37,479 research outputs found
Debunking Logical Ground: Distinguishing Metaphysics from Semantics
Many philosophers take purportedly logical cases of ground ) to be obvious cases, and indeed such cases have been used to motivate the existence of and importance of ground. I argue against this. I do so by motivating two kinds of semantic determination relations. Intuitions of logical ground track these semantic relations. Moreover, our knowledge of semantics for first order logic can explain why we have such intuitions. And, I argue, neither semantic relation can be a species of ground even on a quite broad conception of what ground is. Hence, without a positive argument for taking so-called âlogical groundâ to be something distinct from a semantic determination relation, we should cease treating logical cases as cases of ground
Debunking logical grounding: distinguishing metaphysics from semantics
Many philosophers take purportedly logical cases of ground (such as a true disjunction being grounded in its true disjunct(s)) to be obvious cases, and indeed such cases have been used to motivate the existence of and importance of ground. I argue against this. I do so by motivating two kinds of semantic determination relations. Intuitions of logical ground track these semantic relations. Moreover, our knowledge of semantics for (e.g.) first order logic can explain why we have such intuitions. And, I argue, neither semantic relation can be a species of ground, even on a quite broad conception of what ground is. Hence, without a positive argument for taking so-called âlogical groundâ to be something distinct from a semantic determination relation, we should cease treating logical cases as cases of ground.Accepted manuscrip
Grounding rules and (hyper-)isomorphic formulas
An oft-defended claim of a close relationship between Gentzen inference rules and the meaning of the connectives they introduce and eliminate has given rise to a whole domain called proof-theoretic semantics, see Schroeder- Heister (1991); Prawitz (2006). A branch of proof-theoretic semantics, mainly developed by Dosen (2019); Dosen and Petric (2011), isolates in a precise mathematical manner formulas (of a logic L) that have the same meaning. These isomorphic formulas are defined to be those that behave identically in inferences. The aim of this paper is to investigate another type of recently discussed rules in the literature, namely grounding rules, and their link to the meaning of the connectives they provide the grounds for. In particular, by using grounding rules, we will refine the notion of isomorphic formulas through the notion of hyper-isomorphic formulas. We will argue that it is actually the notion of hyper-isomorphic formulas that identify those formulas that have the same meaning
Grounding rules and (hyper-)isomorphic formulas
An oft-defended claim of a close relationship between Gentzen inference rules and the meaning of the connectives they introduce and eliminate has given rise to a whole domain called proof-theoretic semantics, see Schroeder- Heister (1991); Prawitz (2006). A branch of proof-theoretic semantics, mainly developed by Dosen (2019); Dosen and Petric (2011), isolates in a precise mathematical manner formulas (of a logic L) that have the same meaning. These isomorphic formulas are defined to be those that behave identically in inferences. The aim of this paper is to investigate another type of recently discussed rules in the literature, namely grounding rules, and their link to the meaning of the connectives they provide the grounds for. In particular, by using grounding rules, we will refine the notion of isomorphic formulas through the notion of hyper-isomorphic formulas. We will argue that it is actually the notion of hyper-isomorphic formulas that identify those formulas that have the same meaning
Initial Draft of a Possible Declarative Semantics for the Language
This article introduces a preliminary declarative semantics for a subset of the language Xcerpt (so-called
grouping-stratifiable programs) in form of a classical (Tarski style) model theory, adapted to the specific
requirements of Xcerptâs constructs (e.g. the various aspects of incompleteness in query terms, grouping
constructs in rule heads, etc.). Most importantly, the model theory uses term simulation as a replacement
for term equality to handle incomplete term specifications, and an extended notion of substitutions in
order to properly convey the semantics of grouping constructs. Based upon this model theory, a fixpoint
semantics is also described, leading to a first notion of forward chaining evaluation of Xcerpt program
Grounding Operators: Transitivity and Trees, Logicality and Balance
We formally investigate immediate and mediate grounding operators from an
inferential perspective. We discuss the differences in behaviour displayed by
several grounding operators and consider a general distinction between
grounding and logical operators. Without fixing a particular notion of
grounding or grounding relation, we present inferential rules that define, once
a base grounding calculus has been fixed, three grounding operators: an
operator for immediate grounding, one for mediate grounding (corresponding to
the transitive closure of the immediate grounding one) and a grounding tree
operator, which enables us to internalise chains of immediate grounding claims
without loosing any information about them. We then present an in-depth
proof-theoretical study of the introduced rules by focusing, in particular, on
the question whether grounding operators can be considered as logical operators
and whether balanced rules for grounding operators can be defined
Three Reflections on Return: Convergence of form with regard to light, life, word
In this paper, I trace the three-fold essence of âreturnââa generating trope of identity and difference, through which formal aspects of the theory of relativity, the movement of language and emergence in evolution might converge. The trope of return is contrasted with the more common two-fold structure of relatedness underwriting differential calculus, propositional semantics and reductionism, which privileges space over time, identity over difference, self over creation
- âŠ