHARACTERISTICS OFSWYNESHED'S GAME 3.4.2.1 THE GAME IS FULLY DETERMINED
3.4.2.2 THE GAME IS NOT DYNAMIC 3.4.2.3 TWO DISPUTATIONS WITH THE SAME
POSITUM WILL PROMPT THE SAME ANSWERS, EXCEPT FOR VARIATIONS IN THINGS
3.4.2.4 RESPONSES DO NOT FOLLOW THE USUAL PROPERTIES OF THE CONNECTIVES
3.4.2.5 THE SET OFACCEPTEDLDENIED PROPOSITIONS CAN BE INCONSISTENT 145
145 146 147 147 150 154 154 155 155 156 156 157 158 159 160 161 163 164
168 169 170 170 170 172 172 174 175 176 176 176 178 179 182 CONTENTS
3.4.3 3.4.4 WHAT IS RESPONDENT'S TASK THEN? CONCLUSION XI 183 185 3.5
STRODE'S OHLIGATIONES: THE RETURN OF CONSISTENCY MAINTENANCE 186 3.5.1
THE ESSENTIALS OF STRODE'S TREATISE 187 3.5.1.1 DESCRIPTION OFTHE TEXT
187 3.5.1.2 REMARKS, SUPPOSITIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 187 3.5.1.3
RECONSTRUCTION 192 3.5.2 CONTRA SWYNESHED: CONSISTENCY MAINTENANCE
RE-ESTABLISHED 195 3.5.2.1 SWYNESHED SPOTTED THE WRONG PROBLEMS 195
3.5.2.2 AN EVEN WORSE FORM OF INCONSISTENCY? 196 3.5.2.3 THE CORE OFTHE
MATTER: DEFINITION OF PERTINENT/IMPERTINENT PROPOSITIONS 198 3.5.2.4
AVOIDING TIME-RELATED INCONSISTENCY 199 3.5.2.5 CONJUNCTIONS AND
DISJUNCTIONS 200 3.5.2.6 CONCLUSION 202 3.5.3 FOCUS ON
EPISTEMIC/PRAGMATIC ELEMENTS OFTHE DISPUTATION 202 3.5.3.1 EPISTEMIC
C1AUSES 203 3.5.3.2 ONLY EXPLICITLY PROPOSED PROPOSITIONS BELONG TO THE
INFORMATION AL BASE 205 3.5.3.3 SELF-REFERENTIAL POSITA 207 3.5.3.4 SOME
RULES THAT DO NOT HOLD 209 3.5.4 CONCLUSION 213 3.6 CONCLUSION 214 PART
4 THE PHILOSOPHY OF FORMALIZATION 4.0 INTRODUCTION 4.1 PRE1IMINARY
NOTIONS 4.1.1 OBJECTS OFFORMALIZATION 4.1.2 FORMAL VS. FORMALIZED 4.1.3
THE NOTION OFTHE FORMAL 215 215 217 217 219 224 4.2 AXIOMATIZATION:
STRUCTURING 231 4.2.1 AXIOMS AND RULES OFTRANSFORMATION 232 4.2.2 WHY
AXIOMATIZE? 239 4.2.2.1 COMPLETENESS 239 4.2.2.2 META-PERSPECTIVE 241
4.2.3 IN WHAT SENSE TO AXIOMATIZE IS TO FORMALIZE 245 4.2.4 CONCLUSION
246 4.3 SYMBOLIZATION 247 4.3.1 WORDS VS. SYMBOLS 248 4.3.1.1 LANGUAGES:
NATURAL VS. CONVENTIONAL VS. ARTIFICIAL 249 XII 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4
4.3.1.2 WHAT IS A SYMBOL? EXPRESSIVITY 4.3.2.1 INADEQUACY OF ORDINARY
LANGUAGE 4.3.2.2 DISPLAYING/DEPICTING 4.3.2.2.1 WITTGENSTEIN ON
DEPICTING 4.3.2.2.2 PEIRCE AND ICONS 4.3.2.2.3 ICONIC SYMBOLS 4.3.2.3
KINDS OF SYMBOLS: INTERPRETED VS. UNINTERPRETED LANGUAGES IN WHAT SENSE
TO SYMBOLIZE IS TO FORMALIZE CONCJUSION CONTENTS 252 256 256 262 263 266
268 269 274 277 4.4 CONCEPTUAL TRANSLATIONS 278 4.4.1 WH AT IS
CONCEPTUAL TRANSLATION? 279 4.4.1.1 THE HISTORY OF CONCEPTUAL
TRANSLATIONS 279 4.4.1.2 FOUNDATION FOR CONCEPTUAL TRANSLATION:
CONCEPTUAL IDENTITY AND CONCEPTUAL SIMILARITY 282 4.4.2 THE OUTCOME OF A
CONCEPTUAL TRANSLATION 285 4.4.2.1 FORMAL SEMANTICS 286 4.4.2.2
TRANSFERENCE OF FORMALITY 287 4.4.2.3 DIALOGUE 288 4.4.3 CONCEPTUAL
TRANSLATION IN THE PRESENT WORK 289 4.5 CONCLUSION 292 CONCIUSION I
RETROSPECT 2 WHAT IS LOGIC? REFERENCES INDEX 293 293 295 301 311 |
| adam_txt |
CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PART 1 SUPPOSITION THEORY: ALGORITHMIC
HERMENEUTICS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 THEORIES ON THEORIES OF SUPPOSITION
1.1.1 TWO KINDS OF APPROACH: PROJECTIONS I .1.2 COMMENTATORS 1.1.3
THEORIES OF REFERENCE 1.1.3.1 THE MECHANISMS OF REFERENCE 1.1.3.2
DETERMINATION 1.1.3.3 MANY-ONE MAPPING 1.2 WHAT SUPPOSITION THEORIES DO
NOT DO? 1.2.1 THEORIES OF SUPPOSITION DO NOT EXP1AIN THE MECHANISMS OF
REFERENCE 1.2.2 SUPPOSITION THEORIES DO NOT DETERMINE REFERENT: ONLY THE
WILL OF THE SPEAKER DOES 1.2.3 GENERAL AND AMBIGUOUS DESIGNATION:
ONE-MANY CORRESPONDENCE 1.2.4 SIMILARITIES 1.3 WHAT ARE SUPPOSITION
THEORIES THEN? 1.3.1 HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS 1.3.1.1 FALLACIES 1.3.1.2
COMMENTARIES 1.3.2 CONCEPTUAL ARGUMENTS 1.3.2.1 DENOTATUR 1.3.2.2
PROPOSITIO EST DISTINGUENDA 1.4 THE STRUCTURE OFOCKHAM'S THEORY OF
SUPPOSITION 1.4.1 QUASI-SYNTACTIC RULES VII 1 7 7 8 8 10 12 13 14 15 17
18 20 26 29 30 31 31 33 35 35 40 46 47 VIII 1.4.2 1.4.3 1.4.4 1.4.1.1
PERSONAL, SIMPLE AND MATERIAL SUPPOSITION 1.4.1.2 MODES OF PERSONAL
SUPPOSITION SEMANTIC MIES 1.4.2.1 PERSONAL, SIMPLE AND MATERIAL
SUPPOSITION 1.4.2.2 MODES OFPERSONAL SUPPOSITION COMBINATION CONCLUSION
CONTENTS 47 47 49 49 50 51 51 1.5 FORMALIZATION 52 1.5.1 PERSONAL,
SIMPLE, AND MATERIAL SUPPOSITION. 53 1.5.1.1 PRELIMINARY NOTIONS 54
1.5.1.2 DEFINITIONS OFTHE THREE KINDS OF SUPPOSITION 57 1.5.1.3
QUASI-SYNTACTICAL MIES FOR PERSONAL, SIMPLE, AND MATERIAL SUPPOSITION 58
1.5.1.4 TABLE 59 1.5.2 MODES OFPERSONAL SUPPOSITION 60 1.5.2.1 THE
SEMANTIC MIES FOR THE MODES OF PERSONAL SUPPOSITION 63 1.5.2.2
QUASI-SYNTACTICAL MIES FOR THE MODES OF PERSONAL SUPPOSITION 70 1.5.3
EXAMPLES 76 1.6 CONCLUSION 77 PART 2 8URIDAN'S NOTION OF C(}NSEQLLENT;A
2.1 INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY 2.1.1 INTRODUCTION 2.1.2 HISTORY OF THE
NOTION OF CONSEQUENCE 79 79 79 80 2.2 INFERENCE AND CONSEQUENCE 84 2.2.1
FUNDAMENTAL NOTIONS: TOKENS AND TYPES, INFERENCE, (FORMAL) CONSEQUENCE,
CONSEQUENTIA 86 2.2.2 8URIDAN'S DEFINITION OF CONSEQUENCE 89 2.2.2.1
FIRST ATTEMPT 90 2.2.2.2 SECOND ATTEMPT 91 2.2.2.3 THIRD AND FINAL
ATTEMPT 93 2.2.3 MODALITIES 94 2.2.3.1 ' . HOLDS IN . ' AND ' . IS
TME IN . .' 94 2.2.3.2 MATRICES 96 2.2.3.3 OPPOSITIONS 97 2.2.3.4
EXAMPLE 99 2.2.4 CONSEQUENTIA 100 2.2.4.1 CONSEQUENTIA AS INFERENCE 100
2.2.4.2 CONSEQUENTIA AS CONSEQUENCE 101 CONTENTS IX 2.3 2.4 2.2.4.3
EXAMPLE 2.2.5 CONSEQUENTIAJHRMALIS COMPARISONS 2.3.1 TWO-DIMENSIONAL
SEMANTICS 2.3.1.1 INDEXICALS 2.3.1.2 CHARACTER VS. CONTENT 2.3.1.3
INFERENCE AND CONSEQUENCE IN A TOKEN-BASED SEMANTICS 2.3.1.4 CONC1USION
2.3.2 THE CONCEPT OFLOGICAL CONSEQUENCE 2.3.2. I FOUR NOTIONS OF LOGICAL
CONSEQUENCE 2.3.2. I. I MODEL-THEORETIC NOTION 2.3.2.1.2
INTERPRETATIONAL NOTION 2.3.2.1.3 REPRESENTATIONA1 NOTION 2.3 .2.1.4
INTUITIVE (PRE-THEORETIC) NOTION 2.3.2.2 BURIDAN'S HYBRID NOTION
OFFORMA1 CONSEQUENCE 2.3.2.2.1 MATERIAL AND FORMAL CONSEQUENCE 2.3.2.2.2
SHAPIRO AND BURIDAN: THE HYBRID NOTION 2.3.2.2.3 EXTENSION 2.3.2.3
CONC1USION AND OPEN QUESTIONS THE BURIDANIAN THEORY OF INFERENTIAL
RELATIONS BETWEEN DOUBLY QUANTIFIED PROPOSITIONS 2.4.1 REVIEW OFKARGER'S
RESULTS 2.4.2 MODES OFPERSONAL SUPPOSITION 2.4.2.1 DETERMINATE
SUPPOSITION 2.4.2.2 CONFUSED AND DISTRIBUTIVE SUPPOSITION 2.4.2.3 MERELY
CONFUSED SUPPOSITION 2.4.3 THE MODELS VERIFYING EACH INTERPRETATIONAL
SCHEMA 2.4.3. I SCHEMA (1) - A DIST. B DIST. 2.4.3.2 SCHEMA (2) - A
DIST. B DET. 2.4.3.3 SCHEMA (3) - A DIST. B CONF. 2.4.3.4 SCHEMA (4) - A
DET. B DET. 2.4.4 THE RELATIONS OF INFERENCE 2.4.4.1 PROOFS BY ABSURDITY
2.4.4.1.1 SCHEMA (1) IMPLIES SCHEMA (2) 2.4.4.1.2 SCHEMA (2) IMPLIES
SCHEMA (3) 2.4.4.1.3 SCHEMA (3) IMPLIES SCHEMA (4) 2.4.4.2 PROOFBY
RELATION OF CONTAINMENT 2.4.4.2.1 SCHEMA (1) IMPLIES SCHEMA (2)
2.4.4.2.2 SCHEMA (2) IMPLIES SCHEMA (3) 2.4.4.2.3 SCHEMA (3) IMPLIES
SCHEMA (4) 2.4.5 CONC1UDING REMARKS 101 103 105 105 106 109 109 113 114
115 116 117 118 120 120 120 121 122 123 124 124 127 129 132 132 134 134
135 136 137 138 138 138 139 139 140 140 141 141 142 X 2.5 CONCLUSION
APPENDIX: A VISUAL RENDERING OFTHE HEXAGON OFINFERENTIAL RELATIONS
CONTENTS 142 144 PART 3 OBLIGATIONE.'L AS LOGICAL GAMES 3.0 INTRODUCTION
3.1 HISTORY 3.2 3.3 3.4 OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 3.2.1 DIFFERENT
SUGGESTIONS 3.2.2 ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE COUNTERFACTUAL HYPOTHESIS 3.2.3
CONCLUSION BURLEY'S OBLIGATIONES: CONSISTENCY MAINTENANCE 3.3.1 THE
RULES OFTHE GAME 3.3.1.1 PRELIMINARY NOTIONS 3.3.1.2 TWO INTERPRETATIONS
OFTHE RULES 3.3.1.2.1 DETERMINISTIC INTERPRETATION 3.3.1.2.2 'POINT
SYSTEM' 3.3.1.3 STAGES OFTHE GAME 3.3.2 MOVES AND TREES 3.3.3 STRATEGIES
3.3.3.1 CAN RESPONDENT ALWAYS WIN? 3.3.3.2 WHY DOES RESPONDENT NOT
ALWAYS WIN? 3.3.3.3 THE GAME IS DYNAMIC 3.3.4 PROBLEMS 3.3.5 CONCLUSION
SWYNESHED'S OBLIGATIONES: INFERENCE RECOGNITION 3.4.1 RECONSTRUCTION
3.4.1.1 CENTRAL NOTIONS 3.4.1.2 RULES OFTHE GAME 3.4.1.2.1
POSITUM/OBLIGATUM 3.4.1.2.2 PROPOSITA 3.4.1.2.3 OUTCOME 3.4.2
CHARACTERISTICS OFSWYNESHED'S GAME 3.4.2.1 THE GAME IS FULLY DETERMINED
3.4.2.2 THE GAME IS NOT DYNAMIC 3.4.2.3 TWO DISPUTATIONS WITH THE SAME
POSITUM WILL PROMPT THE SAME ANSWERS, EXCEPT FOR VARIATIONS IN THINGS
3.4.2.4 RESPONSES DO NOT FOLLOW THE USUAL PROPERTIES OF THE CONNECTIVES
3.4.2.5 THE SET OFACCEPTEDLDENIED PROPOSITIONS CAN BE INCONSISTENT 145
145 146 147 147 150 154 154 155 155 156 156 157 158 159 160 161 163 164
168 169 170 170 170 172 172 174 175 176 176 176 178 179 182 CONTENTS
3.4.3 3.4.4 WHAT IS RESPONDENT'S TASK THEN? CONCLUSION XI 183 185 3.5
STRODE'S OHLIGATIONES: THE RETURN OF CONSISTENCY MAINTENANCE 186 3.5.1
THE ESSENTIALS OF STRODE'S TREATISE 187 3.5.1.1 DESCRIPTION OFTHE TEXT
187 3.5.1.2 REMARKS, SUPPOSITIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 187 3.5.1.3
RECONSTRUCTION 192 3.5.2 CONTRA SWYNESHED: CONSISTENCY MAINTENANCE
RE-ESTABLISHED 195 3.5.2.1 SWYNESHED SPOTTED THE WRONG PROBLEMS 195
3.5.2.2 AN EVEN WORSE FORM OF INCONSISTENCY? 196 3.5.2.3 THE CORE OFTHE
MATTER: DEFINITION OF PERTINENT/IMPERTINENT PROPOSITIONS 198 3.5.2.4
AVOIDING TIME-RELATED INCONSISTENCY 199 3.5.2.5 CONJUNCTIONS AND
DISJUNCTIONS 200 3.5.2.6 CONCLUSION 202 3.5.3 FOCUS ON
EPISTEMIC/PRAGMATIC ELEMENTS OFTHE DISPUTATION 202 3.5.3.1 EPISTEMIC
C1AUSES 203 3.5.3.2 ONLY EXPLICITLY PROPOSED PROPOSITIONS BELONG TO THE
INFORMATION AL BASE 205 3.5.3.3 SELF-REFERENTIAL POSITA 207 3.5.3.4 SOME
RULES THAT DO NOT HOLD 209 3.5.4 CONCLUSION 213 3.6 CONCLUSION 214 PART
4 THE PHILOSOPHY OF FORMALIZATION 4.0 INTRODUCTION 4.1 PRE1IMINARY
NOTIONS 4.1.1 OBJECTS OFFORMALIZATION 4.1.2 FORMAL VS. FORMALIZED 4.1.3
THE NOTION OFTHE FORMAL 215 215 217 217 219 224 4.2 AXIOMATIZATION:
STRUCTURING 231 4.2.1 AXIOMS AND RULES OFTRANSFORMATION 232 4.2.2 WHY
AXIOMATIZE? 239 4.2.2.1 COMPLETENESS 239 4.2.2.2 META-PERSPECTIVE 241
4.2.3 IN WHAT SENSE TO AXIOMATIZE IS TO FORMALIZE 245 4.2.4 CONCLUSION
246 4.3 SYMBOLIZATION 247 4.3.1 WORDS VS. SYMBOLS 248 4.3.1.1 LANGUAGES:
NATURAL VS. CONVENTIONAL VS. ARTIFICIAL 249 XII 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4
4.3.1.2 WHAT IS A SYMBOL? EXPRESSIVITY 4.3.2.1 INADEQUACY OF ORDINARY
LANGUAGE 4.3.2.2 DISPLAYING/DEPICTING 4.3.2.2.1 WITTGENSTEIN ON
DEPICTING 4.3.2.2.2 PEIRCE AND ICONS 4.3.2.2.3 ICONIC SYMBOLS 4.3.2.3
KINDS OF SYMBOLS: INTERPRETED VS. UNINTERPRETED LANGUAGES IN WHAT SENSE
TO SYMBOLIZE IS TO FORMALIZE CONCJUSION CONTENTS 252 256 256 262 263 266
268 269 274 277 4.4 CONCEPTUAL TRANSLATIONS 278 4.4.1 WH AT IS
CONCEPTUAL TRANSLATION? 279 4.4.1.1 THE HISTORY OF CONCEPTUAL
TRANSLATIONS 279 4.4.1.2 FOUNDATION FOR CONCEPTUAL TRANSLATION:
CONCEPTUAL IDENTITY AND CONCEPTUAL SIMILARITY 282 4.4.2 THE OUTCOME OF A
CONCEPTUAL TRANSLATION 285 4.4.2.1 FORMAL SEMANTICS 286 4.4.2.2
TRANSFERENCE OF FORMALITY 287 4.4.2.3 DIALOGUE 288 4.4.3 CONCEPTUAL
TRANSLATION IN THE PRESENT WORK 289 4.5 CONCLUSION 292 CONCIUSION I
RETROSPECT 2 WHAT IS LOGIC? REFERENCES INDEX 293 293 295 301 311 |
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| any_adam_object_boolean | 1 |
| author | Dutilh Novaes, Catarina 1976- |
| author_GND | (DE-588)1029530815 |
| author_facet | Dutilh Novaes, Catarina 1976- |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Dutilh Novaes, Catarina 1976- |
| author_variant | n c d nc ncd |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV022404965 |
| classification_rvk | CC 2000 CE 1060 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)238869972 (DE-599)BVBBV022404965 |
| discipline | Philosophie |
| discipline_str_mv | Philosophie |
| era | Geschichte 500-1500 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 500-1500 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>00000nam a2200000 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV022404965</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20110412</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070427s2007 gw d||| |||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="015" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">07,N05,0104</subfield><subfield code="2">dnb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="016" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">982477562</subfield><subfield code="2">DE-101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9781402058523</subfield><subfield code="c">Gb. : ca. EUR 144.45 (freier Pr.), ca. sfr 228.50 (freier Pr.)</subfield><subfield code="9">978-1-4020-5852-3</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1402058527</subfield><subfield code="c">Gb. : ca. EUR 144.45 (freier Pr.), ca. sfr 228.50 (freier Pr.)</subfield><subfield code="9">1-4020-5852-7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9781402058530</subfield><subfield code="9">978-1-4020-5853-0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="024" ind1="3" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9781402058523</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">11936114</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)238869972</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV022404965</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakddb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="044" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">gw</subfield><subfield code="c">XA-DE-BE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-29</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-19</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">CC 2000</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)17606:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">CE 1060</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)17843:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">100</subfield><subfield code="2">sdnb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dutilh Novaes, Catarina</subfield><subfield code="d">1976-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1029530815</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Formalizing medieval logical theories</subfield><subfield code="b">Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes</subfield><subfield code="c">by Catarina Dutilh Novaes</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Dordrecht</subfield><subfield code="b">Springer</subfield><subfield code="c">2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">XII, 314 S.</subfield><subfield code="b">graph. Darst.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science</subfield><subfield code="v">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 500-1500</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Formalization (Philosophy)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Logic, Medieval</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Formalisierung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4123217-3</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Logik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4036202-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Logik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4036202-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Formalisierung</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4123217-3</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 500-1500</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="830" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science</subfield><subfield code="v">7</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV019709027</subfield><subfield code="9">7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="q">text/html</subfield><subfield code="u">http://deposit.dnb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?id=2896147&prov=M&dok_var=1&dok_ext=htm</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltstext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">V:DE-604</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015613545&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015613545</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | DE-604.BV022404965 |
| illustrated | Illustrated |
| index_date | 2024-07-02T17:19:42Z |
| indexdate | 2024-07-20T09:15:46Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9781402058523 1402058527 9781402058530 |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-015613545 |
| oclc_num | 238869972 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-29 DE-12 DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
| owner_facet | DE-29 DE-12 DE-19 DE-BY-UBM |
| physical | XII, 314 S. graph. Darst. |
| publishDate | 2007 |
| publishDateSearch | 2007 |
| publishDateSort | 2007 |
| publisher | Springer |
| record_format | marc |
| series | Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science |
| series2 | Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science |
| spelling | Dutilh Novaes, Catarina 1976- Verfasser (DE-588)1029530815 aut Formalizing medieval logical theories Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes by Catarina Dutilh Novaes Dordrecht Springer 2007 XII, 314 S. graph. Darst. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science 7 Geschichte 500-1500 gnd rswk-swf Formalization (Philosophy) Logic, Medieval Formalisierung (DE-588)4123217-3 gnd rswk-swf Logik (DE-588)4036202-4 gnd rswk-swf Logik (DE-588)4036202-4 s Formalisierung (DE-588)4123217-3 s Geschichte 500-1500 z DE-604 Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science 7 (DE-604)BV019709027 7 text/html http://deposit.dnb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?id=2896147&prov=M&dok_var=1&dok_ext=htm Inhaltstext V:DE-604 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015613545&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| spellingShingle | Dutilh Novaes, Catarina 1976- Formalizing medieval logical theories Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science Formalization (Philosophy) Logic, Medieval Formalisierung (DE-588)4123217-3 gnd Logik (DE-588)4036202-4 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4123217-3 (DE-588)4036202-4 |
| title | Formalizing medieval logical theories Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes |
| title_auth | Formalizing medieval logical theories Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes |
| title_exact_search | Formalizing medieval logical theories Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes |
| title_exact_search_txtP | Formalizing medieval logical theories Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes |
| title_full | Formalizing medieval logical theories Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes by Catarina Dutilh Novaes |
| title_fullStr | Formalizing medieval logical theories Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes by Catarina Dutilh Novaes |
| title_full_unstemmed | Formalizing medieval logical theories Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes by Catarina Dutilh Novaes |
| title_short | Formalizing medieval logical theories |
| title_sort | formalizing medieval logical theories suppositio consequentia and obligationes |
| title_sub | Suppositio, Consequentia and Obligationes |
| topic | Formalization (Philosophy) Logic, Medieval Formalisierung (DE-588)4123217-3 gnd Logik (DE-588)4036202-4 gnd |
| topic_facet | Formalization (Philosophy) Logic, Medieval Formalisierung Logik |
| url | http://deposit.dnb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?id=2896147&prov=M&dok_var=1&dok_ext=htm http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=015613545&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV019709027 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT dutilhnovaescatarina formalizingmedievallogicaltheoriessuppositioconsequentiaandobligationes |