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will not be published.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 2
Individual/well-defined/Hintikka: an individual is well-defined if it can be picked out by a name at a node of the world line.
>World lines; cf. >Four-dimensionalism.
World Line: a world line can link non-existent embodiments of individuals as long as they are well-defined, for all worlds in which a node of the world line is localizable.
Truth conditions are then simple: (Ex) p (x) is true in world w iff. there is an individual, e.g. with the name z such that p (z) is true in w.
II 43
Individual/possible worlds/existence/Hintikka: how can an individual exist in several worlds? (By being in different worlds in different relations to its environment?)
>Possible worlds, >Centered worlds, >Possible worlds/Lewis, cf. >Counterpart theory.
Solution/Hintikka:
World Line/Hintikka: we must distinguish two ways, in which a world line cannot be drawn.
Case 1: our criteria of cross-world identification work with individual i would still fail in world w, which leads us to say that i does not exist in w.
Case 2: more radical: the criteria fail even in the sense that they cannot tell us what i is at all, then we cannot decide whether i exists in w or not (well-defined).
Well-defined/existence/Hintikka: N.B.: we can now say: thesis: that well-defined objects are in a certain sense in the actual world. This is the best rational reconstruction.

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.