Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data
Brandom, Robert
 
Books on Amazon
Singular Terms I 407
Singular Term/Predicate/Subsentential Expressions/Brandom: this is about objective referencing (reference), not about believed propositions - non-propositional, conceptual contents.
---
I 527ff
Singular Terms - substitution inferences are always symmetrical: equivalence classes.
Predicate substitution inferences may be asymmetric: Families (reflexive, transitive).
---
I 512f
Singular Term/Frege: the concept particular cannot be explained independently from the concept singular term - Brandom: not clear what singular terms are, cannot be explained by successful reference - Quine: singular term includes reference, error possible - Brandom: not everyone can be recognized as a singular term: E.g. "root 2", "natural satellite of the Earth" may be more than one thing - Problem: if omniscience of the speaker should be required.
---
I 517
Because sentences are fundamental, it is not clear why there should be any subsentential expressions at all - they cannot have a semantic content in the same respectas sentences - subsentential expressions necessary for the formation of potentially infinite number of sentences.
---
I 528
Singular Term/Brandom: its introduction does not only require application criteria but also identity criteria (for substitutability).
---
I 533
Singular Term/Brandom: are those expressions which play a dual syntactic and semantic substitutional role: 1) SIS: substitution-inferential significance - 2) SSR - substitution-structural role.
---
I 533
Definition singular term/Brandom: an expression that is substituted and whose occurrence is symmetrically inferentially significant - the substitutable (singular term): symmetric - substitution frame (predicates) asymmetrical.
---
I 535
Inversion: Substitutions are not always right: the conclusions are often inferentially weaker than the premises - from "something is a dog" follows "it is a mammal", but not vice versa - singular term: exists, because expressive power of the language would be lost if they were allowed to be asymmetric - Example/(s): if substitution led to weakening of the determination of the object.
---
I 546
Singular term/Brandom: Frames can be regarded as derived singular terms: e.g. "the father of a" - may then be substituted into her (FregeVs) - Brandom: they are still subsitutable and therefore they differ from sentences.
---
I 548
There are exceptions in the singular terms that behave differently, but they can only exist, because there are normal singular terms.
---
I 561
They play both the syntactic and semantic substitutional role.
---
I 569
Singular Term/Predicate/Brandom: indispensable in all languages ​​with conditionals - why are objects needed: for the same reason as singular terms: you need something that means what conditionals mean.
---
II 162
Singular Term/Brandom: 1) Obtain - 2) Designate - 3) Name
---
Newen/Schrenk I 165
Singular Term/Brandom: Problem: because it does not have reference as a basic concept, it creates 1) equivalenz classes of syntactically identical terms (substitutability) - 2) inferential role: helps to isolate the grammatical entities and identify their role as subject, verb , etc. - Subject Term/Singular Term: here the implications are symmetrical and reversible - "E.g. Franklin/Postmaster -" Verb: here the reversal is not symmetrical - E.g. goes for a walk/exercises - at the same time transcendental argument for the splittedness of the world -" (predecessor: Strawson).

Bra I
R. Brandom
Expressive Vernunft Frankfurt 2000

Bra II
R. Brandom
Begründen und Begreifen Frankfurt 2001


> Counter arguments against Brandom
> Counter arguments in relation to Singular Terms



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX file
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-04-30