Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author Vs Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Propositions | Mates Vs Propositions | I 24 Proposition/Mates: should be so-called abstracts, without a spatial temporal structure. The structure of the proposition must not be confused with the structure of the corresponding statement. But this happens frequently in the literature! Problem: how to find out the structure of a proposition that depends on the statement? MatesVsPropositions: Assertion/Mates: (what is claimed by the proposition or statement): corresponding problems as with proposition: The same statement with the same meaning (!) can make different assertions: Example He won the election. Reference: if I ((s) implicitly) refer to Kennedy, or to Nixon, I make different assertions with the same statement (sentence)! Mates: conversely, I can make the same assertion with different statements (sentences): Example Kennedy has won the election. I 25 Thus, I have made the same assertion as above with "he", but I have used another statement with a different meaning. MatesVsAssertions: its structure cannot be determined simply by looking at the corresponding statement (sentence). Nevertheless, the "friends of assertions" have no inhibitions to classify assertions as singular, universal, particulate, conjunctive, hypothetical, affirmative, necessary, etc., or to say: "Assertions have subject predicate structure". Or "assertions contain descriptions". MatesVsPropositions: due to the different structure compared to the corresponding sentences, you cannot do it there either. Thoughts/Mates: the same applies to thoughts. Because of the different structure (compared to the corresponding sentences) it is pointless to say, for example, they contained descriptions, or would be negative. MatesVsThoughts: we should not use them in logic. Just so that logic is not understood as "laws of thought". Judgement/Mates: the same applies to judgments, which are the most dubious of all terms here: there are hardly two authors who say the same thing about them. For example "activity of mind"; "comparison of two concepts or objects obtained by simple perception, etc.". MatesVsVerdict: we should not use them in logic, because logic does not deal with "mental acts". I 26 Proposition/judgement/thought/statement/Mates: much of what we say about the logical properties of statements (sentences) we can easily transfer to propositions, assertions, thoughts and judgements. We only want to avoid index words like "I", "here", "now" etc... Solution: by independence through completion by place and time indications. Assertion/statement/Mates: here the equivalence between both helps: a statement is true iff the assertion made with it is true. The same applies to thoughts and judgements. The rest can be forgotten! |
Mate I B. Mates Elementare Logik Göttingen 1969 Mate II B. Mates Skeptical Essays Chicago 1981 |
| |||