We give upper and lower bounds for the strength of ordinal definable determinacy in a small admissible set. The upper bound is roughly a premouse with a measurable cardinal $\kappa$ of Mitchell order $\kappa^{++}$ and $\omega$ successors. The lower bound are models of ZFC with sequences of measurable cardinals, extending the work of Lewis, below a regular limit of measurable cardinals.

In this paper we study the logical strength of the determinacy of infinite binary games in terms of second order arithmetic. We define new determinacy schemata inspired by the Wadge classes of Polish spaces and show the following equivalences over the system RCA0*, which consists of the axioms of discrete ordered semi‐rings with exponentiation, Δ10 comprehension and Π00 induction, and which is known as a weaker system than the popularbase theory RCA0: 1. Bisep(Δ10, Σ10)‐Det* ↔ WKL0, 2. Bisep(Δ10, (...) Σ20)‐Det* ↔ ATR0 + Σ11 induction, 3. Bisep(Σ10, Σ20)‐Det* ↔ Sep(Σ10, Σ20)‐Det* ↔ Π11‐CA0, 4. Bisep(Δ20, Σ20)‐Det* ↔ Π11‐TR0, where Det* stands for the determinacy of infinite games in the Cantor space (© 2009 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim). (shrink)

DuBose, D.A., Determinacy and the sharp function on the reals, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 55 237–263. We characterize in terms of determinacy, the existence of the least inner model of “every real has a sharp”. We let 1 be the sharp function on the reals and define two classes of sets, * and *+, which lie strictly between β<ω2 an d Δ. We show that the determinacy of * follows from L[#1] xvR; “every real has (...) a sharp”; and we show that the existence of indiscernibles for L[#1] is equivalent to a slightly determinacy hypothesis, the determinacy of *+. (shrink)

For several partial sharp functions # on the reals, we characterize in terms of determinacy, the existence of indiscernibles for several inner models of “# exists for every real r”. Let #10=1#10 be the identity function on the reals. Inductively define the partial sharp function, β#1γ+1, on the reals so that #1γ+1 =1#1γ+1 codes indiscernibles for L [#11, #12,…, #1γ] and #1γ+1=#1γ+1). We sho w that the existence of β#1γ follows from the determinacy of *Σ01)*+ games . Part (...) I proves the converse. (shrink)

We characterize, in terms of determinacy, the existence of the least inner model of "every object of type k has a sharp." For k ∈ ω, we define two classes of sets, (Π 0 k ) * and (Π 0 k ) * + , which lie strictly between $\bigcup_{\beta and Δ(ω 2 -Π 1 1 ). Let ♯ k be the (partial) sharp function on objects of type k. We show that the determinancy of (Π 0 k ) (...) * follows from $L \lbrack\ sharp_k \rbrack \models "\text{every object of type} k \text{has a sharp},$ and we show that the existence of indiscernibles for L[ ♯ k ] is equivalent to a slightly stronger determinacy hypothesis, the determinacy of (Π 0 k ) * +. (shrink)

We characterize in terms of determinacy, the existence of the least inner model of “every real has a sharp”. We let #1 be the sharp function on the reals and define two classes of sets, * and *+, which lie strictly between β<ω2- and Δ. We show that the determinacy of * follows from L[#1] “every reak has a sharp”; and we show that the existence of indiscernibles for L[#1] is equivalent to a slightly stronger determinacy hypothesis, (...) the determinacy of *+. (shrink)

We give limits defined in terms of abstract pointclasses of the amount of determinacy available in certain canonical inner models involving strong cardinals. We show for example: Theorem A. $\mathrm{D}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{t}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}({\mathrm{\Pi }}_{1}^{1}-\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}\mathrm{D})$ ⇒ there exists an inner model with a strong cardinal. Theorem B. Det(AQI) ⇒ there exist type-1 mice and hence inner models with proper classes of strong cardinals. where ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{1}^{1}-\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}\mathrm{D}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}$ (AQI) is the pointclass of boldface ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{1}^{1}$ -inductive (respectively arithmetically quasi-inductive) sets of reals.

We locate winning strategies for various ${\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{3}^{0}$ -games in the L-hierarchy in order to prove the following: Theorem 1. KP+Σ₂-Comprehension $\vdash \exists \alpha L_{\alpha}\ models"\Sigma _{2}-{\bf KP}+\Sigma _{3}^{0}-\text{Determinacy}."$ Alternatively: ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{3}^{1}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}-{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{A}}_{0}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}$ "there is a β-model of ${\mathrm{\Delta }}_{3}^{1}-{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{A}}_{0}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}+\text{\hspace{0.17 em}}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{3}^{0}$ -Determinacy." The implication is not reversible. (The antecedent here may be replaced with ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{3}^{1}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left({\mathrm{\Pi }}_{3}^{1}\right)-{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{A}}_{0}:\text{\hspace{0.17em}}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_{3}^{1}$ instances of Comprehension with only ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{3}^{1}$ -lightface definable parameters—or even weaker theories.) Theorem 2. KP +Δ₂-Comprehension +Σ₂-Replacement + ${\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{3}^{0}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}$ (...) -Determinacy. (Here AQI is the assertion that every arithmetical quasi-inductive definition converges.) Alternatively: $\Delta _{3}^{1}{\rm CA}_{0}+{\rm AQI}\nvdash \Sigma _{3}^{0}$ -Determinacy. Hence the theories: ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{3}^{1}-{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{A}}_{0},\text{\hspace{0.17em}}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{3}^{1}-{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{A}}_{0}+\text{\hspace{0.17em}}{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{3}^{0}-\mathrm{D}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{t}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}$ -Det, ${\mathrm{\Delta }}_{3}^{1}-{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{A}}_{0}+\mathrm{A}\mathrm{Q}\mathrm{I}$ , and ${\mathrm{\Delta }}_{3}^{1}-{\mathrm{C}\mathrm{A}}_{0}\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}$ are in strictly descending order of strength. (shrink)

We study the notion of [Formula: see text]-MAD families where [Formula: see text] is a Borel ideal on [Formula: see text]. We show that if [Formula: see text] is any finite or countably iterated Fubini product of the ideal of finite sets [Formula: see text], then there are no analytic infinite [Formula: see text]-MAD families, and assuming Projective Determinacy and Dependent Choice there are no infinite projective [Formula: see text]-MAD families; and under the full Axiom of Determinacy [Formula: (...) see text][Formula: see text] or under [Formula: see text] there are no infinite [Formula: see text]-mad families. Similar results are obtained in Solovay’s model. These results apply in particular to the ideal [Formula: see text], which corresponds to the classical notion of MAD families, as well as to the ideal [Formula: see text]. The proofs combine ideas from invariant descriptive set theory and forcing. (shrink)

Using the concept of progress measure, we give a new proof of Rabin's fundamental result that the languages defined by tree automata are closed under complementation. To do this we show that for certain infinite games based on tree automata, an immediate determinacy property holds for the player who is trying to win according to a Rabin acceptance condition. Immediate determinancy is stronger than the forgetful determinacy of Gurevich and Harrington, which depends on more information about the past, (...) but applies to another class of games. Next, we show a graph theoretic duality theorem for winning conditions. Finally, we present an extended version of Safra's determinization construction. Together, these ingredients and the determinacy of Borel games yield a straightforward recipe for complementing tree automata. Our construction is almost optimal, i.e. the state space blow-up is essentially exponential- thus roughly the same as for automata on finite or infinite words. To our knowledge, no prior constructions have been better than double exponential. (shrink)

We characterize, in terms of determinacy, the existence of 0 ♯♯ as well as the existence of each of the following: 0 ♯♯♯ , 0 ♯♯♯♯ ,0 ♯♯♯♯♯ , .... For k ∈ ω, we define two classes of sets, (k * Σ 0 1 ) * and (k * Σ 0 1 ) * + , which lie strictly between $\bigcup_{\beta and Δ(ω 2 -Π 1 1 ). We also define 0 1♯ as 0 ♯ and in general, (...) 0 (k + 1)♯ as (0 k♯) ♯ . We then show that the existence of 0 (k + 1)♯ is equivalent to the determinacy of ((k + 1) * Σ 0 1 ) * as well as the determinacy of (k * Σ 0 1 ) * +. (shrink)

We define a parametrised choice principle PCP which is equivalent to the Axiom of Determinacy. PCP describes the difference between these two axioms and could serve as a means of proving Martin's conjecture on the equivalence of these axioms.

We prove the following result which is due to the third author. Let [Formula: see text]. If [Formula: see text] determinacy and [Formula: see text] determinacy both hold true and there is no [Formula: see text]-definable [Formula: see text]-sequence of pairwise distinct reals, then [Formula: see text] exists and is [Formula: see text]-iterable. The proof yields that [Formula: see text] determinacy implies that [Formula: see text] exists and is [Formula: see text]-iterable for all reals [Formula: see (...) text]. A consequence is the Determinacy Transfer Theorem for arbitrary [Formula: see text], namely the statement that [Formula: see text] determinacy implies [Formula: see text] determinacy. (shrink)

We prove the following result which is due to the third author. Let [Formula: see text]. If [Formula: see text] determinacy and [Formula: see text] determinacy both hold true and there is no [Formula: see text]-definable [Formula: see text]-sequence of pairwise distinct reals, then [Formula: see text] exists and is [Formula: see text]-iterable. The proof yields that [Formula: see text] determinacy implies that [Formula: see text] exists and is [Formula: see text]-iterable for all reals [Formula: see (...) text]. A consequence is the Determinacy Transfer Theorem for arbitrary [Formula: see text], namely the statement that [Formula: see text] determinacy implies [Formula: see text] determinacy. (shrink)

We study the notion of ????-MAD families where ???? is a Borel ideal on ω. We show that if ???? is any finite or countably iterated Fubini product of the ideal of finite sets Fin, then there are no analytic...

Assume [Formula: see text]. If [Formula: see text] is an ordinal and X is a set of ordinals, then [Formula: see text] is the collection of order-preserving functions [Formula: see text] which have uniform cofinality [Formula: see text] and discontinuous everywhere. The weak partition properties on [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] yield partition measures on [Formula: see text] when [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] when [Formula: see text]. The following almost everywhere continuity properties for functions on (...) partition spaces with respect to these partition measures will be shown. For every [Formula: see text] and function [Formula: see text], there is a club [Formula: see text] and a [Formula: see text] so that for all [Formula: see text], if [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text], then [Formula: see text]. For every [Formula: see text] and function [Formula: see text], there is an [Formula: see text]-club [Formula: see text] and a [Formula: see text] so that for all [Formula: see text], if [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text], then [Formula: see text]. The previous two continuity results will be used to distinguish the cardinalities of some important subsets of [Formula: see text]. [Formula: see text]. [Formula: see text]. [Formula: see text]. It will also be shown that [Formula: see text] has the Jónsson property: For every [Formula: see text], there is an [Formula: see text] with [Formula: see text] so that [Formula: see text]. (shrink)

In [P. Larson, Martin’s Maximum and the axiom , Ann. Pure App. Logic 106 135–149], we modified a coding device from [W.H. Woodin, The Axiom of Determinacy, Forcing Axioms, and the Nonstationary Ideal, Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin, 1999] and the consistency proof of Martin’s Maximum from [M. Foreman, M. Magidor, S. Shelah, Martin’s Maximum. saturated ideals, and non-regular ultrafilters. Part I, Annal. Math. 127 1–47] to show that from a supercompact limit of supercompact cardinals one could force (...) Martin’s Maximum to hold while the axiom fails. Here we modify that argument to prove a stronger fact, that Martin’s Maximum is consistent with the existence of a wellordering of the reals definable in H without parameters, from the same large cardinal hypothesis. In doing so we give a much simpler proof of the original result. (shrink)

In the presence of large cardinals, or sufficient determinacy, every equivalence relation in L(R) either admits a wellordered separating family or continuously reduces E 0.

The stationary set splitting game is a game of perfect information of length ω1 between two players, unsplit and split, in which unsplit chooses stationarily many countable ordinals and split tries to continuously divide them into two stationary pieces. We show that it is possible in ZFC to force a winning strategy for either player, or for neither. This gives a new counterexample to Σ22 maximality with a predicate for the nonstationary ideal on ω1, and an example of a consistently (...) undetermined game of length ω1 with payoff de.nable in the second-order monadic logic of order. We also show that the determinacy of the game is consistent with Martin's Axiom but not Martin's Maximum. (shrink)

Let Mn♯ denote the minimal active iterable extender model which has n Woodin cardinals and contains all reals, if it exists, in which case we denote by Mn the class-sized model obtained by iterating the topmost measure of Mn class-many times. We characterize the sets of reals which are Σ1-definable from R over Mn, under the assumption that projective games on reals are determined:1. for even n, Σ1Mn=⅁RΠn+11;2. for odd n, Σ1Mn=⅁RΣn+11.This generalizes a theorem of Martin and Steel for (...) L, that is, the case n=0. As consequences of the proof, we see that determinacy of all projective games with moves in R is equivalent to the statement that Mn♯ exists for all n∈N, and that determinacy of all projective games of length ω2 with moves in N is equivalent to the statement that Mn♯ exists and satisfies AD for all n∈N. (shrink)

We define a new type of two player game occurring on a tree. The tree may have no root and may have arbitrary degrees of nodes. These games extend the class of games considered by Gurevich-Harrington in [5]. We prove that in the game one of the players has a winning strategy which depends on finite bounded information about the past part of a play and on future of each play that is isomorphism types of tree nodes. This result extends (...) further the Gurevich-Harrington determinacy theorem from [5]. (shrink)

Matthias Schröder has asked the question whether there is a weakest discontinuous problem in the topological version of the Weihrauch lattice. Such a problem can be considered as the weakest unsolvable problem. We introduce the discontinuity problem, and we show that it is reducible exactly to the effectively discontinuous problems, defined in a suitable way. However, in which sense this answers Schröder’s question sensitively depends on the axiomatic framework that is chosen, and it is a positive answer if we work (...) in Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory with dependent choice and the axiom of determinacy $\mathsf {AD}$. On the other hand, using the full axiom of choice, one can construct problems which are discontinuous, but not effectively so. Hence, the exact situation at the bottom of the Weihrauch lattice sensitively depends on the axiomatic setting that we choose. We prove our result using a variant of Wadge games for mathematical problems. While the existence of a winning strategy for Player II characterizes continuity of the problem (as already shown by Nobrega and Pauly), the existence of a winning strategy for Player I characterizes effective discontinuity of the problem. By Weihrauch determinacy we understand the condition that every problem is either continuous or effectively discontinuous. This notion of determinacy is a fairly strong notion, as it is not only implied by the axiom of determinacy $\mathsf {AD}$, but it also implies Wadge determinacy. We close with a brief discussion of generalized notions of productivity. (shrink)

The Russellian argument against the possibility of absolutely unrestricted quantification can be answered by the partisan of that quantification in an apparently easy way, namely, arguing that the objects used in the argument do not exist because they are defined in a viciously circular fashion. We show that taking this contention along as a premise and relying on an extremely intuitive Principle of Determinacy, it is possible to devise a reductio of the possibility of absolutely unrestricted quantification. Therefore, there (...) are intuitive reasons to believe that the counter-argument fails to support the possibility of absolutely unrestricted quantification. (shrink)

We extend work of H. Friedman, L. Harrington and P. Welch to the third level of the projective hierarchy. Our main theorems say that (under appropriate background assumptions) the possibility to select definable elements of non-empty sets of reals at the third level of the projective hierarchy is equivalent to the disjunction of determinacy of games at the second level of the projective hierarchy and the existence of a core model (corresponding to this fragment of determinacy) which (...) must then contain all real numbers. The proofs use Sacks forcing with perfect trees and core model techniques. (shrink)

Sport, Rules and Values presents a philosophical perspective on some issues concerning the character of sport. Central questions for the text are motivated from real life sporting examples as described in newspaper reports. For instance, the (supposed) subjectivity of umpiring decisions is explored via an examination of the judging ice-skating at the Salt Lake City Olympic Games of 2002. Throughout, the presentation is rich in concrete cases from sporting situations, including baseball, football, and soccer. While granting the constitutive nature of (...) the rules of sport, discussion focuses on three broad uses commonly urged for rules: in defining sport; in judging or assessing sport (as deployed by judges or umpires); and in characterizing the value of sport, especially if that value is regarded as moral value. In general, McFee rejects a conception of the determinacy of rules as possible within sport, and a parallel picture of the determinacy assumed to be required by philosophy. (shrink)

We isolate two abstract determinacy theorems for games of length $\omega_1$ from work of Neeman and use them to conclude, from large-cardinal assumptions and an iterability hypothesis in the region of measurable Woodin cardinals thatif the Continuum Hypothesis holds, then all games of length $\omega_1$ which are provably $\Delta_1$ -definable from a universally Baire parameter are determined;all games of length $\omega_1$ with payoff constructible relative to the play are determined; andif the Continuum Hypothesis holds, then there is a (...) model of ${\mathsf{ZFC}}$ containing all reals in which all games of length $\omega_1$ definable from real and ordinal parameters are determined. (shrink)

We propose a theory of events and causes against the background of branching time. Notions discussed include possibility based on reality, transitions, events, determinacy, contingency, causes and effects. The main idea in defining causal relations is to introduce a certain preconditioning circumstance under which one event follows another. We also briefly compare this theory with some other theories.

Logicians interested in naive theories of truth or set have proposed logical frameworks in which classical operational rules are retained but structural rules are restricted. One increasingly popular way to do this is by restricting transitivity of entailment. This paper discusses a series of logics in this tradition, in which the transitivity restrictions are effected by a determinacy constraint on assumptions occurring in both the major and minor premises of certain rules. Semantics and proof theory for 3-valued, continuum-valued and (...) surreal-valued semantics are given and the proof theory for the systems outlined. The framework is robust in the sense that no conditional, defined or primitive, which sustains the contraction principles underlying Curry paradoxes can be expressed. Classical recapture is smoothly achievable in the system which however is expressively limited and not semantically closed. The conclusion considers the issue of how to extend the system to capture full naive set theory. (shrink)

We present an infinite-game characterization of the well-founded semantics for function-free logic programs with negation. Our game is a simple generalization of the standard game for negation-less logic programs introduced by van Emden [M.H. van Emden, Quantitative deduction and its fixpoint theory, Journal of Logic Programming 3 37–53] in which two players, the Believer and the Doubter, compete by trying to prove a query. The standard game is equivalent to the minimum Herbrand model semantics of logic programming in the sense (...) that a query succeeds in the minimum model semantics iff the Believer has a winning strategy for the game which begins with the Doubter doubting this query. The game for programs with negation that we propose follows the same rules as the standard one, except that the players swap roles every time the play “passes through” negation. We start our investigation by establishing the determinacy of the new game by using some classical tools from the theory of infinite-games. Our determinacy result immediately provides a novel and purely game-theoretic characterization of the semantics of negation in logic programming. We proceed to establish the connections of the game semantics to the existing semantic approaches for logic programming with negation. For this purpose, we first define a refined version of the game that uses degrees of winning and losing for the two players. We then demonstrate that this refined game corresponds exactly to the infinite-valued minimum model semantics of negation [P. Rondogiannis,W.W. Wadge, Minimum model semantics for logic programs with negation-as-failure, ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 6 441–467]. This immediately implies that the unrefined game is equivalent to the well-founded semantics. (shrink)

All spaces are assumed to be separable and metrizable. Consider the following properties of a space X. X is Polish.For every countable crowded Q⊆X\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${Q \subseteq X}$$\end{document} there exists a crowded Q′⊆Q\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${Q'\subseteq Q}$$\end{document} with compact closure.Every closed subspace of X is either scattered or it contains a homeomorphic copy of 2ω\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${2^\omega}$$\end{document}.Every closed subspace of X (...) is a Baire space. While is the well-known property of being completely Baire, properties and have been recently introduced by Kunen, Medini and Zdomskyy, who named them the Miller property and the Cantor-Bendixson property respectively. It turns out that the implications →→→\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${ \rightarrow \rightarrow \rightarrow }$$\end{document} hold for every space X. Furthermore, it follows from a classical result of Hurewicz that all these implications are equivalences if X is coanalytic. Under the axiom of Projective Determinacy, this equivalence result extends to all projective spaces. We will complete the picture by giving a ZFC\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\sf ZFC}$$\end{document} counterexample and a consistent definable counterexample of lowest possible complexity to the implication ←\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${ \leftarrow }$$\end{document} for i=1,2,3\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${i = 1, 2, 3}$$\end{document}. For one of these counterexamples we will need a classical theorem of Martin and Solovay, of which we give a new proof, based on a result of Baldwin and Beaudoin. Finally, using a method of Fischer and Friedman, we will investigate how changing the value of the continuum affects the definability of these counterexamples. Along the way, we will show that every uncountable completely Baire space has size continuum. (shrink)

Heidegger’s ontologische Differenz imposes methodological limits which strictly mark his philosophy for rigor and determinacy. If it is not possible to think Being from the categories of the entity, it is also true that the difference is a tank of possibilities and developments to which Heidegger himself hints at. From the accuracy of the early works to the overturning of the problem in the later works, the ontological difference is a constant of Heideggerian thought. This paper seeks to push (...) Existenz from a mode of being of Dasein to a mode of giving of Seiende. In accordance with his late writings, bringing the question of the Being­-existence bond towards the perspective of the entity – and not only the entity among entities that poses the question –, the development of the problem in Heidegger’s meditation is analysed through the questions of ontological difference – the mode of negation, the between of distinction, the specific situatedness that defines experience, the Being, as a member of ontological difference, in its connection to the Nichts, the Event as a relaxation of the connection between Sein and Seiende. The entity that is exist­ent is the convergence point of the Event where Being and existent, Being and existence, are not in contrast, but protrude (ragen) towards each other revealing the traits of a Seyende des Seyns, of the entity of Being. (shrink)

We study partiality in propositional logics containing formulas with either undefined or over-defined truth-values. Undefined values are created by adding a four-place connective W termed transjunction to complete models which, together with the usual Boolean connectives is shown to be functionally complete for all partial functions. Transjunction is seen to be motivated from a game-theoretic perspective, emerging from a two-stage extensive form semantic game of imperfect information between two players. This game-theoretic approach yields an interpretation where partiality is generated as (...) a property of non-determinacy of games. Over-defined values are produced by adding a weak, contradictory negation or, alternatively, by relaxing the assumption that games are strictly competitive. In general, particular forms of extensive imperfect information games give rise to a generalised propositional logic where various forms of informational dependencies and independencies of connectives can be studied. (shrink)

In this paper I examine two theories of democracy that can be found in contemporary French philosophy. Both Cornelius Castoriadis and Jacques Rancière offer a critique of modern democracy with the purpose of refounding it. The ‘refoundation narratives’ they propose are both based on an account of the origins of democracy in ancient Greece. According to Castoriadis, ancient democracy is grounded in a ‘magma’ of ‘social imaginary significations’ in which ‘autonomy’ is considered the correct response to Being defined as an (...) insurmountable ‘Chaos’. On the contrary, modern democracy defines Being as a determinacy and consequently fails to grasp the notion of autonomy. According to Rancière, the origins of democracy are to be found in the invasion of the public space by ‘those without a part’ who consequently have no title to govern. The problem with the ‘domesticated’ modern democracy is that it denies the existence of Otherness; that is, of non-citizens excluded from the public space. Therefore it appears incapable of letting the ‘dis-agreement’ manifest itself and consequently incapable of transforming the ‘police’ order. After examining the meaning of both theories, I attempt to elucidate the difficulties encountered by each author in the attainment of his goal, which is that of refounding modern democracy. (shrink)

Applies the Conformal Framework to the philosophy of logic, and, in particular, to what McCarthy calls the Interpretation Problem for Logic, i.e. the problem of characterizing the logical devices of a language, as opposed to its descriptive expressions, paradigm examples of which include observational predicates and natural kind terms, on the basis of the data provided by an interpretation of its speakers. An extension of the Conformal Framework is given that facilitates a general solution to the interpretation problem: a logical (...) constant, on McCarthy's account, is an operator whose semantic role is invariant under structure‐preserving transformations defined across situations, which are epistemically possible for the idealized intentional system interpreted. Such a characterization results in a relative determinacy: the interpretations of the logical terms in the intentional system's language are fixed by the role they play in stories describing worlds that are epistemically possible for the system, which in turn is fixed by the system's inductive method. (shrink)

Computability theory originated with the seminal work of Gödel, Church, Turing, Kleene and Post in the 1930s. This theory includes a wide spectrum of topics, such as the theory of reducibilities and their degree structures, computably enumerable sets and their automorphisms, and subrecursive hierarchy classifications. Recent work in computability theory has focused on Turing definability and promises to have far-reaching mathematical, scientific, and philosophical consequences. Written by a leading researcher, Computability Theory provides a concise, comprehensive, and authoritative introduction to contemporary (...) computability theory, techniques, and results. The basic concepts and techniques of computability theory are placed in their historical, philosophical and logical context. This presentation is characterized by an unusual breadth of coverage and the inclusion of advanced topics not to be found elsewhere in the literature at this level. The book includes both the standard material for a first course in computability and more advanced looks at degree structures, forcing, priority methods, and determinacy. The final chapter explores a variety of computability applications to mathematics and science. Computability Theory is an invaluable text, reference, and guide to the direction of current research in the field. Nowhere else will you find the techniques and results of this beautiful and basic subject brought alive in such an approachable and lively way. (shrink)

The present paper investigates the power of proper forcings to change the shape of the universe, in a certain well-defined respect. It turns out that the ranking among large cardinals can be used as a measure for that power. However, in order to establish the final result I had to isolate a new large cardinal concept, which I dubbed “remarkability.” Let us approach the exact formulation of the problem—and of its solution—at a slow pace.Breathtaking developments in the mid 1980s found (...) one of its culminations in the theorem, due to Martin, Steel, and Woodin, that the existence of infinitely many Woodin cardinals with a measurable cardinal above them all implies that AD, the axiom of determinacy, holds in the least inner model containing all the reals, L. One of the nice things about AD is that the theory ZF + AD + V = L appears as a choiceless “completion” of ZF in that any interesting question seems to find an at least attractive answer in that theory. Beyond that, AD is very canonical as may be illustrated as follows.Let us say that L is absolute for set-sized forcings if for all posets P ∈ V, for all formulae ϕ, and for all ∈ ℝ do we have thatwhere is a name for the set of reals in the extension. (shrink)

Utilizing Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s work, I argue that the gestaltian framework’s co-determinacy of the theme and the horizon in seeing and experiencing the world serves as an encompassing epistemological framework with which to understand racism. Conclusions reached: as bias is unavoidably part of being in the world, defining racism as bias is superfluous; racism is sedimented into our very perceptions and experiences of the world and not solely a prejudice of thought; neutral perception of skin color is impossible. Phenomenology accounts (...) for the dynamic changes in expressions of racism and the interconnections of both race and sex for women of color. (shrink)

Let κ be a cardinal, and let H κ be the class of sets of hereditary cardinality less than κ ; let τ (κ) > κ be the height of the smallest transitive admissible set containing every element of {κ}∪H κ . We show that a ZFC-definable notion of long unfoldability, a generalisation of weak compactness, implies in the core model K, that the mouse order restricted to H κ is as long as τ. (It is known that some (...) weak large cardinal property is necessary for the latter to hold.) In other terms we delimit its strength as follows: Theorem Con(ZFC+ω2-Π 1 1-Determinacy) ⇒ ⇒Con(ZFC+V=K+∃ a long unfoldable cardinal ⇒ ⇒Con(ZFC+∀X(X # exists) + ‘‘ $\forall D \subseteq \omega_1 D$ is universally Baire ⇔ ∃r∈R(D∈L(r)))’’, and this is set-generically absolute). We isolate a notion of ω-closed cardinal which is weaker than an ω1-Erd\ os cardinal, and show that this bounds the first long unfoldable: Theorem Let κ be ω -closed. Then there is a long unfoldable ł<κ. (shrink)

My colleague E. D. Hirsch has skillfully developed the consequences for literary interpretation of a “realistic” epistemological position which he formulates as follows: “If we could not distinguish a content of consciousness from its contexts, we could not know any object at all in the world.” Given that premise, it is easy for Hirsch to infer that “without the stable determinacy of meaning there can be no knowledge in interpretation.”1 A lot of people disagree with Hirsch on the latter (...) point, and they look to philosophy for replies to the premise from which it was inferred. But it is not clear where in philosophy they should look: To epistemology? Ethics?2 Philosophy of language? What Jacques Derrida calls “a new logic, … a graphematics of iterability”?3 Where do we find first principles from which to deduce an anti-Hirsch argument?I want to argue that there is no clear or straight answer to this question and that there need be none. I shall begin by criticizing the strategy used against Hirsch and others by my fellow pragmatists Steven Knapp and Walter Benn Michaels. They think that one can start with philosophy of language and straighten things out by adopting a correct account of meaning. I share their desire to refute Hirsch, their admiration for Stanley Fish, and their view that “theory”—when defined as “an attempt to govern interpretations of particular texts by appealing to an account of interpretation in general”—has got to go . But they want to defend this position by exposing a mistake which they think common to all theory so defined: an error about the relation between meaning and intention. They assert that “what is intended and what is meant are identical” and that one will look for an “account of interpretation in general” only if one fails to recognize this identity . Such failure leads to an attempt to connect meaning and intention or to disconnect them . But such attempts must fail, for they presuppose a break “between language and speech acts” which does not exist . 1. E. D. Hirsch, Jr., The Aims of Interpretation , pp. 3, 1.2. See ibid., where Hirsch offers a “fundamental ethical maxim for interpretation” which, he says, “claims no privileged sanction from metaphysics or analysis” . Here and elsewhere Hirsch suggests that it may be ethics rather than epistemology which provides the principles that govern interpretation. There remain other passages, however, in which he retains the view, conspicuous in his earlier writings, that an analysis of the idea of knowledge is the ultimate justification for his approach.3. Jacques Derrida, “Limited Inc abc … , ” Glyph 2 : 219. Richard Rorty is Kenan Professor of Humanities at the University of Virginia. He is the author of Consequences of Pragmatism , among other works, and is currently writing a book on Martin Heidegger. His previous contribution to Critical Inquiry, “Deconstruction and Circumvention,” appeared in the September 1984 issue. (shrink)

Supervaluational accounts of vagueness have come under assault from Timothy Williamson for failing to provide either a sufficiently classical logic or a disquotational notion of truth, and from Crispin Wright and others for incorporating a notion of higher-order vagueness, via the determinacy operator, which leads to contradiction when combined with intuitively appealing ‘gap principles’. We argue that these criticisms of supervaluation theory depend on giving supertruth an unnecessarily central role in that theory as the sole notion of truth, rather (...) than as one mode of truth. Allowing for the co-existence of supertruth and local truth, we define a notion of local entailment in supervaluation theory, and show that the resulting logic is fully classical and allows for the truth of the gap principles. Finally, we argue that both supertruth and local truth are disquotational, when disquotational principles are properly understood. (shrink)

A set of reals is universally Baire if all of its continuous preimages in topological spaces have the Baire property. ${\sf Sealing}$ is a type of generic absoluteness condition introduced by Woodin that asserts in strong terms that the theory of the universally Baire sets cannot be changed by set forcings. The ${\sf Largest\ Suslin\ Axiom}$ is a determinacy axiom isolated by Woodin. It asserts that the largest Suslin cardinal is inaccessible for ordinal definable surjections. Let ${\sf LSA}$ (...) - ${\sf over}$ - ${\sf uB}$ be the statement that in all generic extensions there is a model of $\sf {LSA}$ whose Suslin, co-Suslin sets are the universally Baire sets. We outline the proof that over some mild large cardinal theory, $\sf {Sealing}$ is equiconsistent with $\sf {LSA}$ - $\sf {over}$ - $\sf {uB}$. In fact, we isolate an exact theory that is equiconsistent with both. As a consequence, we obtain that $\sf {Sealing}$ is weaker than the theory “ $\sf {ZFC}$ + there is a Woodin cardinal which is a limit of Woodin cardinals.” This significantly improves upon the earlier consistency proof of $\sf {Sealing}$ by Woodin. A variation of $\sf {Sealing}$, called $\sf {Tower \ Sealing}$, is also shown to be equiconsistent with $\sf {Sealing}$ over the same large cardinal theory. We also outline the proof that if V has a proper class of Woodin cardinals, a strong cardinal, and a generically universally Baire iteration strategy, then $\sf {Sealing}$ holds after collapsing the successor of the least strong cardinal to be countable. This result is complementary to the aforementioned equiconsistency result, where it is shown that $\sf {Sealing}$ holds in a generic extension of a certain minimal universe. This theorem is more general in that no minimal assumption is needed. A corollary of this is that $\sf {LSA}$ - $\sf {over}$ - $\sf {uB}$ is not equivalent to $\sf {Sealing}$. (shrink)

Let κ R be the least ordinal κ such that L κ (R) is admissible. Let $A = \{x \in \mathbb{R} \mid (\exists\alpha such that x is ordinal definable in L α (R)}. It is well known that (assuming determinacy) A is the largest countable inductive set of reals. Let T be the theory: ZFC - Replacement + "There exists ω Woodin cardinals which are cofinal in the ordinals." T has consistency strength weaker than that of the theory (...) ZFC + "There exists ω Woodin cardinals", but stronger than that of the theory ZFC + "There exists n Woodin Cardinals", for each n ∈ ω. Let M be the canonical, minimal inner model for the theory T. In this paper we show that A = R ∩ M. Since M is a mouse, we say that A is a mouse set. As an application, we use our characterization of A to give an inner-model-theoretic proof of a theorem of Martin which states that for all n, every Σ * n real is in A. (shrink)

We analyze the hereditarily ordinal definable sets $\operatorname {HOD} $ in $M_n[g]$ for a Turing cone of reals x, where $M_n$ is the canonical inner model with n Woodin cardinals build over x and g is generic over $M_n$ for the Lévy collapse up to its bottom inaccessible cardinal. We prove that assuming $\boldsymbol \Pi ^1_{n+2}$ -determinacy, for a Turing cone of reals x, $\operatorname {HOD} ^{M_n[g]} = M_n,$ where $\mathcal {M}_{\infty }$ is a direct limit of iterates (...) of $M_{n+1}$, $\delta _{\infty }$ is the least Woodin cardinal in $\mathcal {M}_{\infty }$, $\kappa _{\infty }$ is the least inaccessible cardinal in $\mathcal {M}_{\infty }$ above $\delta _{\infty }$, and $\Lambda $ is a partial iteration strategy for $\mathcal {M}_{\infty }$. It will also be shown that under the same hypothesis $\operatorname {HOD}^{M_n[g]} $ satisfies $\operatorname {GCH} $. (shrink)

It is proved that in the absence of proper class inner models with Woodin cardinals, for each n ε {1,…,ω}, ∑3 + n1 absoluteness implies there are n strong cardinals in K (where this denotes a suitably defined global version of the core model for one Woodin cardinal as exposed by Steel. Combined with a forcing argument of Woodin, this establishes that the consistency strength of ∑3 + n1 absoluteness is exactly that of n strong cardinals so that in particular (...) projective absoluteness is equiconsistent with the existence of infinitely many strong cardinals. It is also argued how this theorem is to be construed as the first step in the long range program of showing that projective determinacy is equivalent to its analytical consequences for the projective sets which would settle positively a conjecture of Woodin and thereby solve the last Delfino problem. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Joel Weinsheimer HISTORY AND THE FUTURE OF MEANING In "meaning and Significance Reinterpreted," E. D. Hirsch, Jr. offers what he calls a "new and different theory" of meaning, one which radically reduces the role of the mens auctoris as the normative principle defining validity in literary interpretation.1 Clearly this essay marks a noteworthy shift in Hirsch's own thought, though in the history of hermeneutics such a reduction is of (...) itself hardly new. More interesting are the arguments Hirsch offers for this "correction" of his views, and in particular his thesis that in the process of application "responsible interpreters can adjust old concepts to new beliefs" and still say that they "have not really changed the text's meaning. They can properly say this, first of all, on grounds that... the original speech-intent subsumes new contents in the way that a concept subsumes examples, whether or not the examples were available to the original speaker. But in addition to this, the provisionality of speech sanctions a degree of adjustment in the original concepts as well" (p. 223). Application does not alter meaning if the new example can be subsumed under the original concept or if the original concept is itself originally provisional and adjustable. Thus Hirsch now concurs with Gadamer that application belongs to meaning and yet still dissents from Gadamer's thesis that application to situations unlike those the author envisioned necessarily changes the meaning. If determinacy of meaning is to be preserved, the essential question is, how far can sameness be unlike without becoming difference? Hirsch replies, "It appears... that meaning can tolerate a small revision in mental content and remain the same — but not a big revision.... In our ordinary talk about language, our judgment of sameness of meaning is based on our ad hoc judgment about the closeness of two contents" (p. 221). 139 140Philosophy and Literature Since I (and, I think, Gadamer) agree in great part with this conclusion, Hirsch's theory in my view does not need to be refuted and replaced with something new and different. Rather, in the spirit of his essay, I propose to adjust and build on it — by showing first that the development of Hirsch's argument rehearses Kant's movement from the first Critique to the third, second that the result of merging the two Critiques is unacceptable, and finally that Gadamer's reading of Kant anticipates and refines Hirsch's new theory while avoiding its unacceptable consequences. "The first amendment I must make in my original explanation of the distinction between meaning and significance is to reject my earlier claim that future applications of meaning, each being different, must belong to the domain of significance" (p. 210). In this first phase of his argument, Hirsch argues that the details of literary texts exemplify concepts that are themselves broader than the particulars that exemplify them. In Shakespeare 's sonnet 55, "marble" exemplifies what will last long but not forever. Just as the sonnet itself offers additional instances of this concept, so also the interpreter can find still other, more modern examples of it. Even if Shakespeare did not mention these modern examples and could not be said to have had them in mind, yet they too belong to the poem's self-same meaning if they can be subsumed under the original concept and thus belong to its extension. We can always find more examples, then, and in Hirsch's view this means that through its applications a poem can always become fresh again without altering its meaning. But here's the rub: if new instances are always to be found and thus no instance ever exhausts a concept, then no instance ever fully exemplifies a concept. Every example is a bad example, and Shakespeare would have done better to stick to conceptual language in the first place. If this conclusion is unacceptable, then we can reverse it. When the purpose is only to exemplify a concept, the difference between two examples (say, marble and steel) can be ignored as irrelevant. But it is nonetheless real. Certain elements of the particular example must be eliminated before it can be used to exemplify the general concept. But... (shrink)

In this article, I present a formal semantic framework that renders explicit how to reconcile the condition that a proposition about a contingent future event is true at a moment t0 with the idea that at t0, this proposition is ‘truth-maker indeterminate’: a state of affairs making it true will obtain later on, though no such state of affairs obtains at t0. The semantics I formulate employs ‘open temporal models’. They represent the passage of time by a specific component termed (...) time-resource, which acts on durations construed as model-external inputs. A model does not by itself specify which course of events gets actualized in a given duration depending on the latest moment that has already got actualized. A time-resource merely represents schematically the dependence between a moment t and a course of events that gets actualized in a time-span of a given length counted from t; until that much time has indeed passed, it is not fixed which course of events actually extends t. Further, I introduce evaluations as a fine-grained tool for studying truth-conditions of tensed formulas, and I use this tool to define the notion of truth-maker. I define what it means that a truth-maker will obtain but does not, and what it means for a truth-maker to be determinate. It is proven that my semantic analysis retains the desirable link between determinacy and historical necessity—namely, a truth-maker of a proposition being determinate entails that the proposition is historically necessary. (shrink)

We consider fixed point logics, i.e., extensions of first order predicate logic with operators defining fixed points. A number of such operators, generalizing inductive definitions, have been studied in the context of finite model theory, including nondeterministic and alternating operators. We review results established in finite model theory, and also consider the expressive power of the resulting logics on infinite structures. In particular, we establish the relationship between inflationary and nondeterministic fixed point logics and second order logic, and we consider (...) questions related to the determinacy of games associated with alternating fixed points. (shrink)