tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post114020408601482497..comments2023-10-08T15:51:17.426+00:00Comments on Beyond Necessity: Hume's ForkEdward Ockhamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-70713134146418893392007-03-11T11:42:00.000+00:002007-03-11T11:42:00.000+00:00There's a long and short answer to this. The shor...There's a long and short answer to this. The short answer is the standard position (as expressed by Mill, e.g., and by Kneales in their history of logic, see e.g. p. 197) that 'man is a universal and Callias is an individual' is expressing the difference between two kinds of things (not words, or ideas). <BR/><BR/>The long answer (short version of) is that there was argument about this in medieval times just as now, and that the medieval writers were not so oblivious to the use-mention distinction as the standard account would have. <BR/><BR/>On existential import, correct. I wrote something about this here<BR/><BR/>http://uk.geocities.com/frege@btinternet.com/cantor/Eximport.htm<BR/><BR/>and will be presenting a paper on a connected subject at the Square of Opposition conference at Montreux in July.<BR/><BR/>Forgive my curiousity, but I Googled 'Martin Cothran' who appears to be doing some interesting work with Latin and traditional logic. Would that be you? Then we are allies of a sort. We have just decided to send our son to a similar school in England.<BR/><BR/>With best wishes.Edward Ockhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-62849427796202138202007-03-10T23:05:00.000+00:002007-03-10T23:05:00.000+00:00You say that "The scholastic logicians said that i...You say that "The scholastic logicians said that in a proposition (which for them meant a sentence) the predicate is affirmed or denied of the subject. 'Subject' and 'predicate' here are objectively existing things." And you attribute the view that the subject and predicate represent "ideas" to the influence of Descartes.<BR/><BR/>My understanding of scholastic (or "Aristotelian") logic is that it is the "science of second intentions", and that it purports to deal with relationships between beings of reason, not empirical facts, although the relationship between the beings of reason is not unimportant. And, in fact, that the whole reason that five of the 19 recognized valid syllogism forms have been rejected by modern logicians is precisely because THEY see the terms in categorical syllogisms as necessarily referring to real, rather than logical, entities, in accordance with their nominalist assumptions. I'm referring to the debate over existential import here, of course.<BR/><BR/>Interesting post, but help me out here.Martin Cothranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16452612266051351726noreply@blogger.com