By Tadeusz Kotarbiński (auth.), Jan Woleński (eds.)
Tadeusz Kotarbinski is one among towering figures in modern Polish philosophy. He was once an outstanding philosopher, a very good instructor, a good organizer of philosophical and medical existence (he was once, between others, the rector of the Uni versi ty of t6dz, the president of the Polish Academy of Sciences, and the president of the foreign Institute of Philosophy), and, final yet no longer least, an excellent ethical authority. He died on the age of ninety six on October three, 1981. Kotarbinski was once lively in just about all branches of philosophy. He made many major contributions to common sense, semantics, ontology, epistemology, background of philosophy, and ethics. He created a brand new box, specifically praxiology. hence, utilizing an historic contrast, he contributed to theoretical in addition to useful philoso~hy. Kotarbinski appeared praxiology as his significant philosophical "child". no doubt, praxiology belongs to sensible philosophy. This assortment, howewer, is principally dedicated to Kotarbinski' s theoretical philosophy. Reism - Kotarbinski' s primary inspiration of ontology and semantics - is the vital subject of such a lot papers integrated the following; even Pszczolowski' s essay on praxiology considers its ontological foundation. ,Only papers, specifically that of Zarnecka-Bialy and that of Wolenski, aren't associated with reism. even though, either fall lower than the final label "Kotarbinski: good judgment, semantics and ontology". the gathering partially includes past released papers.
Read or Download Kotarbiński: Logic, Semantics and Ontology PDF
Best semantics books
This paintings provides a unified thought of element inside of common Grammar. It presents an strange mixture of syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic ways to a unmarried area, and offers distinctive linguistic analyses of 5 languages with very varied aspectual structures: English, French, Mandarin chinese language, Navajo and Russian.
During this brief monograph, John Horty explores the problems awarded for Gottlob Frege's semantic thought, in addition to its sleek descendents, via the remedy of outlined expressions. The ebook starts via targeting the mental constraints governing Frege's idea of experience, or that means, and argues that, given those constraints, even the remedy of easy stipulative definitions led Frege to big problems.
Linguistic research of the discussion of Italian cinema, utilizing recommendations and methodologies from pragmatics, dialog research and discourse research.
- Society in Language, Language in Society: Essays in Honour of Ruqaiya Hasan
- An Introduction to English Semantics and Pragmatics (Edinburgh Textbooks on the English Language)
- Meaning and Humour (Key Topics in Semantics and Pragmatics)
- On Conditionals
Extra resources for Kotarbiński: Logic, Semantics and Ontology
The real components of the space should have the full dimension of the whole space. Such components may be called geometrical bodies. (Topologically they may be def ined as interiors of the i r own closures, i. e. open domains in the topological terminology of Kuratowski (1948). g. geometrical spheres (in the sense of whole globes) are geometrical bodies. Tarski (1956a) sketched a geometry having the notion of sphere and the inclusion between bodies as the two unique primi ti ve notions Tarski' s definitions of other spatial relations are very ingenious.
Owing to tbe reference to everyday experience reiBm provides us with tbe feeling of philosophical understanding of the world. Unfortunanately the attitude of scientists becomes pragmatic. After a scholar-philospher, who strives mainly for ontological understanding of the world, there comes a scholar-pragmatist who notices that the familiar classical theory, perfect in itself, does not organize the totality of experience. The scholar-pragmatist then says: let us put aside niceties of philosophy and let us construct an ontologically dubious, un-intuitive theory which, however, would offer us a uniform CONSISTENT REISM 41 theoretical description of the totality of facts.
The expression in question is 'stating as to content'. The author, besides discussing t stating as to content' (direct and indirect), says nothing about other ways or modalities of stating. Faced with this fact, we can assume that the insertion of the phrase 'as to content' instead of being intended to distinguish one kind of stating from other kinds has another function. We might ask: what would stating which is not I as to content' be? enty, and so we can make the assumption, that the author used the expression 'as to content' in order to mark the difference between stating and other kinds of expressing, if we accept that stating is a special case of expressing.