From xod@thestonecutters.net Thu Apr 07 09:41:04 2005 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 78235 invoked from network); 7 Apr 2005 16:41:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m19.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 7 Apr 2005 16:41:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Apr 2005 16:41:03 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DJa3y-0002KN-8h for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 09:41:02 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DJa3e-0002Ju-C0; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 09:40:53 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 07 Apr 2005 09:40:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DJa3T-0002Ji-7m for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 09:40:31 -0700 Received: from thestonecutters.net ([63.251.19.112] helo=chert.thestonecutters.net) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DJa3N-0002JZ-B1 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 07 Apr 2005 09:40:31 -0700 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p78-77.acedsl.com [66.114.78.77]) by chert.thestonecutters.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88A7B14800F for ; Thu, 7 Apr 2005 12:12:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <42556271.1050702@thestonecutters.net> Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:40:17 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20050407001954.80327.qmail@web81310.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20050407001954.80327.qmail@web81310.mail.yahoo.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 9780 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0 From: 2 = 3 Reply-To: xod@thestonecutters.net Subject: [lojban] Re: Hintikka on Quantifier Scope X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 24136 John E Clifford wrote: >--- 2 = 3 wrote: > > >>"Here we are beginning to see the whole horror >>of Frege's mistake. >>The notation he introduced (like the later >>notation of Russell and >>Whitehead) arbitrarily rules out certain >>perfectly possible patterns of >>dependence and independence between quantifiers >>or between connectives >>and quantifiers." >> >> >> >> >http://www.hf.uio.no/filosofi/njpl/vol1no2/revolution/revolution.pdf > >Oh, that Jaako! What a card! He is technically >right, of course, but he also points out most of >the reasons why little will come of it -- for a >while at least. >As for its role in Lojbanery, his notation does >suggest a partial solution for the problem of >quantifiers not getting comfortably where they >are needed (sentences about dogs biting men seem >to play quite arole here). > The asymmetry in that bit's always made me somewhat queasy. In terms of the usefulness of IF Logic: "Broadly speaking, Hintikka has two major aims in the book. On the one hand, he wishes to present a detailed case for the significance of his Independence Friendly [IF] logic based not only on its expressive power in service of a neo-logicist philosophy of mathematics, but also its ability to solicitously model certain semantic phenomena which he claims are ubiquitous in both our mathematical and everyday idioms. On the other, he wishes to lobby against the traditional Tarskian theory of truth for rst-order languages on the basis of what he takes to be its excessively liberal commitment to set theoretic entities. In its stead, Hintikka proposes that we adopt a theory of truth based on verication games. This approach yields a theory of truth known as game theoretic semantics [GTS] which is applicable to both classical rst-order logic and to IF logic." (pardon the silly ligatures provided by Acrobat) http://www.univ-nancy2.fr/poincare/colloques/symp02/abstracts/dean.pdf Here's a flamewar on the topic: http://www.groupsrv.com/science/viewtopic.php?t=12412&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 Here's where Hintikka defends himself against Neil Tennant ("I studied at the Sorbonne / Doctored in mathematics, I could have been a don") http://www.hf.uio.no/filosofi/njpl/vol4no2/gamesem/gamesem.pdf >I seem to recall something like this >was proposed once a long while ago using modified >Skolem functions in place of particular >quantifiers (and eventually groups -- bunches -- >for value to make the numeric cases work). > It would be interesting to see the Skolem function proposal. Loglan (!) gets round the issue by explicitly declaring the mapping, if I recall correctly. -- If it rained, it did not rain hard. It did rain hard. Therefore it did not rain.