From Neo-Kantianism to Logicism: Vvedenskij's Mature Years

In the first two decades of the century Vvedenskij developed and defended what he took to be an original argument in support of the impossibility of metaphysical knowledge. This argument, which he hailed as a proof, involved an examination of the four laws of thought alone. As it made no appeal to the highly technical analyses found in Kant's first Critique, Vvedenskij considered it to be more efficient and thereby effective than Kant's own arguments. Although Vvedenskij's estimation of his accomplishment actually increased with the passage of time, the proof rested on highly dubious assumptions.     

Self-Constitution in the Ethics of Plato and Kant

Plato and Kant advance a constitutional model of the soul, in which reason and appetite or passion have different structural and functional roles in the generation of motivation, as opposed to the familiar Combat Model in which they are portrayed as independent sources of motivation struggling for control. In terms of the constitutional model we may explain what makes an action different from an event. What makes an action attributable to a person, and therefore what makes it an action, is that it issues from the person's constitution, and therefore from the person as a whole, rather than from some force working on or in the person. This in turn implies an account of what makes an action good: what makes an action good is that it is deliberated upon and chosen in a way that unifies the person into a constitutional system. Through deliberative action we constitute ourselves as unified agents. Platonic justice and Kant's categorical imperative are shown to be normative standards for action because they are principles of self-constitution.     

An abstract setting for Henkin proofs

A general result is proved about the existence of maximally consistent theories satisfying prescribed closure conditions. The principle is then used to give streamlined proofs of completeness and omitting-types theorems, in which inductive Henkin-style constructions are replaced by a demonstration that a certain theory respects a certain class of inference rules.     

Kenneth Strike on Liberalism,Citizenship and the Private Interest in Schooling

After indicating a number of points of agreement with the argument 0eveloped by Kenneth Strike in his article Liberalism, Citizenship and the Private Interest in Schooling, this article identifies and explores a number of queries and criticisms which arise in relation to that argument. These queries and criticisms relate especially to the nature and extent of the expansiveness involved in Strike's conception of public or common educational influence, and to the implications and justification of the claim that private educational interests enjoy a greater salience and recognition on Strike's view of public or common educational influence than on some alternative views.     

General education,cultural diversity,and identity

The issue of this paper is cultural plurality as a problem for public, general education and for (personal) identity. In order to examine this question, one needs to be clear about the meaning of the concepts of general education, on the one hand, and cultural diversity on the other. In the first section, we will fix the meaning of these concepts. A conceptual distinction between cultural diversity and cultural pluralism will be introduced. In the second section, it will be argued that open pluralism can only be maintained if there is a basic common culture apart from the cultural diversity that pluralism affirms. Therefore, there is yet an indispensable role for general education in an open, pluralistic society. In the third section we will look at two metaphors that give an opposite significance to the relation between identity and diversity: the conversational metaphor and the food metaphor mishmash. The final section expands on the conversational metaphor by way of an exposition of Ricoeur's hermeneutics of the self. It supplies us with a promising concept of identity that is not in complete opposition to diversity.     

German philosophy: Language and style

Conclusion Why, then, has so much of German philosophy for so long and so intensively felt itself bound to texts and authorities? And why is philosophy in Germany so often a matter of philosophizing through an author (whether Kant or Hegel or Heidegger)? Why is German philosophy to such a large extent a philosophy wherein questions such as What problems are you dealing with, then ? or Is what you say here true ? or What, then, is your own view on this matter? are unable to gain a foothold?The textual orientation of the mainstream of German philosophy is certainly in part dictated by the fact that this philosophy was always, in the middle ages as also in the modern era, to a very high degree a product of the universities. The most important philosophical movements in England, in contrast (as also in France), arose initially against the opposition of the universities. German-speaking university philosophers were thereby able to take over the teaching forms and methods of their scholastic predecessors in unbroken continuity, and the commentary, whether spoken or written, was in German philosophy faculties a prescribed form until as late as 1800. Even Kant gave lectures always in the form of commentary on other works, never on his own philosophy.Gradually, of course, philosophy came to be a matter for the universities in the Anglo-Saxon countries as well. The teaching of philosophy in these countries has however to a much greater extent than on the Continent been tied not to the formalized lecture(-commentary) but rather to tutorials and seminars involving comparatively small numbers of active participants. The job of philosophizing is learned thereby in Anglo-Saxon universities principally through the activity of argument and discussion.In German universities, in contrast, philosophy continues to be learned, in general, through lectures or homilies involving little or no discussion, so that the student of philosophy is rarely called upon to become active in his philosophizing. This is marked in the fact that in German one still refers to those enrolled in a lecture course as hearers (Hörer), whereby one often gains the impression that the hearers of lectures in philosophy are not in fact familiar with the desire to understand the content of what they hear.Even the teaching of the history of philosophy becomes impossible under such conditions, at least if this is understood in the Anglo-Saxon sense as an objective and as it were atomistic treatment of the ideas and arguments and problems which have arisen at different times and places. Rather we have an outcome in which philosophy, history of philosophy and textual commentary have become fused together into a single whole. To philosophize is to insert oneself into this whole, in order to contribute thereby to its further growth. Sometimes there will come along a philosopher (Hegel, Gentile, Heidegger) who will conceive it as his task to bring this development to a climax. The whole enterprise may thereby from time to time acquire a certain vital teleology. On the other hand, however, the conception of philosophy as a slowly growing textual mass can on occasion skid out of control, as the dadaistic posturings of Derrida et al. have made all too abundantly clear.     

Libertarianism vs. Marxism: Reflections on G. A. Cohen‘s Self-Ownership, Freedom and Equality

Self-Ownership, Freedom and Equality is G.A. Cohens attempt to rescue something of the socialist outlook on society from the challenge of libertarianism, which Cohen identifies with the work of Robert Nozick in his famous book, Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Sympathizing with the leading idea that a person must belong to himself, and thus be unavailable for forced redistribution of his efforts, Cohen is at pains to reconcile the two. This cannot be done – they are flatly contrary. Moreover, equality is a nonsense principle, calling for such things as equal distribution of natural resources. But resources, as goods, are not natural: all require work to utilize. The only thing exchanged on markets is services, and estimates of value received are relevantly made only by those party to the exchanges in question. Imposition from above on voluntary exchange can only be socially counterproductive.     

Thought,speech and the genesis of meaning: On the 50th anniversary of Vygotsky's Myšlenie i reč'

This article seeks to present Vygotsky's theoretical perspective as an integral whole as an antidote to the desire to plunder his work for isolated insights. The first part of the paper treats Vygotsky's views on method: his critique of the prevailing psychological orthodoxies; his recommendation that the higher mental functions be seen as standing in interfunctional relations of mutual determination; his technique of unit analysis. The second part discusses the method in action: Vygotsky's genetic account of the development of consciousness, on which the key point in ontogenesis is taken to be the convergence of two initially independently developing faculties: thought and speech; the notion of internalisation and its defence; the critique of Piaget; the concepts of inner speech and developed thought. The author hopes this article will serve as an aid to reading the limited sources of Vygotsky's writings presently available in English.     

Construction of monadic three-valued Łukasiewicz algebras

The notion of monadic three-valued ukasiewicz algebras was introduced by L. Monteiro ([12], [14]) as a generalization of monadic Boolean algebras. A. Monteiro ([9], [10]) and later L. Monteiro and L. Gonzalez Coppola [17] obtained a method for the construction of a three-valued ukasiewicz algebra from a monadic Boolea algebra. In this note we give the construction of a monadic three-valued ukasiewicz algebra from a Boolean algebra B where we have defined two quantification operations and ^* such that ^*x=^*x (where ^*x=-^*-x). In this case we shall say that and ^* commutes. If B is finite and is an existential quantifier over B, we shall show how to obtain all the existential quantifiers ^* which commute with .Taking into account R. Mayet [3] we also construct a monadic three-valued ukasiewicz algebra from a monadic Boolean algebra B and a monadic ideal I of B. The most essential results of the present paper will be submitted to the XXXIX Annual Meeting of the Unión Matemática Argentina (October 1989, Rosario, Argentina).     

Demonstrative utterances

Conclusion We have worked out a small part of a program originally devised by Kaplan which included a clarification of the phrase y intends to demonstrate x. The analysis of demonstrative utterances, combined with a theory of deferred ostensive reference, enabled us to account for a much larger class of utterances (accompained by a relevant gesture) than expected. Regrettably, the analysis forces more questions on us than it answers. Although I have used the term gesture quite freely without providing any sort of explication, there is much more to say about gestures and their relation to speech. Especially questions concerning the ontological nature of gestures (What kind of a thing is a gesture anyway?), their epistemological status (How can we tell gestures apart from other actions?), and their semantic status (What makes a gesture have meaning?) have remained largely unexplored. To my knowledge, no philosopher in the analytic tradition has addressed those issues in any systematic manner.     

Once More into the Breach of Self-Ownership: Reply to Narveson and Brenkert

In reply to Narveson, I distinguish his no-proviso argument from his liberty argument, and I show that both fail. I also argue that interference lacks the strategic status he assigns to it, because it cannot be appropriately distinguished, conceptually and morally, from prevention; that natural resources do enjoy the importance he denies they have; that laissez-faire economies lack the superiority he attributes to them; that ownership can indeed be a reflexive relation; that anti-paternalism does not entail libertarianism; and that he misrepresents the doctrines of a number of philosophers, including John Locke, Ronald Dworkin, and myself. In reply to Brenkert, I show that he seriously misconstrues my view of the nature of freedom, and of its relationship to self-ownership. I then refute his criticisms of my treatment of the contrasts between self-ownership, on the one hand, and autonomy and non-slavery, on the other. I also show that his attempt to exorcize the demon of self-ownership is multiply flawed.     

Rethinking the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization

This paper makes a case for a refined look at the so- called fallacy of hasty generalization by arguing that this expression is an umbrella term for two fallacies already distinguished by Aristotle. One is the fallacy of generalizing in an inappropriate way from a particular instance to a universal generalization containing a for all x quantification. The other is the secundum quid (in a certain respect) fallacy of moving to a conclusion that is supposed to be a universal generalization containing a for all x quantification while overlooking qualifications that have to be added to the more limited kind of generalization expressed in the premise. It is shown that these two fallacies relate to two different kinds of generalization.The classification of fallacious generalizations is based on a new theory of generalization that distinguishes three kinds of generalizations – the universal generalization of the for all x type, used in classical deductive logic, the inductive generalization, based on probability, and the presumptive generalization, which is defeasible, and allows for exceptions to a general rule. The resulting classification goes beyond a logic-oriented analysis by taking into account how a respondent may oppose a potentially fallacious generalizing move by falsifying it. Using a dialectical interpretation of premise-conclusion complexes, the paper outline a richer concept of generalizing argument moves embedded in a communicational reconstruction of the strategic uses of such moves in which two parties take part in an orderly dialectical exchange of viewpoints.     

A modification of kendall's tau for measuring association in contingency tables

A coefficient of association is described for a contingency table containing data classified into two sets of ordered categories. Within each of the two sets the number of categories or the number of cases in each category need not be the same.=+1 for perfect positive association and has an expectation of 0 for chance association. In many cases also has –1 as a lower limit. The limitations of Kendall's _a and _b and Stuart's _c are discussed, as is the identity of these coefficients to' under certain conditions. Computational procedure for is given.     

Beyond verisimilitude: A linguistically invariant basis for scientific progress

This paper proposes a solution to David Miller's Minnesotan-Arizonan demonstration of the language dependence of truthlikeness (Miller 1974), along with Miller's first-order demonstration of the same (Miller 1978). It is assumed, with Peter Urbach, that the implication of these demonstrations is that the very notion of truthlikeness is intrinsically language dependent and thus non-objective. As such, truthlikeness cannot supply a basis for an objective account of scientific progress. I argue that, while Miller is correct in arguing that the number of true atomic sentences of a false theory is language dependent, the number of known sentences (under certain straightforward assumptions) is conserved by translation; degree of knowledge, unlike truthlikeness, is thus a linguistically invariant notion. It is concluded that the objectivity of scientific progress must be grounded on the fact (noted in Cohen 1980) that knowledge, not mere truth, is the aim of science.For criticism and comments I am indebted to Noretta Koertge, David Miller, and an anonymous Synthese referee.     

Vulnerability schemas of individuals in couples relationships: a cognitive perspective

The professional literature has recently given attention to addressing individual schemas in couples relationships, with particular emphasis on the fact that individual vulnerability has a significant impact on couples relationships. This article addresses how this vulnerability can be restructured during the course of couples therapy. Case vignettes are used to illustrate how the model can be applied. Some of the implications of this model are considered in the discussion section.Authors note: Portions of this article were published in Norwegian by the first author and appear in Nordby, T.T. (2002): Kognitiv parterapi. En tilnærming som ivaretar betydningen av den individuelle sårbarheten i samspillet. Reprinted by permission of Fokus på familien 30, 46–60.     

An Exploration of Johnson's Sense of ‘Argument’

This essay attempts to give definitions and identity conditions for the two predominant senses of Argument currently in use, the one involving reasons for a conclusion and the other denoting an expressed disagreement with ensuing verbal behaviour by two parties. I see Johnson's new concept of Argument, as developed in his book Manifest Rationality, as a hybrid of the two common senses of Argument, and, accordingly, I try to define and give the identity conditions of Johnson-arguments. Finally, I disagree with Johnson on the nature of the definition he thinks he has proposed, and I conclude with observations suggesting that his logical perspective has dialectical and rhetorical components.     

Objectivity and the double standard for feminist epistemologies

The emphasis on the limitations of objectivity, in specific guises and networks, has been a continuing theme of contemporary analytic philosophy for the past few decades. The popular sport of baiting feminist philosophers — into pointing to what's left out of objective knowledge, or into describing what methods, exactly, they would offer to replace the powerful objective methods grounding scientific knowledge — embodies a blatant double standard which has the effect of constantly putting feminist epistemologists on the defensive, on the fringes, on the run.This strategy can only work if objectivity is transparent, simple, stable, and clear in its meaning. It most certainly is not. In fact, taking objectivity as a sort of beautiful primitive, self-evident in its value, and all-powerful in its revelatory power, requires careless philosophy, and the best workers in metaphysics, epistemology, and philosophy of science have made reworked definitions of objectivity absolutely central to their own projects. In fact, classic feminist concerns with exploring the impact of sex and gender on knowledge, understanding, and other relations between human beings and the rest of the world fall squarely within the sort of human and social settings thatare already considered central in most current analytic metaphysics, epistemology, and philosophy of science. I argue that the burden of proof is clearly on those who wish toreject the centrality and relevance of sex and gender to our most fundamental philosophical work on knowledge and reality.I am especially indebted to Helen Longino, Bojana Mladenovic, Ina Roy, Jonathan Sills, and David Smith for their time, discussion, and criticism of drafts of this paper.     

Dowód aksjomatyzowalności pewnychn-wartościowych rachunków zdań

Praca ta zostaa wykonana pod kierunkiem prof. drJerzego Supeckiego. Jej szczególny przypadek dotyczcyn-wartociowego rachunku zda o jednej wartoci wyrónionej by referowany w Warszawie na zjedzie Grupy Logiki Instytutu Filozofii i Socjologii PAN. Streszczenie tego referatu [5] zostao wydrukowane w Sprawozdaniach Wydziau Nauk Spoecznych PAN.Allatum est die 19 Aprilis 1963     

Foundations of a new system of probability theory

The aim of my book is to explain the content of the different notions of probability.Based on a concept of logical probability, which is modified as compared with Carnap, we succeed by means of the mathematical results of de Finetti in defining the concept of statistical probability.The starting point is the fundamental concept that certain phenomena are of the same kind, that certain occurrences can be repeated, that certain experiments are identical. We introduce for this idea the notion: concept K of similarity. From concept K of similarity we derive logically some probability-theoretic conclusions:If the events E() are similar —of the same kind - on the basis of such a concept K, it holds good that intersections of n of these events are equiprobable on the basis of K; in formulae: E(₁)...E( _{n K} E('₁)...E(' _n , _{i j} ,' _j ' _j for ij On the basis of some further axioms a partial comparative probability structure results from K, which forms the starting point of our further investigations and which we call logical probability on the basis of K.We investigate a metrisation of this partial comparative structure, i.e. normed -additive functions m _K, which are compatible with this structure; we call these functions m _K measure-functions in relation to K.The measure-functions may be interpreted as subjective probabilities of individuals, who accept the concept K.Now it holds good: For each measure-function there exists with measure one the limit of relative frequencies in a sequence of the E().In such an event, where all measure-functions coincide, we speak of a quantitative logical probability, which is the common measure of this event. In formulae we have: l _K (h _n lim h _n )=1 in words: There is the quantitative logical probability one that the limit of the relative frequencies exists. Another way of saying this is that the event ^* (h_n lim h _n) is a maximal element in the comparative structure resulting from K.Therefore we are entitled to introduce this limit and call it statistical probability P.With the aid of the measure-functions it is possible to calculate the velocity of this convergence. The analog of the Bernoulli inequation holds true: m _K (¦h _n –P¦)1–1/4n².It is further possible in the work to obtain relationships for the concept of statistical independence which are expressed in terms of the comparative probability.The theory has a special significance for quantum mechanics: The similarity of the phenomena in the domain of quantum mechanics explains the statistical behaviour of the phenomena.The usual mathematical statistics are explained in my book. But it seems more expedient on the basis of this new theory to use besides the notion of statistical probability also the notion of logical probability; the notion of subjective probability has only a heuristic function in my system.The following dualism is to be noted: The statistical behaviour of similar phenomena may be described on the one hand according to the model of the classical probability theory by means of a figure called statistical probability, on the other hand we may express all formulae by means of a function, called statistical probability function. This function is defined as the limit of the relative frequencies depending on the respective state of the universe. The statistical probability function is the primary notion, the notion of statistical probability is derived from it; it is defined as the value of the statistical probability function for the true unknown state of the universe.As far as the Hume problem, the problem of inductive inference, is concerned, the book seems to give an example of how to solve it.The developed notions such as concept, measure-function, logical probability, etc. seem to be important beyond the concept of similarity.The present work represents a summary of my book Grundzüge zu einem neuen Aufbau der Wahrscheinlich-keitstheorie [5], For this reason, I have frequently dispensed with providing proof and in this connection refer the interested reader to my book.     

Set theory as modal logic

A logical systemBM ⁺ is proposed, which, is a prepositional calculus enlarged with prepositional quantifiers and with two modal signs, and These modalities are submitted to a finite number of axioms. is the usual sign of necessity, corresponds to transmutation of a property (to be white) into the abstract property (to be the whiteness). An imbedding of the usual theory of classesM intoBM ⁺ is constructed, such that a formulaA is provable inM if and only if(A) is provable inBM ⁺. There is also an inverse imbedding with an analogous property.