Giulio Cesare Vanini, called by 17th-century theologians the „eagle of atheists”, criticized vehemently the fundamental assumption of Christian anthropology according to which virtues in their nature are something alien to the human being, and only vices and vicious inclinations should be peculiar to it. Vanini discards the theological alienation and restores the dignity of man as an individual of a reasonable and moral nature. According to Vanini, the existence of God as a giver of soul would deprive man of his (...) dignity. Thus, if man received his soul from God, nobody could in fact be father to his children, as he would not be able to transfer his essence to his offspring. An interesting item in Vanini’s considerations is his materialistic idea that men’s nature and conduct are determined by external factors, e.g., by food. As food is transformed into the „substance” of the consumer, „we consist of what we consume”. Vanini observes that rich people feed themselves differently than the poor and concludes that differences in habits may be attributed to different nutrition. Heroic deeds are explained by Vanini by that certain patterns of behaviour of people we adore or esteem are distinctly inculcated on our imagination. In certain situations these patterns „incite us to similar deeds”. To Vanini, the aim of his life was discarding lies and acting „for the enriching of the world of culture”. (shrink)

The first part of this paper presents the fundations and some properties of the inclusive theory of quantification and analyses the relationship between inclusive and standard quantification theory. Some arguments concerning application of the inclusive theory instead of the standard theory have been discussed too. The second part of the article presents some versions of the inclusive theory of quantification formulated by: Mostowski (1951), Hailperin (1953), Quine (1954), Meyer and Lambert (1968). In the third part, a new conception of the (...) inclusive theory of predicates has been presented. This conception is based, analogically to Meyer and Lambert theory, on the idea of undersignating names the first-order language. Four consequence relations have been semantically defined, and the way, how the fundations concerning realizing in the domain of individual names condition the form of the quantification theory has been presented. The discussed consequence relations have been axiomatically characterized. The only difference between the axiomatics is the way of dealing with the formulas of the following type: ∀xα –> α [x/t] where t is the name (term) of the first-order language. (shrink)