Examines the dialogues from Plato's early and middle periods and illustrates the similarities and differences between Plators"s concept of craft knowledge and ...

Acts of martyrdom have been found in nearly all major religions. Though considered by devotees to be perhaps the greatest expression of faith, martyrdom is also one of the most difficult concepts for modern observers of religion to understand. Cormack seeks to foster a greater understanding of these acts by explaining how martyrdom has historically been viewed in the major religions. She provides the first cross-cultural examination of this fascinating aspect of religious life.

In the opening sections of this paper, we defined ambiguity in terms of distinct sentences (for a single sentence-string) with, in particular, distinct sets of truth conditions for the corresponding negative sentence-string. Lexical vagueness was defined as equivalent to disjunction, for under conditions of the negation of a sentence-string containing such an expression, all the relevant more specific interpretations of the string had also to be negated. Yet in the case of mixed quantification sentences, the strengthened, more specific, interpretations of (...) some such positive string are not all of them necessarily implied to be false if the corresponding negative sentence-string is asserted. On the contrary, as we saw in section 6, a negative sentence-string can be used to deny one of the more specific interpretations of the corresponding positive string without also denying other weaker interpretations of that same string. One might therefore argue that the only empirical evidence availble for assessing quantified sentences suggests clearly that these sentence-strings are ambiguous. Indeed logicians, many of whom restrict their attention to propositions, MUST recognise logical ambiguity at this point. For the contextualisation of the negative sentences in section 6 showed that it was possible to assert the falsity of some proposition P expressed by the sentence S while asserting a further proposition which was compatible with the truth of S. However the corresponding conclusion that such sentence-strings are sententially ambiguous is not a necessary conclusion for the linguist: for the alternative account of postulating a single semantic representation plus a set of semantic procedures is also compatible with the negation evidence. Moreover we have seen independent reasons for thinking that if sentential ambiguity is assumed to be in one-to-one correspondence with what we should now call logical ambiguity, a considerable body of generalisations is lost. For the maximal ambiguity account, it should be recalled, is committed to assigning at least thirteen distinct propositions and hence thirteen distinct sentence outputs for every sentence-string containing no more than two quantifiers, for three out of the four interpretations originally outlined in this paper can be understood with each numeral taken either in an ’exactly’ sense or in an ’at least’ sense. Moreover there is no explanation of why just these interpretations are available-they are merely an arbitrary list, no more connected than are the two interpretations of John saw her duck, with no reason to predict that the ambiguity would carry over from language to language. If then it is granted that an ambiguity account fails to capture appropriate generalisations, only two alternative accounts of mixed quantification sentence-strings remain viable-an analysis proposing an initial co-ordinate logical form like the logical form III, which is the strongest form compatible with each of the propositional interpretations of sentence-string Two examiners marked six scripts, and the radically weak form in which only existential quantification (both over sets and over members of those sets) is invoked. Since there are strong arguments to suggest that the procedures which both analyses require are semantic, there seems no reason not to adopt the radical vagueness account, with its considerably greater simplicity. (shrink)

Die Möglichkeit, Walter Benjamins Allegorie-Begriff in akademischen Untersuchungen mit der Prosa Jean Pauls in Verbindung zu bringen, wurde von Benjamin noch selbst abgewogen: in der Rezension einer frühen Abhandlung zu diesem Thema, die er für zu kurz gegriffen befand. Ein solches Vorhaben, das beste Chancen böte, dürfe sich nämlich nicht auf literaturwissenschaftliche und geistesgeschichtliche Perspektiven beschränken. Notwendig sei vielmehr, auch die Dimension der Alltagskultur einzubeziehen und Jean Pauls Hinabgreifen in Tiefen des Volkstums und der Tradition zu berücksichtigen. Diesem Hinweis Benjamins (...) folgt die vorliegende Untersuchung. Indem sie sich auf den Bereich der materiellen Kultur konzentriert, legt sie eine Geschichte der Theorie der Dingwelt offen. Jean Pauls ästhetische Überlegungen zur projektiven Belehnung der Dingwelt mit seelischen Regungen wurden von Aby Warburg aufgegriffen und für seine kulturwissenschaftliche Methode fruchtbar gemacht. Dabei erschliesst er unter anderem einen Traditionsstrang des Denkens von materieller Kultur im ästhetischen und kultur anthropologischen Kontext, der geprägt ist von aus der Antike herrührenden abergläubischen Vorstellungen über die Einflüsse der Planeten auf die menschliche Geistesverfassung wie etwa die Saturnfürchtigkeit. (shrink)

This book argues that we can only understand transformations of nature studies in the Scientific Revolution if we take seriously the interaction between practitioners and scholars. These are not in opposition, however. Theory and practice are end points on a continuum, with some participants interested only in the practical, others only in the theoretical, and most in the murky intellectual and material world in between. It is this borderland where influence, appropriation, and collaboration have the potential to lead to new (...) methods, new subjects of enquiry, and new social structures of natural philosophy and science. The case for connection between theory and practice can be most persuasively drawn in the area of mathematics, which is the focus of this book. Practical mathematics was a growing field in early modern Europe and these essays are organised into three parts which contribute to the debate about the role of mathematical practice in the Scientific Revolution. First, they demonstrate the variability of the identity of practical mathematicians, and of the practices involved in their activities in early modern Europe. Second, readers are invited to consider what practical mathematics looked like and that although practical mathematical knowledge was transmitted and circulated in a wide variety of ways, participants were able to recognize them all as practical mathematics. Third, the authors show how differences and nuances in practical mathematics typically depended on the different contexts in which it was practiced: social, cultural, political, and economic particularities matter. Historians of science, especially those interested in the Scientific Revolution period and the history of mathematics will find this book and its ground-breaking approach of particular interest. (shrink)

In this paper, we study the relationship among classical logic, intuitionistic logic, and quantum logic . These logics are related in an interesting way and are not far apart from each other, as is widely believed. The results in this paper show how they are related with each other through a dual intuitionistic logic . Our study is completely syntactical.

LK is much more difficult than NK, and to make matters worse, Gentzen's intention is still unclear when it comes to that system (LK). -/- The second and third volumes of the series titled What is LK? conduct the detailed survey of each inference-figure in a toe-to-toe way, as it were, which most mathematicians looked through. -/- The present volume, Vol.2, looks deeper into structural inference-figures, which is never an easy task.

LK is much more difficult than NK, and to make matters worse, Gentzen's intention is still unclear when it comes to that system (LK). -/- After long surveys conducted from Vol.1 to Vol.4, all of which shares the common title What is LK?, this fifth volume finally handles the solved problems in the realm of propositional logic in LK.

LK is much more difficult than NK, and to make matters worse, Gentzen's intention is still unclear when it comes to that system (LK). -/- The second, third, and fourth volumes of the series titled What is LK? conduct the detailed survey of each inference-figure in a toe-to-toe way, as it were, which most mathematicians looked through. -/- The present volume, Vol.4, looks deeper into those operational inference-figures which concerns predicate logic.

LK is much more difficult than NK, and to make matters worse, Gentzen's intention is still unclear when it comes to that system (LK). -/- This book, Vol.1 of the series titled What is LK?, tackles this issue, focusing on the sequent, the most enigmatic notion we find in LK. The dependence-relation we find in NK shall play a crucial role in that investigation. -/- The style is typically textbook-like, so readers can learn the system of LK, using this series (...) as a guidance, too. (shrink)

The interpretability of AI is just as important as its performance. In the LegalAI field, there have been efforts to enhance the interpretability of models, but a trade-off between interpretability and prediction accuracy remains inevitable. In this paper, we introduce a novel framework called LK-IB for compulsory measure prediction (CMP), one of the critical tasks in LegalAI. LK-IB leverages Legal Knowledge and combines an Interpretable model and a Black-box model to balance interpretability and prediction performance. Specifically, LK-IB involves three steps: (...) (1) inputting cases into the first module, where first-order logic (FOL) rules are used to make predictions and output them directly if possible; (2) sending cases to the second module if FOL rules are not applicable, where a case distributor categorizes them as either “simple” or “complex“; and (3) sending simple cases to an interpretable model with strong interpretability and complex cases to a black-box model with outstanding performance. Experimental results demonstrate that the LK-IB framework provides more interpretable and accurate predictions than other state-of-the-art models. Given that the majority of cases in LegalAI are simple, the idea of model combination has significant potential for practical applications. (shrink)

LK is much more difficult than NK, and to make matters worse, Gentzen's intention is still unclear when it comes to that system (LK). -/- The second and third volumes of the series titled What is LK? conduct the detailed survey of each inference-figure in a toe-to-toe way, as it were, which most mathematicians looked through. -/- The present volume, Vol.3, looks deeper into those operational inference-figures which concerns propositional logic.

Two consecution calculi are introduced: one for the implicational fragment of the logic of entailment with truth and another one for the disjunction free logic of nondistributive relevant implication. The proof technique—attributable to Gentzen—that uses a double induction on the degree and on the rank of the cut formula is shown to be insufficient to prove admissible various forms of cut and mix in these calculi. The elimination theorem is proven, however, by augmenting the earlier double inductive proof with additional (...) inductions. We also give a new purely inductive proof of the cut theorem for the original single cut rule in Gentzen’s sequent calculus $ LK $ without any use of mix. (shrink)

Gentzen’s sequent calculi LK and LJ are landmark proof systems. They identify the structural rules of weakening and contraction as notable inference rules, and they allow for an elegant statement and proof of both cut elimination and consistency for classical and intuitionistic logics. Among the undesirable features of those sequent calculi is that their inferences rules are low-level and frequently permute over each other. As a result, large-scale structures within sequent calculus proofs are hard to identify. In this paper, we (...) present a different approach to designing a sequent calculus for classical logic. Starting with Gentzen’s LK proof system, we examine the proof search meaning of his inference rules and classify those rules as involving either don’t care nondeterminism or don’t know nondeterminism. Based on that classification, we design the focused proof system LKF in which inference rules belong to one of two phases of proof construction depending on which flavor of nondeterminism they involve. We then prove that the cut rule and the general form of the initial rule are admissible in LKF. Finally, by showing that the inference rules for LK are all admissible in LKF, we can give a relative completeness proof for LKF provability with respect to LK provability. We shall also apply these properties of the LKF proof system to establish other meta-theoretic properties of classical logic, including Herbrand’s theorem. (shrink)