scholarly journals Carnap's Contribution to Tarski's Truth.

Author(s):  
Monika Gruber

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column">In his seminal work “The Concept of Truth in Formalized Languages” (1933), Alfred Tarski showed how to construct a formally correct and materially adequate definition of true sentence for certain formalized languages. These results have, eventually, been accepted and applauded by philosophers and logicians nearly in unison. Its Postscript, written two years later, however, has given rise to a considerable amount of controversy. There is an ongoing debate on what Tarski really said in the postscript. These discussions often regard Tarski as putatively changing his logical framework from type theory to set<br />theory.<br /><br />In what follows, we will compare the original results with those presented two years later. After a brief outline of Carnap’s program in The Logical Syntax of Language we will determine its significance for Tarski’s final results.</div></div></div>

Author(s):  
Scott Soames

This chapter begins by discussing the work of Alfred Tarski. In the 1930s, Tarski published two articles that became classics. In “The Concept of Truth in Formalized Languages” (1935) he defined truth for formal languages of logic and mathematics. In “On the Concept of Logical Consequence” (1936) he used that definition to give what is essentially the modern “semantic” (model-theoretic) definition of logical consequence. In addition to their evident significance for logic and metamathematics, these results have come to play an important role in the study of meaning. The chapter then discusses Rudolf Carnap's embrace of truth-theoretic semantics and the semantic approach of Donald Davidson.


Author(s):  
Anil Gupta

Alfred Tarski’s definition of truth is unlike any that philosophers have given in their long struggle to understand the concept of truth. Tarski’s definition is more clear and precise than any previous definition, but it is also unusual in character and more restricted in scope. Tarski does not provide a general definition of truth. He provides instead a method of constructing, for a range of formalized languages L, definitions of the notions ‘true sentence of L’. A remarkable feature of Tarski’s work on truth is his ‘Criterion T’, which lays down a general condition that any definition of ‘true sentence of L’ must satisfy. Tarski’s ideas have exercised an enormous influence in philosophy. They have played an important role in the formulation and defence of a range of views in logic, semantics and metaphysics.


2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-237
Author(s):  
Roland Coghetto

Summary Józef Białas and Yatsuka Nakamura has completely formalized a proof of Urysohn’s lemma in the article [4], in the context of a topological space defined via open sets. In the Mizar Mathematical Library (MML), the topological space is defined in this way by Beata Padlewska and Agata Darmochwał in the article [18]. In [7] the topological space is defined via neighborhoods. It is well known that these definitions are equivalent [5, 6]. In the definitions, an abstract structure (i.e. the article [17, STRUCT 0] and its descendants, all of them directly or indirectly using Mizar structures [3]) have been used (see [10], [9]). The first topological definition is based on the Mizar structure TopStruct and the topological space defined via neighborhoods with the Mizar structure: FMT Space Str. To emphasize the notion of a neighborhood, we rename FMT TopSpace (topology from neighbourhoods) to NTopSpace (a neighborhood topological space). Using Mizar [2], we transport the Urysohn’s lemma from TopSpace to NTop-Space. In some cases, Mizar allows certain techniques for transporting proofs, definitions or theorems. Generally speaking, there is no such automatic translating. In Coq, Isabelle/HOL or homotopy type theory transport is also studied, sometimes with a more systematic aim [14], [21], [11], [12], [8], [19]. In [1], two co-existing Isabelle libraries: Isabelle/HOL and Isabelle/Mizar, have been aligned in a single foundation in the Isabelle logical framework. In the MML, they have been used since the beginning: reconsider, registration, cluster, others were later implemented [13]: identify. In some proofs, it is possible to define particular functors between different structures, mainly useful when results are already obtained in a given structure. This technique is used, for example, in [15] to define two functors MXR2MXF and MXF2MXF between Matrix of REAL and Matrix of F-Real and to transport the definition of the addition from one structure to the other: [...] A + B -> Matrix of REAL equals MXF2MXR ((MXR2MXF A) + (MXR2MXF B)) [...]. In this paper, first we align the necessary topological concepts. For the formalization, we were inspired by the works of Claude Wagschal [20]. It allows us to transport more naturally the Urysohn’s lemma ([4, URYSOHN3:20]) to the topological space defined via neighborhoods. Nakasho and Shidama have developed a solution to explore the notions introduced in various ways https://mimosa-project.github.io/mmlreference/current/ [16]. The definitions can be directly linked in the HTML version of the Mizar library (example: Urysohn’s lemma http://mizar.org/version/current/html/urysohn3.html#T20).


Author(s):  
Michael D. Hurley

Newman has been much vaunted as a ‘master’ of non-fiction prose style, and justly so. His felicity of phrasing is astonishing: so precise, so elegant, so vivid. This chapter admires Newman’s stylistic achievements too, but with a view to explaining why Newman himself baulked at such praise, by insisting instead on the importance of veracity over verbalism. While a number of different writings by Newman are surveyed in the course of the chapter, the argument comes to focus in particular on his seminal work of faith, Grammar of Assent, a book that took him some twenty years to write, which almost killed him, and which best exemplifies his suggestive but enigmatic definition of ‘style’ as ‘a thinking out into language’.


2021 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANDREA VEZZOSI ◽  
ANDERS MÖRTBERG ◽  
ANDREAS ABEL

Abstract Proof assistants based on dependent type theory provide expressive languages for both programming and proving within the same system. However, all of the major implementations lack powerful extensionality principles for reasoning about equality, such as function and propositional extensionality. These principles are typically added axiomatically which disrupts the constructive properties of these systems. Cubical type theory provides a solution by giving computational meaning to Homotopy Type Theory and Univalent Foundations, in particular to the univalence axiom and higher inductive types (HITs). This paper describes an extension of the dependently typed functional programming language Agda with cubical primitives, making it into a full-blown proof assistant with native support for univalence and a general schema of HITs. These new primitives allow the direct definition of function and propositional extensionality as well as quotient types, all with computational content. Additionally, thanks also to copatterns, bisimilarity is equivalent to equality for coinductive types. The adoption of cubical type theory extends Agda with support for a wide range of extensionality principles, without sacrificing type checking and constructivity.


2000 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 477-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARGRET SELTING

The notion of Turn-Constructional Unit (TCU) in Conversation Analysis has become unclear for many researchers. The underlying problems inherent in the definition of this notion are here identified, and a possible solution is suggested. This amounts to separating more clearly the notions of TCU and Transition Relevance Place (TRP). In this view, the TCU is defined as the smallest interactionally relevant complete linguistic unit, in a given context, that is constructed with syntactic and prosodic resources within their semantic, pragmatic, activity-type-specific, and sequential conversational context. It ends in a TRP unless particular linguistic and interactional resources are used to project and postpone the TRP to the end of a larger multi-unit turn. This suggestion tries to spell out some of the assumptions that the seminal work in CA made in principle, but never formulated explicitly.


1995 ◽  
Vol 06 (03) ◽  
pp. 203-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
YUKIYOSHI KAMEYAMA

This paper studies an extension of inductive definitions in the context of a type-free theory. It is a kind of simultaneous inductive definition of two predicates where the defining formulas are monotone with respect to the first predicate, but not monotone with respect to the second predicate. We call this inductive definition half-monotone in analogy of Allen’s term half-positive. We can regard this definition as a variant of monotone inductive definitions by introducing a refined order between tuples of predicates. We give a general theory for half-monotone inductive definitions in a type-free first-order logic. We then give a realizability interpretation to our theory, and prove its soundness by extending Tatsuta’s technique. The mechanism of half-monotone inductive definitions is shown to be useful in interpreting many theories, including the Logical Theory of Constructions, and Martin-Löf’s Type Theory. We can also formalize the provability relation “a term p is a proof of a proposition P” naturally. As an application of this formalization, several techniques of program/proof-improvement can be formalized in our theory, and we can make use of this fact to develop programs in the paradigm of Constructive Programming. A characteristic point of our approach is that we can extract an optimization program since our theory enjoys the program extraction theorem.


1973 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-226
Author(s):  
Satoko Titani

In [4], I introduced a quasi-Boolean algebra, and showed that in a formal system of simple type theory, from which the cut rule is omitted, wffs form a quasi-Boolean algebra, and that the cut-elimination theorem can be formulated in algebraic language. In this paper we use the result of [4] to prove the cut-elimination theorem in simple type theory. The theorem was proved by M. Takahashi [2] in 1967 by using the concept of Schütte's semivaluation. We use maximal ideals of a quasi-Boolean algebra instead of semivaluations.The logical system we are concerned with is a modification of Schütte's formal system of simple type theory in [1] into Gentzen style.Inductive definition of types.0 and 1 are types.If τ1, …, τn are types, then (τ1, …, τn) is a type.Basic symbols.a1τ, a2τ, … for free variables of type τ.x1τ, x2τ, … for bound variables of type τ.An arbitrary number of constants of certain types.An arbitrary number of function symbols with certain argument places.


Author(s):  
Mike Sosteric ◽  
Susan Hesemeier

<p> For some, “learning objects" are the “next big thing” in distance education promising smart learning environments, fantastic economies of scale, and the power to tap into expanding educational markets. While learning objects may be revolutionary in the long term, in the short term, definitional problems and conceptual confusion undermine our ability to understand and critically evaluate the emerging field. This article is an attempt to provide an adequate definition of learning objects by (a) jettisoning useless theoretical links hitherto invoked to theorize learning objects, and (b) reducing the definition of learning objects to the bare essentials. The article closes with suggestions for further research and further refinement of the definition of learning objects. </P>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document