Ben,
F is a variable. But it does not matter. Vagueness (indefiniteness) is a feature of existential quantification regardles of whether it is the object or predicate. This appears to match what Lane and the trikonic say. You say,
"In that predicate logic which you're useing, does the existence of an aggregate of qualities formally imply the existence of something x which has that aggregate of qualities?" (end)
(EF)Fx---> qx. qx is a definite aggregate and implied by a rule of assumption. But the existence of x is not implied. The statement is true if the aggregate exists. The object letter x can be interpreted but existence is solely on the side of qualities. In extensional logic, do we ask whether qualities exist?
Jim W
-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Udell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Peirce Discussion Forum <peirce-l@lyris.ttu.edu>
Sent: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 18:04:27 -0500
Subject: [peirce-l] Re: naming definite individuals
Jim,
Quick question: is "F" a variable in "(EF) Fx" or is it a constant?
What I really want to ask but don't know how to phrase schematically (till I know the method for expressing distinctly the variable predicate and the constant predicate) is,
In that predicate logic which you're useing, does the existence of an aggregate of qualities formally imply the existence of something x which has that aggregate of qualities?
I'll probably be out the door by the time that you reply, but I thought I'd give it a shot.
----- Original Message -----
Jim wrote,
Leave the object variable unbound; bind the property. "(EF) Fx" translates "there is some aggregate of qualities such that x has it."
---Jim wrote,
Leave the object variable unbound; bind the property. "(EF) Fx" translates "there is some aggregate of qualities such that x has it."
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and industry-leading spam and email virus protection.
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
