Higher-order metaphysics and propositional attitudes

According to relationism, for Alice to believe that some rabbits can speak is for Alice to stand in a relation to a further entity, some rabbits can speak. But what could this further entity possibly be? Higher-order metaphysics seems to offer a simple, natural answer. On this view (roughly put), expressions in different syntactic categories (for instance: names, predicates, sentences) in general denote entities in correspondingly different ontological categories. Alice's belief can thus be understood to relate her to a sui generis entity denoted by "some rabbits can speak", belonging to a different ontological category than Alice herself. This straightforward account of the attitudes has historically been deemed so attractive that it was seen as providing an important motivation for higher-order metaphysics itself (Prior [1971]). But I argue that it is not as straightforward as it might seem, and in fact that propositional attitudes present a foundational challenge for higher-order metaphysics

Pure Logic and Higher-order Metaphysics

W. V. Quine famously defended two theses that have fallen rather dramatically out of fashion. The first is that intensions are “creatures of darkness” that ultimately have no place in respectable philosophical circles, owing primarily to their lack of rigorous identity conditions. However, although he was thoroughly familiar with Carnap’s foundational studies in what would become known as possible world semantics, it likely wouldn’t yet have been apparent to Quine that he was fighting a losing battle against intensions, due in large measure to developments stemming from Carnap’s studies and culminating in the work of Kripke, Hintikka, and Bayart. These developments undermined Quine’s crusade against intensions on two fronts. First, in the context of possible world semantics, intensions could after all be given rigorous identity conditions by defining them (in the simplest case) as functions from worlds to appropriate extensions, a fact exploited to powerful and influential effect in logic and linguistics by the likes of Kaplan, Montague, Lewis, and Cresswell. Second, the rise of possible world semantics fueled a strong resurgence of metaphysics in contemporary analytic philosophy that saw properties and propositions widely, fruitfully, and unabashedly adopted as ontological primitives in their own right. This resurgence — happily, in my view — continues into the present day. For a time, at any rate, Quine experienced somewhat better success with his second thesis: that higher-order logic is, at worst, confused and, at best, a quirky notational alternative to standard first-order logic. However, Quine notwithstanding, a great deal of recent work in formal metaphysics transpires in a higher-order logical framework in which properties and propositions fall into an infinite hierarchy of types of (at least) every finite order. Initially, the most philosophically compelling reason for embracing such a framework since Russell first proposed his simple theory of types was simply that it provides a relatively natural explanation of the paradoxes. However, since the seminal work of Prior there has been a growing trend to consider higher-order logic to be the most philosophically natural framework for metaphysical inquiry, many of the contributors to this volume being among the most important and influential advocates of this view. Indeed, this is now quite arguably the dominant view among formal metaphysicians. In this paper, and against the current tide, I will argue in §1 that there are still good reasons to think that Quine’s second battle is not yet lost and that the correct framework for logic is first-order and type-free — properties and propositions, logically speaking, are just individuals among others in a single domain of quantification — and that it arises naturally out of our most basic logical and semantical intuitions. The data I will draw upon are not new and are well-known to contemporary higher-order metaphysicians. However, I will try to defend my thesis in what I believe is a novel way by suggesting that these basic intuitions ground a reasonable distinction between “pure” logic and non-logical theory, and that Russell-style semantic paradoxes of truth and exemplification arise only when we move beyond the purely logical and, hence, do not of themselves provide any strong objection to a type-free conception of properties and propositions. Most of my arguments in §1 are largely independent of any specific account of the nature of properties and propositions beyond their type-freedom. However, I will in addition argue that there are good reasons to take propositions, at least, to be very fine-grained. My arguments are thus bolstered significantly if it can be shown that there are in fact well-defined examples of logics that are not only type-free but which comport with such a conception of propositions. It is the purpose of §2 to lay out a logic of this sort in some detail, drawing especially upon work by George Bealer and related work of my own. With the logic in place, it will be possible to generalize the line of argument noted above regarding Russell-style paradoxes and, in §3, apply it to two propositional paradoxes — the Prior-Kaplan paradox and the Russell-Myhill paradox — that are often taken to threaten the sort of account developed here

On the Top-Down Argument for the Ability to Do Otherwise

The Top-Down Argument for the ability to do otherwise aims at establishing that humans can do otherwise in the sense that is relevant for debates about free will. It consists of two premises: first, we always need to answer the question of whether some phenomenon (such as the ability to do otherwise) exists by consulting our best scientific theories of the domain at issue. Second, our best scientific theories of human action presuppose that humans can do otherwise. This paper argues that this is not enough to establish the conclusion. The Top-Down Argument supports that humans can do otherwise _in some sense_. But it does not show that humans can do otherwise _in the sense that is relevant for debates about free will_. The paper then shows that the apparently best way to make the argument valid does not work

Bullshit in Politics Pays

Politics is full of people who don't care about the facts. Still, while not caring about the facts, they are often concerned to present themselves as caring about them. Politics, in other words, is full of bullshitters. But why? In this paper I develop an incentives-based analysis of bullshit in politics, arguing that it is often a rational response to the incentives facing different groups of agents. In a slogan: bullshit in politics pays, sometimes literally. After first outlining an account of bullshit, I discuss the incentives driving three different groups of agents to bullshit: politicians, the media, and voters. I then examine several existing proposals to combat bullshit in politics, arguing that each will fail because they ignore the relevant underlying incentives. I conclude somewhat pessimistically that a certain amount of bullshit in politics is inevitable

The Rebirth of the CLSU-CED Education Digest and the Future Directions for Educational Research

The rebirth of the Education Digest is instrumental to the growing demand for research and innovation platforms. Findings from research and reviews may enlighten programs, policies, and practices to advance the quality of education and empower students' well-being. The journal will start its online publication to convey scholarly findings to a larger audience, and it intends to publish articles covering not only Quality Education but other topics within the Sustainable Development Goals

Tác động của chương trình khuyến mãi và nỗi sợ bị bỏ lỡ đến quyết định mua sắm bốc đồng của phụ nữ trẻ khi xem livestream mỹ phẩm trên TikTok

Nghiên cứu khảo sát bằng bảng hỏi được thiết kế theo thang đo Likert 5 mức độ gửi tới 380 khách hàng nữ trong độ tuổi 18-35 tham gia mua sắm mỹ phẩm thông qua livestream trên nền tảng TikTok nhằm phân tích tác động của chương trình khuyến mãi và nỗi sợ bị bỏ lỡ đến quyết định mua sắm bốc đồng của phụ nữ trẻ khi xem livestream mỹ phẩm trên TikTok. Số mẫu thu về hợp lệ là 242 mẫu, dữ liệu sau khi thu thập được phân tích bằng phần mềm SmartPLS 4. Kết quả nghiên cứu cho thấy, nhân tố Chương trình khuyến mãi và Sự tham gia vào phiên livestream có tác động đáng kể đến Ý định và Quyết định mua sắm bốc đồng của phụ nữ trẻ. Trong khi đó, nhân tố Nỗi sợ bị bỏ lỡ không có ý nghĩa thống kê đối với Ý định mua sắm, nhưng vẫn ảnh hưởng đến Quyết định mua sắm

Wittgenstein x Gödel: reflexões sobre o Teorema da Incompletude

In the Appendix I of his "Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics", Wittgenstein elaborates a different interpretation of Gödel’s First Incompleteness Theorem, which we have come to refer to as "Gödel’s Theorem" or "Incompleteness Theorem". This nomenclature arises from the recognition that the so-called "Second Incompleteness Theorem" is essentially a corollary of the primary theorem. Wittgenstein aims to reassess Gödel’s conclusion that there exist true formulas not demonstrable within formal systems capable of representing a sufficient amount of arithmetic theory. Gödel’s initial reaction, as well as other commentators, was that Wittgenstein had not understood the proof. Nevertheless, recent commentators view worthy commentaries in wittgensteinian writings: some commentators, such as Juliet Floyd and Hilary Putnam, distinguish between mathematical proof and philosophical prose that surrounds the theorem, making it possible to understand Wittgenstein’s remarks. Ultimately, Wittgenstein’s observations serve as a lens through which Gödel’s theorem can be reconsidered within the realm of non-classical logics, such as paraconsistent logic

Il valore educativo dell'abitare: un percorso nella filosofia di John Dewey

This article constitutes a theoretical reflection from an educational perspective that places emphasis on the notion of inhabiting in the present technological society. The discussion is based on John Dewey's pragmatism, particularly on the idea of technology resulting from the fundamental tenets of his conception of experience and aesthetics. A key element is the notion of habit, through which we manage our relationship with reality or inhabit it. Starting from an examination of technology in relation tothe Deweyan notion of experience, the discussion moves towards the importance of the aesthetic dimension to come, finally, to some considerations on the meaning of habits in education and human existence