Empty terms in W. Ockham's logic: what is the reference for chimaeras
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Published:
21.05.2019
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
The paper is devoted to the problem of supposition of terms in the propositions about imaginary objects and the conditions of their truth values in the doctrine of William of Ockham who was a leading figure of the scholastic nominalism. His rather radical ontological position acknowledges the existence of no more than two types of essences: unitary substances and qualities. Being devoid of the universals, the Ockhamist doctrine implied the transformation of the previously elaborated semantic theories, including the theory of supposition. In the reconstruction of Ockham’s thought that became classical, the supposition closely approached the reference; however, in 2000s C.Dutilh-Novaes proposed the interpretation of supposition as a theory of propositional meanings. This approach brings forth the understanding of supposition as an intensional rather than extensional theory. One of the crucial arguments for this reconstruction is based on the application of supposition in the propositions about imaginary objects. According to our view, this argument is not free from some drawbacks. The term that makes the reference to the imaginary objects can have only simple or material supposition but not a personal one. W. Ockham names imaginary objects impossible objects.Chimaera is an impossible object, because it is considered as something which is combined of parts of different animals.That's why it should contain several substantial forms, which leads to contradiction with the metaphysical principle of the uniqueness of the substantial form.
In Ockham’s doctrine affirmative propositions about imaginary objects are always false since chimeras do not possess real existence. This observation implies that propositions about imaginary objects are more adequately squared with the extensional rather than intensional interpretation of supposition.
In Ockham’s doctrine affirmative propositions about imaginary objects are always false since chimeras do not possess real existence. This observation implies that propositions about imaginary objects are more adequately squared with the extensional rather than intensional interpretation of supposition.
##plugins.generic.usageStats.downloads##
##plugins.generic.usageStats.noStats##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
How to Cite
Kopylova A. O. Empty terms in W. Ockham’s logic: what is the reference for chimaeras // Logicheskie Issledovaniya / Logical Investigations. 2019. VOL. 25. № 1. C. 52-69.
Issue
Section
Philosophy and Logic
References
Аристотель, 1983 – Аристотель Об истолковании. Соч.: в 4 т. Т. 2. М.: Мысль, 1978. 687 с.
Лисанюк, 2001 – Лисанюк Е.Н. Теория суппозиции в средневековой логике // Verbum. Альманах Центра изучения средневековой культуры при философском факультете СПбГУ. СПб., 2001. No. 2. С. 14–36.
Оккам, 2010 – Оккам У. Избранное / Под ред. А.В. Апполонова. Изд. 2-е. М.: Книжный дом "Либроком", 2010. 272 с.
Перлер, 2016 – Перлер Д. Теории интенциональности в Средние века. Г.С. Вдовина, пер. с нем. М.: Издательский дом "Дело" РАНХиГС, 2016. 472 с.
Ashworth, 2010 – Ashworth E.J. Terminist logic // The Cambridge History of Medieval Philosophy / Ed. by R. Pasnau. Cambridge University Press, 2010. P. 146–158.
Ashworth, 1977 – Ashworth E.J. Chimeras and Imaginary Objects: A Study in the Post-Medieval Theory of Signification // Vivarium. 1977. Vol. 15. No. 1. P. 57–77. Brown, 1996 – Brown D.J. The Puzzle of Names in Ockham’s Theory of Mental Language // The Review of Metaphysics. 1996. Vol. 50. No. 1. P. 79–99. Dewender, 2001 – Dewender T. Ockham and Burley on signification and imaginary objects // Philosophy and Theology in the Long Middle Ages. Brill, 2001. P. 437–450.
Dutilh Novaes, 2007 – Dutilh Novaes C. Formalizing Medieval Logical Theories: Suppositio, Consequentiae and Obligationes. Springer, 2007. 316 p.
Dutilh Novaes, 2011 – Dutilh Novaes C. Medieval Theories of Truth // Lagerlund H. Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy. Springer, 2011. Р. 1340–1347.
Ebessen 1981 – Ebessen S. Early supposition theory (12th-13th century) // Histoire ´Epist´emologie Langage, 1981. Vol. 3. No. 1. P. 35–48.
Leff, 1975 – Leff G. William of Ockham: The Metamorphosis of Scholastic Discourse. Manchester University Press, 1975. 666 p.
McCord Adams, 1976 – McCord Adams M. What Does Ockham Mean by ‘Supposition’? // Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 1976. Vol. 17. No. 3. P. 375–391.
McCord Adams, 1977 – McCord Adams M. Ockham’s Nominalism and Unreal Entities // Philosophical Review, 1977. Vol. 86. No. 2. P. 144–176.
McCord Adams, 1987 – McCord Adams M. William Ockham. University of Notre Dame Press, 1987. 1402 p.
Nuchelman, 1973 – Nuchelman G. Theories of the Proposition. North Holland, 1973. 309 p.
Ockham, 1974a – Ockham W. Part I of the Summa Logicae tr. M. Loux, Ockham’s Theory of Terms, Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1974. 235 p.
Ockham, 1974b – Ockham W. Summa Logicae / Ed. by P. Boehner, G. G´al and S. Brown. St. Bonaventure: Franciscan Institute, 1974.
Ockham, 1974c – Ockham W. Opera Philosophica / Ed. by Gedeon G´al et al. The Franciscan Institute, 1974-88. Vol. 1. 800 p.
Ockham, 1998 – Ockham W. Part II of the Summa Logicae.tr. Fredosso. Ockham’s Theory of Propositions. St. Augustine Press, 1998. 220 p.
Panaccio, 2004 – Panaccio C. Ockham on Concepts. Ashgate, 2004. 210 p. Schierbaum, 2014 – Schierbaum S. Ockham’s Assumption of Mental Speech. Brill, 2014. 276 p.
Spade, 1974 – Spade P.V. Ockham’s rule of supposition: Two conflicts in his theory // Vivarium. 1974. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 63–73.
Spade, 1980 – Spade P.V. Synonymy and equivocation in Ockham’s mental language // Journal of the History of Philosophy. 1980. Vol. 18. No. 1. P. 9–22.
Pelletier, 2012 – Pelletier J. William Ockham on Metaphysics: The Science of Being and God. Brill, 2012. 352 p.
Weingartner, 2000 – Weingartner P. Basic Questions on Truth. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000. 230 p.
Лисанюк, 2001 – Лисанюк Е.Н. Теория суппозиции в средневековой логике // Verbum. Альманах Центра изучения средневековой культуры при философском факультете СПбГУ. СПб., 2001. No. 2. С. 14–36.
Оккам, 2010 – Оккам У. Избранное / Под ред. А.В. Апполонова. Изд. 2-е. М.: Книжный дом "Либроком", 2010. 272 с.
Перлер, 2016 – Перлер Д. Теории интенциональности в Средние века. Г.С. Вдовина, пер. с нем. М.: Издательский дом "Дело" РАНХиГС, 2016. 472 с.
Ashworth, 2010 – Ashworth E.J. Terminist logic // The Cambridge History of Medieval Philosophy / Ed. by R. Pasnau. Cambridge University Press, 2010. P. 146–158.
Ashworth, 1977 – Ashworth E.J. Chimeras and Imaginary Objects: A Study in the Post-Medieval Theory of Signification // Vivarium. 1977. Vol. 15. No. 1. P. 57–77. Brown, 1996 – Brown D.J. The Puzzle of Names in Ockham’s Theory of Mental Language // The Review of Metaphysics. 1996. Vol. 50. No. 1. P. 79–99. Dewender, 2001 – Dewender T. Ockham and Burley on signification and imaginary objects // Philosophy and Theology in the Long Middle Ages. Brill, 2001. P. 437–450.
Dutilh Novaes, 2007 – Dutilh Novaes C. Formalizing Medieval Logical Theories: Suppositio, Consequentiae and Obligationes. Springer, 2007. 316 p.
Dutilh Novaes, 2011 – Dutilh Novaes C. Medieval Theories of Truth // Lagerlund H. Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy. Springer, 2011. Р. 1340–1347.
Ebessen 1981 – Ebessen S. Early supposition theory (12th-13th century) // Histoire ´Epist´emologie Langage, 1981. Vol. 3. No. 1. P. 35–48.
Leff, 1975 – Leff G. William of Ockham: The Metamorphosis of Scholastic Discourse. Manchester University Press, 1975. 666 p.
McCord Adams, 1976 – McCord Adams M. What Does Ockham Mean by ‘Supposition’? // Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 1976. Vol. 17. No. 3. P. 375–391.
McCord Adams, 1977 – McCord Adams M. Ockham’s Nominalism and Unreal Entities // Philosophical Review, 1977. Vol. 86. No. 2. P. 144–176.
McCord Adams, 1987 – McCord Adams M. William Ockham. University of Notre Dame Press, 1987. 1402 p.
Nuchelman, 1973 – Nuchelman G. Theories of the Proposition. North Holland, 1973. 309 p.
Ockham, 1974a – Ockham W. Part I of the Summa Logicae tr. M. Loux, Ockham’s Theory of Terms, Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1974. 235 p.
Ockham, 1974b – Ockham W. Summa Logicae / Ed. by P. Boehner, G. G´al and S. Brown. St. Bonaventure: Franciscan Institute, 1974.
Ockham, 1974c – Ockham W. Opera Philosophica / Ed. by Gedeon G´al et al. The Franciscan Institute, 1974-88. Vol. 1. 800 p.
Ockham, 1998 – Ockham W. Part II of the Summa Logicae.tr. Fredosso. Ockham’s Theory of Propositions. St. Augustine Press, 1998. 220 p.
Panaccio, 2004 – Panaccio C. Ockham on Concepts. Ashgate, 2004. 210 p. Schierbaum, 2014 – Schierbaum S. Ockham’s Assumption of Mental Speech. Brill, 2014. 276 p.
Spade, 1974 – Spade P.V. Ockham’s rule of supposition: Two conflicts in his theory // Vivarium. 1974. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 63–73.
Spade, 1980 – Spade P.V. Synonymy and equivocation in Ockham’s mental language // Journal of the History of Philosophy. 1980. Vol. 18. No. 1. P. 9–22.
Pelletier, 2012 – Pelletier J. William Ockham on Metaphysics: The Science of Being and God. Brill, 2012. 352 p.
Weingartner, 2000 – Weingartner P. Basic Questions on Truth. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000. 230 p.