By B. Russell
Read or Download An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth PDF
Similar logic & language books
Now a lot revised considering that its first visual appeal in 1941, this publication, regardless of its brevity, is remarkable for its scope and rigor. It offers a unmarried strand of easy ideas for the significant enterprise of recent good judgment. simple formal strategies are defined, the paraphrasing of phrases into symbols is handled at a few size, and a trying out strategy is given for truth-function good judgment in addition to a whole facts approach for the good judgment of quantifiers.
The current selection of seventeen papers, such a lot of them already released in overseas philosophical journals, offers either with concerns within the philosophy of common sense, the philosophy of arithmetic, the philosophy of language and epistemology. the 1st half includes severe tests and a little deviant renderings of the paintings of 2 seminal philosophers, Frege and Husserl, in addition to of the younger Carnap and Kripke.
This e-book is meant either as a textbook in symbolic common sense for undergraduate and graduate scholars and as a treatise at the foundations of common sense.
“The determinate negation” has by way of Robert Brandom been referred to as Hegel’s such a lot basic conceptual instrument. during this booklet, Terje Sparby concurs in regards to the value of the time period, yet rejects Brandom’s interpretation of it. Hegel’s genuine use of the time period could firstly appear to be inconsistent, anything that's mirrored within the scholarship.
- Logic demystified
- The Continuum Companion to Philosophical Logic
- Language and Reason: A Study of Habermas's Pragmatics
- Multiple Analogies in Science and Philosophy
- Logic, semantics, metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938
- Prolegomena to a science of reasoning : phaneroscopy, semeiotic, logic
Extra resources for An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth
If we only knew present occur rences which are in fact related to past occurrences, we should never know of this relationship. Clearly we do sometimes, in some sense, know the past, not by inference from the present, but in the same direct way in which we know the present. For if this were not the case, nothing in the present could lead us to suppose that there was a past, or even to understand the supposition. Let us revert to the proposition: "if x precedes y, y does not precede x". istic convention.
49 AN INQUIRY INTO ME A N I N G A N D TRUTH We must therefore say eirher that my present experience is indistinguishable from my knowing it while it is present, or that, as a rule, we do not know our present experiences. On the whole, I prefer to use the word "know" in a sense which implies that the knowing is different from what is known, and to accept the consequence that , as a rule, we do not know our present experi ences. We are to say, then, that it is one thi ng to see a puddle, and another to know that I see a puddle.
The pro position "x precedes y" can be asserted on the basis of expe rien� We are saying that, if this experience occurs, no experience · will ·occur such as would lead to y precedes x". It is obvious that, however we re-state the matter, there must always be a negation somewhere in our statement; and I think it is also fairly obvious that negation brings us into the realm of language. " When we say )' does not precede x , it might seem that we _ ' ' * To decide this question, we need a discussion of we shall come later.
An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth by B. Russell