A general argument against structured propositions

The standard argument against ordered tuples as propositions is that it is arbitrary what truth-conditions they should have. In this paper we generalize that argument. Firstly, we require that propositions have truth-conditions intrinsically. Secondly, we require strongly equivalent truth-conditions to be identical. Thirdly, we provide a formal framework, taken from Graph Theory, to characterize structure and structured objects in general. The argument in a nutshell is this: structured objects are too fine-grained to be identical to truth-conditions. Without identity, there is no privileged mapping from structured objects to truth-conditions, and hence structured objects do not have truth-conditions intrinsically. Therefore, propositions are not structured objects.

     

The theory of random propositions

The theory of random propositions is a theory of confirmation that contains the Bayesian and Shafer—Dempster theories as special cases, while extending both in ways that resolve many of their outstanding problems. The theory resolves the Bayesian problem of the priors and provides an extension of Dempster's rule of combination for partially dependent evidence. The standard probability calculus can be generated from the calculus of frequencies among infinite sequences of outcomes. The theory of random propositions is generated analogously from the calculus of frequencies among pairs of infinite sequences of suitably generalized outcomes and in a way that precludes the inclusion of contrived orad hoc elements. The theory is also formulated as an uninterpreted calculus.I am grateful to Frank Arntzenius, John Earman, Allan Franklin, Teddy Seidenfeld, Brian Skyrms, Sandy Zabell and an anonymous referee for helpful discussion.     

Necessitarian propositions

The eternalist holds that all propositions specify the needed time information, and so are eternally true if true at all. The necessitarian holds the parallel view for worlds: she holds that all propositions specify the needed world information, and so are necessarily true if true at all. I will argue that the considerations for both views run parallel: the necessitarian can mimic the whole case for eternalism.     

Cognitive propositions

Soames's new theory of "cognitive propositions" is presented and several prima facie objections are presented to it.     

Functionalism and propositions

Conclusion Some have argued, following Stalnaker, that a plausible functionalist account of belief requires coarse-grained propositions. I have explored a class of functionalist accounts, and my argument has been that, in this class, there is no account which meetsall of the following conditions: it is plausible, noncircular, and allows for the validity of the argument to coarse-grained propositions. In producing this argument, I believe that I have shown that it might be open to a functionalist to adopt fine-grained propositions; thus, one might be a functionalist without holding that all mathematical beliefs are about strings of symbols (and that the belief that all bachelors are unmarried men is a belief about words).My project in this paper has been minimal in the following sense. I havenot argued thatno functionalist account of belief which meets the three conditions can be produced; rather, I have simply explored the inadequacies of certain sorts of accounts. I think that this is useful insofar as it makes clear the challenges to be met by an account of belief which can play the required role in the argument to coarse-grained propositions. It is compatible with my position that such an account is forthcoming, insofar as I have not produced a functionalist theory of belief which is clearly non-circular, plausible, and which yields fine-grained propositions. Of course, it is also compatible with my position that no plausible, non-circular functionalist account of belief of any sort can be produced. My argument has been that,if one construes such mental states as belief as functional states, no convincing argument has yet been produced that they require coarse-grained objects.     

Theorie des propositions normatives

Sans résumé     

Reasoning with contrary-to-fact propositions

In the initial study, the ability of subjects at four age levels (10, 13, 15, 18 years) (1) to accept if-then premises as a basis for reasoning and (2) to reason correctly with if-then premises was examined. Half the subjects were assessed with four reasoning problems involving factually accurate premises. The other half received factually inaccurate premises which were derived from the preceding ones by altering a single term. Both tests included an abstract problem which preceded the concrete propositions. Results indicate that the 10 year olds, and to a lesser extent the 13 year olds, did have difficulty in accepting contrary-to-fact premises as a basis for reasoning. The 15 and 18 year olds did not, but did find reasoning correctly more difficult with contrary-to-fact premises. The second study examined the ability of 5 and 7 year olds to accept contrary-to-fact premises. Subjects were given factually false premises either alone or within a fantasy context. Results indicate that the fantasy context decreases the extent to which empirical knowledge interferes with accepting contrary-to-fact premises. This result supports the notion that a representational process may be involved in accepting contrary-to-fact premises.