Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Propositions have parts that correspond to functions, specifically conditional functions that map arguments onto special values reflecting truth or falsity.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Davidson argued that truth conditions for propositions are given by T-sentences, not by functions mapping arguments onto Fregean truth-values.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If Tarski's semantic theory adequately captures propositional truth without positing abstract truth-values as objects, Frege's functional ontology is explanatorily redundant.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Quine's criterion of ontological commitment gives us principled grounds to reject abstract truth-values as unnecessary posits in a parsimonious semantic theory.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Wittgenstein's Tractatus shows propositions are pictures of facts, not function-argument structures mapping onto truth-values.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The picture theory entails that logical form is shown, not said, making functional decomposition a category error.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Frege held that propositions have parts that correspond to functions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Frege held that these include conditional functions mapping arguments onto values reflecting the truth or falsity of propositions/sentences.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.