Titlebook: Definitions and Definability: Philosophical Perspectives; James H. Fetzer,David Shatz,George N. Schlesinger Book 1991 Springer Science+Bus

fender

多產子

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2371-0jection of analyticity still prevails — in that philosophers . have either joined Quine in repudiating the “analytic”/“synthetic” distinction or remained (however mutinously) silent and made no claims of analyticity.

AMEND

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2371-0neralizations. Traditional accounts of definability are often vague and obscure, however, so that it is not always clear what the word stands for. Hence, it is instructive to place definitions in a more formal framework, as we shall see. Such a maneuvre brings forth sophistication which is not pract

Gentry

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2371-0ne-place predicate .) occurring in a theory .[.] is . on the basis of this theory iff the theory determines the interpretation of . as soon as the interpretations of the other concepts occurring in .[.] are fixed. More explicit, this is what, the definability of . on the basis of .[.] means.

膽小鬼

fructose

Seizure

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2371-0ivalence of any notion in the vocabulary of physics or some other “hard science.” Various “naturalistic” accounts make use of . notions, since idealized notions are used in physics. The most sophisticated use made of idealized notions in articulating a naturalistic philosophy is by W. V. Quine. In h

TRUST

Esalate

Definition in a Quinean Worldjection of analyticity still prevails — in that philosophers . have either joined Quine in repudiating the “analytic”/“synthetic” distinction or remained (however mutinously) silent and made no claims of analyticity.

Osteons

Towards a General Theory of Identifiabilityne-place predicate .) occurring in a theory .[.] is . on the basis of this theory iff the theory determines the interpretation of . as soon as the interpretations of the other concepts occurring in .[.] are fixed. More explicit, this is what, the definability of . on the basis of .[.] means.