Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
II 322
Essentialism/Wiggins/Peacocke: if we want to read Wiggins

[neclx1[Human(x1)]](Socrates)

as an essentialist sentence, that Socrates is necessarily a human being, then nothing can be a human being without existing.
>Necessity/Wiggins, >de re necessity, >D. Wiggins, >de re, >de dicto, cf. >Barcan formula.
The translation into semantics of possible worlds would then be:
"In every world in which Socrates exists, he is a human being.
In general: [neclx1...lxn [A(x1...xn)]](t1...tn) - i.e. "In every world w in which all of t1...tn exist, t1...tn have the relation A in w" - if we wanted to make similar existential assumptions in the antecedence for expressions occurring in A(x1...xn) here, there would be no hope of finding a difference in the truth conditions between these forms:
neclx1lx2[Rx1x2](a,b),
neclx1[Rax1](b) and
neclx1[Rx1b](a) - this shows that T1 contains false theorems.
>Semantics of Possible Worlds, >Possible Worlds.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.