个体词的逻辑语义

发布时间：2018-04-28 11:58

本文选题：个体词 + 专名　；参考：《清华大学》2007年博士论文

【摘要】： 自弗雷格以来,哲学家们对名称问题进行了深入和富有成果的讨论。弗雷格、罗素和克里普克等人都对名称问题进行了分析和说明,而且他们的观点都不尽相同:弗雷格不区分专名和摹状词,认为它们只要指称相同,其他方面的不同都是可以容忍的;罗素严格区分了专名和摹状词;而克里普克却认为专名是严格的指示词,摹状词是非严格的指示词。这些讨论丰富了哲学的理论内容,促进了哲学的研究和发展。但是应看到,弗雷格、罗素和克里普克不但是哲学家而且也都是逻辑学家,他们的哲学理论都有他们各自的逻辑理论的支持,因此他们对专名的不同分析可以从一阶逻辑与模态逻辑中找到依据。简言之,对专名的认识依赖于对个体词的逻辑性质的认识。个体词的逻辑性质可以从句法和语义两个方面来分析。句法方面,个体词基本分为两类:一类是简单个体词,一类是复合个体词。简单个体词又包括个体变元和个体常元;复合个体词是指由简单个体词添加函数符号产生的。个体变元与个体常元的逻辑性质不同,它们与谓词、量词组合的公式在一阶逻辑与模态逻辑中的表现也是不同的。从语义上看,当用来解释非逻辑符号的结构被确定,个体常元的解释也就随之确定,而个体变元需要赋值。对量化公式的解释需要个体满足谓词规定的性质才能说明这些公式的真之条件,即需要可满足来说明。根据对个体词逻辑性质的认识人们可以讨论专名和摹状词,而根据不同逻辑系统,比如一阶逻辑或模态逻辑,人们可以对专名及其相关问题提出不同的解释,这样也就有了弗雷格、罗素和克里普克等人不同的观点。传统逻辑是类逻辑,因而没有关于个体词的研究。在探讨日常推理中的问题时,则把专名当作类来处理,因此存在许多问题。传统逻辑与现代逻辑有许多差异,而关于个体词的处理,是一个探讨其间差异,说明其区别的重要途径。根据对个体词逻辑性质的说明以及哲学上人们对个体词的不同讨论,我们可以清楚看出,逻辑与哲学具有十分密切的关系,逻辑对于哲学具有重要意义。
[Abstract]:Since Frege, philosophers have conducted in-depth and fruitful discussions on the issue of names. Frege, Russell and Kripke have all analyzed and explained the name problem, and their views are different: Frege does not distinguish between proper names and descriptions, as long as they refer to the same. Other differences are tolerated; Russell strictly distinguishes between proper names and descriptions, while Kripke thinks that proper names are strict deixis, and descriptions are non-strict deixis. These discussions enrich the theoretical content of philosophy and promote the research and development of philosophy. But it should be noted that Frege, Russell and Kripke are not only philosophers but also logicians, and that their philosophical theories are supported by their own logical theories. Therefore, their different analysis of proper names can be found in first order logic and modal logic. In short, the understanding of proper names depends on the understanding of the logical nature of individual words. The logical nature of individual words can be analyzed from syntactic and semantic aspects. Syntactically, individual words can be divided into two categories: simple individual words and compound individual words. Simple individual words include individual variables and individual constants, and compound individual words are generated by adding functional symbols to simple individual words. The logical properties of individual variables and individual constants are different, and the formulas of combination of predicates and classifiers are different in the first order logic and modal logic. From the semantic point of view, when the structure used to explain non-logical symbols is determined, the interpretation of individual constant elements is determined, and individual variables need to be assigned values. The interpretation of quantitative formulas requires that individuals satisfy the properties prescribed by predicates in order to explain the true conditions of these formulas, that is to say, they need to be satisfied to explain. Based on the understanding of the logical nature of individual words, one can discuss proper names and descriptions, while according to different logical systems, such as first-order logic or modal logic, one can give different interpretations of proper names and their related problems. This gives Frege, Russell and Kripke different views. Traditional logic is class logic, so there is no research on individual words. When discussing the problems in daily reasoning, the proper name is treated as a class, so there are many problems. There are many differences between traditional logic and modern logic, but dealing with individual words is an important way to explore the differences between them. According to the explanation of the logical nature of individual words and the different discussions on individual words in philosophy, we can clearly see that logic has a very close relationship with philosophy, and logic is of great significance to philosophy.
【学位授予单位】：清华大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2007
【分类号】：B812

【相似文献】