Review of Symbolic Logic 1 (3):335-354 (2008)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
Argument-places play an important role in our dealing with relations. However, that does not mean that argument-places should be taken as primitive entities. It is possible to give an account of relations in which argument-places play no role. But if argument-places are not basic, then what can we say about their identity? Can they, for example, be reconstructed in set theory with appropriate urelements? In this article, we show that for some relations, argument-places cannot be modeled in a neutral way in V[A], the cumulative hierarchy with basic ingredients of the relation as urelements. We argue that a natural way to conceive of argument-places is to identify them with abstract, structureless points of a derivative structure exemplified by positional frames. In case the relation has symmetry, these points may be indiscernible
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1017/s1755020308080222 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Philosophy of Mathematics: Structure and Ontology.Stewart Shapiro - 1997 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Philosophy of Mathematics: Structure and Ontology.Stewart Shapiro - 2000 - Philosophical Quarterly 50 (198):120-123.
View all 8 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Modeling Occurrences of Objects in Relations.Joop Leo - 2010 - Review of Symbolic Logic 3 (1):145-174.
Similar books and articles
Analytics
Added to PP index
2013-11-01
Total views
46 ( #246,270 of 2,507,638 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #169,938 of 2,507,638 )
2013-11-01
Total views
46 ( #246,270 of 2,507,638 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #169,938 of 2,507,638 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads