Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    A paraphrase that covers only monadic quantifiers cannot ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Boolos's reinterpretation of second-order quantifiers does not epistemologically justify the Comprehension Principle for Relations

    A paraphrase that covers only monadic quantifiers cannot cover quantification over relational concepts

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Boolos's reinterpretation of second-order quantifiers does not epistemologically...Boolos's reinterpretation works only for monadic quantifiers — those ranging ove...The Comprehension Principle for Relations requires quantification over relationa...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    Boolos's reinterpretation works only for monadic quantifiers — those r...83%The Comprehension Principle for Relations requires quantification over...80%Monadic second-order logic restricts quantification to monadic (unary)...79%If quantification must presuppose a category, then arguments relying o...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: frege-theorem
    View source passageHide passage
    Boolos (1985) noted that the Rule of Substitution causes a problem of this kind for Frege’s program given that it is equivalent the Comprehension Principle for Concepts. Boolos suggests a defense for Frege with respect to this particular aspect of his logic, namely, to reinterpret (by paraphrasing) the second-order quantifiers so as to avoid commitment to concepts. (See Boolos (1985) for the details.) Boolos’s suggestion, however, is one which would require Frege to abandon his realist theory of

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective