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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Romeo likes Juliet (L(r,j)). — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Someone likes Juliet and Romeo likes someone (∃x[L(x,j)] ∧ ∃x[L(r,x)]).

    Romeo likes Juliet (L(r,j)).

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Everyone likes everyone (∀x∀y[L(x,y)]).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.'Romeo' and 'Juliet' indicate arguments (individuals) in the domain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A variable bound by a universal quantifier can be replaced with a name for some individual in the domain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Universal instantiation from '∀x∀y[L(x,y)]' presupposes a fixed, uniform domain, but names like 'Romeo' may fail to rigidly refer to any actual domain element.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kripke's distinction between rigid and non-rigid designators shows that fictional names like 'Romeo' lack the stable referential anchor required for valid instantiation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If 'Romeo' does not refer to an individual in the domain, the substitution L(r,j) is not a well-formed instance of the universal formula but a category error.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege's sense/reference distinction entails that 'Romeo likes Juliet' carries a sense that determines more than bare predication over individuals in a domain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Two co-referential names can differ in cognitive significance, so L(r,j) underdetermines the propositional content expressed by 'Romeo likes Juliet' in natural language.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A logical form that erases sense-distinctions cannot faithfully represent the meaning of the original sentence, undermining the inference from the universal to this instance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageModality & Possibility

    Related

    'Romeo' and 'Juliet' indicate arguments (individuals) in the domain.A logical form that erases sense-distinctions cannot faithfully represent the me...A name can be replaced with a variable bound by an existential quantifier.A variable bound by a universal quantifier can be replaced with a name for some ...
    +7 moreShow less
    Everyone likes everyone (∀x∀y[L(x,y)]).Frege's sense/reference distinction entails that 'Romeo likes Juliet' carries a ...If 'Romeo' does not refer to an individual in the domain, the substitution L(r,j...Kripke's distinction between rigid and non-rigid designators shows that fictiona...Someone likes Juliet and Romeo likes someone (∃x[L(x,j)] ∧ ∃x[L(r,x)]).Two co-referential names can differ in cognitive significance, so L(r,j) underde...Universal instantiation from '∀x∀y[L(x,y)]' presupposes a fixed, uniform domain,...

    Similar

    Someone likes Juliet and Romeo likes someone (∃x[L(x,j)] ∧ ∃x[L(r,x)])...84%Everyone likes everyone (∀x∀y[L(x,y)]).77%S and S' are the same ship75%'Homo' signifies a common nature existing in re.75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: logical-form
    View source passageHide passage
    On Frege’s view, a single quantifier can bind an unsaturated position that is associated with a function that takes a single argument. But it is equally true that two quantifiers can bind two unsaturated positions associated with a function that takes a pair of arguments. For example, the proposition that everyone likes everyone can be represented with the formal sentence ‘\(\forall x \forall y [L(x, y)]\)’. Assuming that ‘Romeo’ and ‘Juliet’ indicate arguments, it follows that Romeo likes every

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit