CHAPTER ONE The Logical Study of Language

2010 ◽  
pp. 7-32
Keyword(s):  
1980 ◽  
Vol 7 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 241-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Vincent Spade

Summary This paper argues that the 14th-century Oxford Carmelite Richard Lavenham was the author of the treatise De syncategorematibus that was used as a textbook in 15th-century Cambridge, a version of which was printed several times in the late 15th and early 16th centuries in the Libellus sophistarum ad usum Cantabrigiensium. The manuscript versions of this treatise differ significantly from one another and from the printed editions, so that the claim of Lavenham’s authorship needs to be carefully considered. The evidence for this claim is described briefly. The identification of the De syncategorematibus in the Cambridge Libellus as Lavenham’s provides the first real indication that Lavenham, whose works testify to the influence of other authors on logico-linguistic studies in late 14th-century Oxford, was himself not without influence as late as the early 16th century. On the other hand, the De syncategorematibus is not a very competent treatise, so that its inclusion as a textbook in the Libellus sophistarum is an indication of the decline of the logical study of language in England during this period. A brief analysis of the contents of the treatise supports this observation.


Mind ◽  
1925 ◽  
Vol XXXIV (135) ◽  
pp. 334-350
Author(s):  
BENJAMIN IVES GILMAN
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
pp. 174-184
Author(s):  
O. Pylypchuk

The article focuses on the problem of defines the volume of evidence to be research and the system of their researching in the court of first instance including those evidence that arising in connection with changing dated 04.10/2019 in the Criminal procedural Code of Ukraine. The purpose of the article is to analyze the legislation and propose ways to improve current legislation in order to optimize procedures aimed at planning the research of evidence in the court of first instance. The current the Criminal procedural Code of Ukraine assumes that the amount of evidence to be research, the court receives not in the form of protocols, of proprietary evidence or other materials, and with a application speech, which is proclaimed by the parties at the beginning of the court session. Introductory speech is the first information that builds a court views about evidences, through which the parties intend to substantiate the substitution of their legal positions concerning the prosecution, their affiliation, admissibility and sufficiency, order of their research into Court hearings, as well as the content of other legal positions of the parties in this proceeding. During the proclamation of the application speeches, the parties cite the amount of evidence on which their position is built, after which the court must investigate the evidence submitted by them. To construct a structural and logical study of evidence, a necessary plan for such a study and establish the evidence study procedure. Under the concept of 'evidence research ' procedure, it is proposed to understand a certain sequence and order of of actions that will depend on a particular criminal proceeding. In the study of evidence, the court should consider the specifics of the proceeding; Specifics of the evidence submitted by the Parties; Focus how long it takes to study the submitted evidence. If a party raises a question about inadmissibility evidence, such doubt should be in writing decorated with appropriate evidence. A party that opposes such a written application shall refute such a statement by submitting the court its arguments. In the article analyses questions about inadmissibility evidence and making a propose to introduction procedure to recognition evidences how inadmissibility. In the presence of a substantiated position of rejection in the acceptance of evidence, the party may in writing argue about the recognition of such evidence invalid.


Author(s):  
John Horty

The task of formalizing common-sense reasoning within a logical framework can be viewed as an extension of the programme of formalizing mathematical and scientific reasoning that has occupied philosophers throughout much of the twentieth century. The most significant progress in applying logical techniques to the study of common-sense reasoning has been made, however, not by philosophers, but by researchers in artificial intelligence, and the logical study of common-sense reasoning is now a recognized sub-field of that discipline. The work involved in this area is similar to what one finds in philosophical logic, but it tends to be more detailed, since the ultimate goal is to encode the information that would actually be needed to drive a reasoning agent. Still, the formal study of common-sense reasoning is not just a matter of applied logic, but has led to theoretical advances within logic itself. The most important of these is the development of a new field of ‘non-monotonic’ logic, in which the conclusions supported by a set of premises might have to be withdrawn as the premise set is supplemented with new information.


2014 ◽  
pp. 3-57
Author(s):  
Alfred Sidgwick
Keyword(s):  

Dialogue ◽  
1970 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
C. D. MacNiven

“What has ethical theory to do with the moral life?”. This is a question which continually confronts moral philosophers, especially those who identify themselves with the analytic tradition of contemporary Anglo-American philosophy. Continental European moral philosophers and those Anglo-Americans who identify themselves with them are seldom confronted with this question. Existentialism, for example, has an obvious connection with the moral life which contemporary analytic philosophy seems to lack. For many people outside professional philosophic circles analytic moral philosophy appears completely irrelevant to the moral life. Since the analysts conceive ethics, to quote R. M. Hare, as “the logical study of the language of morals”, they never seem to get past linguistic analysis to the concrete moral problems which are its main incentive in the first place.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-51
Author(s):  
Sonja Smets ◽  
Fernando R. Velázquez-Quesada
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document