Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Entailment: material relationship between statements, unlike the formal implication. I.e. the content of the partial statements is relevant for the truth value of the composed statement. See also conditional, implication paradox._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
M.J. Cresswell on Entailment - Dictionary of Arguments
I 44 Entailment: consists in the interpretation - inference: in the underlying natural language. Llogical consequence/Cresswell: but, of course, there is even in intensional logic the concept of logical consequence and e.g. Montague has made use of it. For example, if p and q are propositional variables, then neither is a logical consequence of the other because it is always possible to attribute truth values to the variables so that p is true in a possible world, but q is not. VsEntailment: it may be in many interpretations that the set of possible worlds, in which p is true, is entailed in the set of possible worlds, in which q is true. And in all these interpretations, applies: p entails q. Logic/some authors: thesis: logic is concerned primarily with what is true in all interpretations, not merely in one. CresswellVs: even if this is true, this cannot apply in an analysis of the natural language. >Everyday language. It is also simply not true that logic deals with all interpretations. For example, the logical constants are only interpreted in one way and not in others - it must be ensured that the meaning postulates do not provide an analysis of what it means for an inference to be valid. ((s) Otherwise circular). >Meaning postulates. Hughes I 265 Entailment/Ackermann/Hughes/Cresswell: from criticising paradoxes of strict implication: even weakest systems contain them. - This makes it impossible to interpret "strimp" as "follows from" or "follows logically from". Solution: Entailment: as a calculus of logical continuity. Ackermann: "strict implication" - Belnap, Anderson: Entailment. >Strict implication, >Consequence._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Cr I M. J. Cresswell Semantical Essays (Possible worlds and their rivals) Dordrecht Boston 1988 Cr II M. J. Cresswell Structured Meanings Cambridge Mass. 1984 Hughes I G.E. Hughes Maxwell J. Cresswell Einführung in die Modallogik Berlin New York 1978 |
||
> Counter arguments against Cresswell
> Counter arguments in relation to Entailment
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-16