Do we need quantification?

Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 25 (4):289-302 (1984)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The standard response is illustrated by E, J. Lemmon's claim that if all objects in a given universe had names and there were only finitely many of them, then we could always replace a universal proposition about that universe by a complex proposition. It is because these two requirements are not always met that we need universal quantification. This paper is partly in agreement with Lemmon and partly in disagreement. From the point of view of syntax and semantics we can replace a universal proposition about any universe (finite or infinite, countable or uncountable) by a complex proposition (= sentence built up from atomic sentences and the connectives). But from the point of view of communication such a replacement is not possible if the universe is infinite.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
100 (#170,475)

6 months
15 (#159,128)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Charles Sayward
University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Philip Hugly
University of California, Berkeley (PhD)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references