当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of Philosophical Logic › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Predicate Change
Journal of Philosophical Logic Pub Date : 2020-03-26 , DOI: 10.1007/s10992-020-09552-x
Corina Strößner

Like belief revision, conceptual change has rational aspects. The paper discusses this for predicate change. We determine the meaning of predicates by a set of imaginable instances, i.e., conceptually consistent entities that fall under the predicate. Predicate change is then an alteration of which possible entities are instances of a concept. The recent exclusion of Pluto from the category of planets is an example of such a predicate change. In order to discuss predicate change, we define a monadic predicate logic with three different kinds of lawful belief: analytic laws, which hold for all possible instances; doxastic laws, which hold for the most plausible instances; and typicality laws, which hold for typical instances. We introduce predicate changing operations that alter the analytic laws of the language and show that the expressive power is not affected by the predicate change. One can translate the new laws into old laws and vice versa. Moreover, we discuss rational restrictions of predicate change. These limit its possible influence on doxastic and typicality laws. Based on the results, we argue that predicate change can be quite conservative and sometimes even hardly recognisable.

中文翻译:

谓词变化

与信念修正一样,概念改变也有理性的方面。本文讨论了谓词更改的这一点。我们通过一组可想象的实例来确定谓词的含义,即属于谓词的概念上一致的实体。谓词更改则是更改哪些可能的实体是概念的实例。最近将冥王星从行星类别中排除就是这种谓词变化的一个例子。为了讨论谓词变化,我们定义了具有三种不同类型的合法信念的一元谓词逻辑:分析定律,适用于所有可能的实例;信念法则,适用于最合理的情况;和典型性定律,适用于典型实例。我们引入了改变语言分析规律的谓词更改操作,并表明表达能力不受谓词更改的影响。人们可以将新法律转化为旧法律,反之亦然。此外,我们讨论了谓词变化的合理限制。这些限制了它对信念和典型性法则的可能影响。根据结果​​,我们认为谓词变化可能非常保守,有时甚至难以识别。
更新日期:2020-03-26
down
wechat
bug