Economics Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Substitutional Quantification: the substitutional quantification is concerned with the determination of whether linguistic expressions can be formed for a situation. E.g. "There is a true sentence that ...". In contrast, the referential quantification - the form of quantification normally used in predicate logic - tells us something about objects. E.g. "There is at least one object x with the property ..." or "For all objects x applies ...". The decisive difference between the two types of quantification is that, in the case of the possible replacement of a linguistic expression by another expression, a so-called substitution class must be assumed which cannot exist in the case of objects since the everyday subject area is not classified into classes is. E.g. you can replace a table by some box, but you cannot replace the word table by any available word. See also referential quantification, quantification, substitution, inference, implication, stronger/weaker, logic, systems, semantic rise._____________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 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Jaakko Hintikka on Substitutional Quantification - Dictionary of Arguments
II 171 Substitutional Quantification/sQ/HintikkaVsSQ/HintikkaVsSubstitutional Quantification/Hintikka: substitutional quantification is a pseudo-paradise, at most of formal interest, there has never been a satisfactory explanation for it. Description/knowledge/Russell: knowledge by description: e.g. we do not know Bismarck. We wish that the object itself is a constituent of our proposition, but this does not work here. We know, however, that there is an object called Bismarck (existence). Russell: we also know about this Bismarck that he is a clever diplomat. Solution/Russell: then we can describe the proposition we want to claim, namely, "B was a clever diplomat", where B is the object that is Bismarck (> logical form). Logical Form/Hintikka: (15) (Eb) (b = Bismarck; we judge that b was a clever diplomat) "B": this variable has then actual objects (objects from the actual world) as values. Russell/Hintikka: that shows that he has not chosen the solution (i). II 172 Description/knowledge/Russell/Hintikka: knowledge by description: here we know propositions about the "so-and-so" without knowing who or what so-and-so is._____________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. |
Hintikka I Jaakko Hintikka Merrill B. Hintikka Investigating Wittgenstein German Edition: Untersuchungen zu Wittgenstein Frankfurt 1996 Hintikka II Jaakko Hintikka Merrill B. Hintikka The Logic of Epistemology and the Epistemology of Logic Dordrecht 1989 |
||
> Counter arguments against Hintikka
> Counter arguments in relation to Substitutional Quantification
