If 'p' and 'q' have genuine sentential status sufficient to fill argument-slots, substitutional quantification must be available, yet substitutional quantification collapses truth-functional logic into mere syntactic manipulation without genuine semantic content.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

argument-slots(formal logic): The positions in a logical argument where you can plug in statements or values—like the blank spaces in a fill-in-the-blank question.
semantic content(Cappelen and Lepore's literalist/minimalist framework): Propositions determined solely by conventions of meaning, precisification, disambiguation, and reference fixing — not by pragmatic inference.
sentential status(logic and philosophy of language): The quality of being a complete sentence or statement that can be true or false, rather than just a fragment or phrase.
substitutional quantification(logic and philosophy of mathematics): A way of interpreting logical statements by substituting actual things or values into placeholder positions, rather than claiming those things actually exist.
syntactic manipulation(philosophy of language and logic): Moving symbols and words around according to grammar rules, without necessarily understanding what they actually mean or refer to.
truth-functional logic(formal logic): A system of logic where the truth or falsehood of a complex statement depends only on the truth or falsehood of its simple parts—like how 'A and B' is only true if both A and B are true.

2 topics