We introduce a new compactness principle which we call the gluing property. For a measurable cardinal [Formula: see text] and a cardinal [Formula: see text], we say that [Formula: see text] has the [Formula: see text]-gluing property if every sequence of [Formula: see text]-many [Formula: see text]-complete ultrafilters on [Formula: see text] can be glued into an extender. We show that every [Formula: see text]-compact cardinal has the [Formula: see text]-gluing property, yet non-necessarily the (...) [Formula: see text]-gluing property. Finally, we compute the exact consistency strength for [Formula: see text] to have the [Formula: see text]-gluing property — this being [Formula: see text]. (shrink)

Journal of Mathematical Logic, Ahead of Print. We introduce a new compactness principle which we call the gluing property. For a measurable cardinal [math] and a cardinal [math], we say that [math] has the [math]-gluing property if every sequence of [math]-many [math]-complete ultrafilters on [math] can be glued into an extender. We show that every [math]-compact cardinal has the [math]-gluing property, yet non-necessarily the [math]-gluing property. Finally, we compute the exact consistency strength (...) for [math] to have the [math]-gluing property — this being [math]. (shrink)

We give a systematic method of constructing extensions of the Kuznetsov-Gerčiu logic KG without the finite model property (fmp for short), and show that there are continuum many such. We also introduce a new technique of gluing of cyclic intuitionistic descriptive frames and give a new simple proof of Gerčiu’s result [9, 8] that all extensions of the Rieger-Nishimura logic RN have the fmp. Moreover, we show that each extension of RN has the poly-size model property, thus (...) improving on [9]. Furthermore, for each function f: omega -> omega, we construct an extension Lf of KG such that Lf has the fmp, but does not have the f-size model property. We also give a new simple proof of another result of Gerčiu [9] characterizing the only extension of KG that bounds the fmp for extensions of KG. We conclude the paper by proving that RN.KC = RN + (¬p vee ¬¬p) is the only pre-locally tabular extension of KG, introduce the internal depth of an extension L of RN, and show that L is locally tabular if and only if the internal depth of L is finite. (shrink)

Nitric oxide (NO) is involved in synaptic long-term potentiation (LTP) by multiple signaling pathways. Here, we show that LTP of synaptic transmission can be explained as a feature of signal transduction—bistable behavior in a chain of biochemical reactions with positive feedback, formed by diffusion of NO to the presynaptic site and facilitating the release of glutamate (Glu). The dynamics of Glu, calcium (Ca2+) and NO is described by a system of nonlinear reaction–diffusion equations with modified Michaelis–Menten (MM) kinetics. Numerical investigation (...) reveals that the chain of biochemical reactions analyzed can exhibit a bistable behavior under physiological conditions when production of Glu is described by MM kinetics and decay of NO is modeled by means of two enzymatic pathways with different kinetic properties. Our finding extends understanding of the role of NO in LTP: a short high-intensity stimulus is “memorized” as a long-lasting elevation of NO concentration. The conclusions obtained by analysis of the chain of biochemical reactions describing LTP can be generalized to other chains of interactions or for creating the logical elements for biological computers. (shrink)

The paper critically examines some theses from A.V. Smirnov’s monograph ‘The Logic of Meaning as a Philosophy of Consciousness: An Invitation to Reflection’. In particular, the statement about the inability of cognitive sciences to exhaustively explain conscious­ness because of its de-subjectivation within their framework. It is shown that cognitive sciences are generally able to cope with the intellectual and controlling aspects of con­sciousness. Only its phenomenal aspect remains in question, but this is clearly not what the author of the monograph (...) means. Further, he argues that understanding the workings of consciousness underlies the philosophical foundations of any subject. The analysis shows that if we exclude consciousness as control and the phenomenal consciousness, which are obviously irrelevant here, then the philosophical foundations of anything within this understanding are reduced either to normative requirements in the form of the logical foundations of theories, or to empirical data in the form of cognitive limita­tions of real subjects. Attributing rationalism and universalism to the Western philosophy as its essential properties, the author of the monograph does not take into account that ra­tionalism as anti-empiricism has long been a kind of abandoned trend, and rationalism as a commitment to inferential procedures has also been recently challenged by some strong alternatives. Similarly, the author’s opinion of the Western philosophy of mind as the exe­cution of the Cartesian program, which he reduces to cogito ergo sum, is disputed. This methodological tool – and the metaphysical principle as well – of Descartes is subjected to incessant attacks from representatives of various schools of Western philosophy. More­over, it underlies not the philosophy of mind, but the epistemology of the great philoso­pher. Finally, the author’s concept of ‘unfolding the folded’ comes down to a kind of di­alectical deduction of the empirical features of various cultures from a priori predeter­mined ‘subject-predicate gluings’ and ‘intuitions of integrity’, which paradoxically brings us back to Hegelian-type rationalism. (shrink)

It is a celebrated result of McKinsey and Tarski [28] thatS4is the logic of the closure algebraΧ+over any dense-in-itself separable metrizable space. In particular,S4is the logic of the closure algebra over the realsR, the rationalsQ, or the Cantor spaceC. By [5], each logic aboveS4that has the finite model property is the logic of a subalgebra ofQ+, as well as the logic of a subalgebra ofC+. This is no longer true forR, and the main result of [5] states that each (...) connected logic aboveS4with the finite model property is the logic of a subalgebra of the closure algebraR+.In this paper we extend these results to all logics aboveS4. Namely, for a normal modal logicL, we prove that the following conditions are equivalent: (i)Lis aboveS4, (ii)Lis the logic of a subalgebra ofQ+, (iii)Lis the logic of a subalgebra ofC+. We introduce the concept of a well-connected logic aboveS4and prove that the following conditions are equivalent: (i)Lis a well-connected logic, (ii)Lis the logic of a subalgebra of the closure algebra$\xi _2^ + $over the infinite binary tree, (iii)Lis the logic of a subalgebra of the closure algebra${\bf{L}}_2^ + $over the infinite binary tree with limits equipped with the Scott topology. Finally, we prove that a logicLaboveS4is connected iffLis the logic of a subalgebra ofR+, and transfer our results to the setting of intermediate logics.Proving these general completeness results requires new tools. We introduce the countable general frame property (CGFP) and prove that each normal modal logic has the CGFP. We introduce general topological semantics forS4, which generalizes topological semantics the same way general frame semantics generalizes Kripke semantics. We prove that the categories of descriptive frames forS4and descriptive spaces are isomorphic. It follows that every logic aboveS4is complete with respect to the corresponding class of descriptive spaces. We provide several ways of realizing the infinite binary tree with limits, and prove that when equipped with the Scott topology, it is an interior image of bothCandR. Finally, we introduce gluing of general spaces and prove that the space obtained by appropriate gluing involving certain quotients ofL2is an interior image ofR. (shrink)

We prove a full completeness theorem for multiplicative–additive linear logic using a double gluing construction applied to Ehrhard’s *-autonomous category of hypercoherences. This is the first non-game-theoretic full completeness theorem for this fragment. Our main result is that every dinatural transformation between definable functors arises from the denotation of a cut-free proof. Our proof consists of three steps. We show:• Dinatural transformations on this category satisfy Joyal’s softness property for products and coproducts.• Softness, together with multiplicative full completeness, (...) guarantees that every dinatural transformation corresponds to a Girard proof-structure.• The proof-structure associated with any dinatural transformation is a proof-net, hence a denotation of a proof. This last step involves a detailed study of cycles in additive proof-structures.The second step is a completely general result, while the third step relies on the concrete structure of a double gluing construction over hypercoherences. (shrink)

Donald Davidson denied convention any interesting role in the philosophical theory of meaning: Conventions are neither necessary nor sufficient to account for communication by language. This anticonventionalism is part of Davidson's more general individualism about meaning. According to Davidson, notions such as that of a shared language, shared practices of use, and the attendant notions of standard meaning and linguistic mistake, are as uninteresting to the philosophical theory of meaning as that of convention. The chapter starts with a sketch of (...) the meaning theoretical background for Davidson's anticonventionalism, arguing that Davidson ultimately motivates both anti‐conventionalism and individualism by the social or public nature of language. After quickly taking up Davidson's arguments against attempts to conventionally link semantics to nonsemantic purposes, the chapter then focuses on his attack on the idea that literal meaning is conventional meaning and the surrounding discussion. (shrink)

According to the received view the later Wittgenstein subscribed to the thesis that speaking a language requires being guided by rules (thesis RG). In this paper we question the received view. On its most intuitive reading, we argue, (RG) is very much at odds with central tenets of the later Wittgenstein. Giving up on this reading, however, threatens to deprive the notion of rule-following of any real substance. Consequently, the rule-following considerations cannot charitably be read as a deep and subtle (...) defense of (RG) against the threat of paradox, as proponents of the received view are wont to do. Instead, we argue, the rule-following considerations provide Wittgenstein's deep and subtle reasons for rejecting the very idea that speaking a language involves rule-guidance. Although Wittgenstein subscribed to (RG) during his middle period writings, his later remarks on rules, far from being a clarification and elaboration of his earlier views, are directed against the claim of the middle period that speaking a language is an essentially rule-guided activity. (shrink)

Donald Davidson famously held that only beliefs provide reasons for belief. Perceptual experiences, he held, are not even propositional attitudes, and thus doubly disqualified from being reason providers. John McDowell and others have tried to restore the intuitive reason-providing role of experience by suggesting that experiences do have contents. However, on McDowell’s account, experiences provide ‘reasons’ in a sense very different from the Davidsonian. In this paper, I argue that there is a better way of rescuing the reason-providing role of (...) experience: Construed as a (special) kind of belief, experience provides reasons for belief in precisely the Davidsonian sense. Moreover, the doxastic account of experience I suggest integrates naturally both with the Davidsonian picture of content determination and, consequently, with Davidsonian anti-skepticism. (shrink)

Or, in Donald Davidson’s much quoted words: “What is it for words to mean what they do?” (Davidson 1984, xiii). Davidson himself suggested approaching this matter by asking two different questions: What form should a formal semantics take? And: What is it that makes a semantic theory correct for a particular language, i.e. what determines meaning? The second question concerns the place of semantic facts in a wider metaphysical space: How do these facts relate to non-semantic facts? Can they be (...) reduced to non-semantic facts, do they merely supervene on non-semantic facts, or are they something like metaphysical primitives? In the second half of the Twentieth Century, philosophers of language have been especially interested in the relation between semantic facts and facts that can be described in naturalistic terms, and different versions of reductive and non-reductive naturalism have been discussed. Another, though related, debate concerns the question whether the facts determining meaning (and thought content) are facts in some sense internal, or external, to the subject saying or thinking something. (shrink)

Excerpt from Goethe als Geschichtsphilosoph und die Geschichtsphilosophische Bewegung Seiner Zeit Eine Pflanze ist in ihrer Erscheinung nur recht zu begreifen, wenn man die Umgebung, wenn man den Boden kennt, dem sie entsprossen ist. Und je langer sie an einem Standorte beharrte, desto mehr kommt dieser Boden, diese Umgebung charakteristisch in ihr zum Ausdruck. Ja, wird sie verpflanzt und in andere Umgebung gebracht, nur langsam und schwer wird sie sich andern. So lange wie sie vermag, bleibt sie ihrem alten Charakter (...) getreu, und immer wieder zeigen sich von der einstigen Umgebung uberkommene Zuge. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.". (shrink)

The book critically analyses the nature and scope of intellectual property rights using three different approaches: the philosophical, the empirical, and the theoretical. It studies the different justifications usually put forward in favour of protecting intellectual property rights, and shows how such rights come into conflict with other rights in society. The volume also discusses their benefits and drawbacks with the help of case studies. The author contends that rights can and should be 'structured in a lexical order (...) of priority where rights which are linked to survival strategies ought to have enough legal teeth to trump rights which are more in the nature of economic entitlements, like intellectual property rights are'. (shrink)

Veit suggests that the challenge of coordinating movement in multicellular organisms led to the evolution of a prioritizing value system, which rendered organisms complex enough to be sentient and drove the Cambrian explosion, while the absence of this evaluation system led to the demise of Ediacaran animals. In this commentary we criticize Veit’s terminology and evolutionary proposals, arguing that his terminology and evolutionary scenarios are problematic, and put forward alternative proposals. We suggest that sentience is a system property, and (...) that the evolution of sentience was the outcome of the evolution of open-ended associative learning, which included the coevolution of sensory, motor, memory, and value subsystems. We suggest that these coevolutionary system dynamics were a factor in the Cambrian explosion and contributed to the extinction of the Ediacaran biota. (shrink)

An argument against treating our bodies as commodities No one wants to be treated like an object, regarded as an item of property, or put up for sale. Yet many people frame personal autonomy in terms of self-ownership, representing themselves as property owners with the right to do as they wish with their bodies. Others do not use the language of property, but are similarly insistent on the rights of free individuals to decide for themselves whether to (...) engage in commercial transactions for sex, reproduction, or organ sales. Drawing on analyses of rape, surrogacy, and markets in human organs, Our Bodies, Whose Property? challenges notions of freedom based on ownership of our bodies and argues against the normalization of markets in bodily services and parts. Anne Phillips explores the risks associated with metaphors of property and the reasons why the commodification of the body remains problematic. What, she asks, is wrong with thinking of oneself as the owner of one's body? What is wrong with making our bodies available for rent or sale? What, if anything, is the difference between markets in sex, reproduction, or human body parts, and the other markets we commonly applaud? Phillips contends that body markets occupy the outer edges of a continuum that is, in some way, a feature of all labor markets. But she also emphasizes that we all have bodies, and considers the implications of this otherwise banal fact for equality. Bodies remind us of shared vulnerability, alerting us to the common experience of living as embodied beings in the same world. Examining the complex issue of body exceptionalism, Our Bodies, Whose Property? demonstrates that treating the body as property makes human equality harder to comprehend. (shrink)

The dominant approach to environmental policy endorsed by conservative and libertarian policy thinkers, so-called “free market environmentalism”, is grounded in the recognition and protection of property rights in environmental resources. Despite this normative commitment to property rights, most self-described FME advocates adopt a utilitarian, welfare-maximization approach to climate change policy, arguing that the costs of mitigation measures could outweigh the costs of climate change itself. Yet even if anthropogenic climate change is decidedly less than catastrophic, human-induced climate change (...) is likely to contribute to environmental changes that violate traditional conceptions of property rights. Viewed globally, the actions of some countries—primarily industrialized nations—are likely to increase environmental harms suffered by other countries—less developed nations that have not made any significant contribution to climate change. It may well be that aggregate human welfare would be maximized in a warmer, wealthier world, or that the gains from climate change will offset environmental losses. Yet such claims, even if demonstrated, would not address the normative concern that the consequences of anthropogenic global warming would infringe upon the rights of people in less-developed nations. As a consequence, this paper calls for a rethinking of FME approaches to climate change policy. (shrink)

Can we employ the property of rationality in establishing what rationality requires? According to a central and formal thesis of John Broome’s work on rational requirements, the answer is ‘no’ – at least if we expect a precise answer. In particular, Broome argues that (i) the property of full rationality (i.e. whether or not you are fully rational) is independent of whether we formulate conditional requirements of rationality as having a wide or a narrow logical scope. That is, (...) (ii) by replacing a wide-scope requirement with a corresponding narrow-scope requirement (or vice versa), we do not alter the situations in which a person is fully rational. As a consequence, (iii) the property of full rationality is unable to guide us in determining whether a rational requirement has a wide or a narrow logical scope. We cannot resolve the wide/narrow scope debate by appealing to a theory of fully rational attitudes. This paper argues that (i), (ii) and (iii) are incorrect. Replacing a wide- with a corresponding narrow-scope requirement (or vice versa) can alter the set of circumstances in which a person is fully rational. The property of full rationality is therefore not independent of whether we formulate conditional requirements of rationality as having a wide or a narrow logical scope. As a consequence, the property of full rationality can guide us in determining what rationality requires – even in cases where we expect a precise answer. (shrink)

In the first part of the article, we show that if $\omega \le \kappa < \lambda$ are cardinals, ${\kappa ^{ < \kappa }} = \kappa$, and λ is weakly compact, then in $V\left[M {\left} \right]$ the tree property at $$\lambda = \left^{V\left[ {\left} \right]} $$ is indestructible under all ${\kappa ^ + }$-cc forcing notions which live in $V\left[ {{\rm{Add}}\left} \right]$, where ${\rm{Add}}\left$ is the Cohen forcing for adding λ-many subsets of κ and $\left$ is the standard Mitchell forcing (...) for obtaining the tree property at $\lambda = \left^{V\left[ {\left} \right]} $. This result has direct applications to Prikry-type forcing notions and generalized cardinal invariants. In the second part, we assume that λ is supercompact and generalize the construction and obtain a model ${V^{\rm{*}}}$, a generic extension of V, in which the tree property at ${\left^{{V^{\rm{*}}}}}$ is indestructible under all ${\kappa ^ + }$-cc forcing notions living in $V\left[ {{\rm{Add}}\left} \right]$, and in addition under all forcing notions living in ${V^{\rm{*}}}$ which are ${\kappa ^ + }$-closed and “liftable” in a prescribed sense. (shrink)

Tense logics in the bimodal propositional language are investigated with respect to the Finite Model Property. In order to prove positive results techniques from investigations of modal logics above K4 are extended to tense logic. General negative results show the limits of the transfer.

This book gives an account of a full spectrum of property rights and their relationship to individual liberty. It shows that a purely deontological approach to justice can deal with the most complex questions regarding the property system. Moreover, the author considers the economic, ecological, and technological complexities of our real-world property systems. The result is a more conceptually sound account of natural rights and the property system they demand. If we think that liberty should be (...) at the centre of justice, what does that mean for the property system? Economists and lawyers widely agree that a property system must be composed of many different types of property: the kind of private ownership one has over one's person and immediate possessions, as well as the kinds of common ownership we each have in our local streets, as well as many more. However, theories of property and justice have not given anything approaching an adequate account of the relationship between liberty and any other form of property other than private ownership. It is often thought that a basic commitment to liberty cannot really tell us how to arrange the major complexities of the property system, which diverge from simple private ownership. Property and Justice demonstrates how philosophical rigour coupled with interdisciplinary engagement enables us to think clearly about how to deal with real-world problems. It will be of interest to political philosophers, political theorists, and legal theorists working on property rights and justice. (shrink)

New developments in biotechnology radically alter our relationship with our bodies. Body tissues can now be used for commercial purposes, while external objects, such as pacemakers, can become part of the body. Property in the Body: Feminist Perspectives transcends the everyday responses to such developments, suggesting that what we most fear is the feminisation of the body. We fear our bodies are becoming objects of property, turning us into things rather than persons. This book evaluates how well-grounded this (...) fear is, and suggests innovative models of regulating what has been called 'the new Gold Rush' in human tissue. This is an up-to-date and wide-ranging synthesis of market developments in body tissue, bringing together bioethics, feminist theory and lessons from countries that have resisted commercialisation of the body, in a theoretically sophisticated and practically significant approach. (shrink)

This paper is about the relation between two metaphysical topics: the nature of properties, and way the instantiation of a property is sometimes “realized in” something more fundamental. It is partly an attempt to develop further, but also to correct, my earlier treatments of these topics. In my published work on realization, including my book Physical Realization, I was at pains to insist that acceptance of my view about this does not commit one to the causal theory of properties (...) I have defended in several places. I held that it commits one to the claim that within any given world, properties with the same causal profile are identical, but not to the requirement that a property must have the same causal profile in any world in which it can be instantiated. I now think that this was a mistake. There is an argument from the account of realization I have offered to the conclusion that, if physicalism is true, properties of macroscopic objects have their causal profiles essentially. In what follows I will present that argument.Along the way I will correct what now seem to me mistakes in my earlier presentationsof the account of realization. And I will conclude with an additional argument for the causal theory of properties, one that does not tie it to the assumption that physicalism is true or to my account of realization. (shrink)

Because law, policy, and ethics are multiply intertwined, developments in any one of these areas can affect what happens in each of the others. Thus those interested in African information ethics will find it valuable to examine trends in law and policy – and those concerned about legal trends should acknowledge effective leadership when it comes from the direction of ethical practices. Though African societies are almost always pictured as receivers of social, informational, and technological innovations that come from other (...) sources, today many Africans are providing global leadership by developing innovative techniques for approaching the problem of information access. This article describes the context within which this is taking place, including a brief introduction to innovations in a number of areas, before looking in particular at innovations involving intellectual property rights that blend law, policy, and ethics. (shrink)

The article discusses an idea of how to extend the notion of rigidity to predicates, namely the idea that predicates stand in a certain systematic semantic relation to properties, such that this relation may hold rigidly or nonrigidly. The relation (which I call signification) can be characterised by recourse to canonical property designators which are derived from predicates (or general terms) by means of nominalization: a predicate signifies that property which the derived property designator designates. Whether signification (...) divides into rigid and non-rigid cases will then depend uponwhether canonical property designators divide into rigid and non-rigid ones. But, I shall argue, they do not, and so the only notion of rigidity gained this way is trivial. To show this, I first focus on the kind of canonical property designators which could be thought to be nonrigid, canonical designators such as having the colour of ripe tomatoes which themselves contain non-rigid property designators. An argument to the effect that such complex canonical designators are non-rigid is rebutted, five arguments to the effect that they are rigid are formulated, and finally an explanation of their rigidity based on the general nature of canonical property designators is presented. (shrink)

It is widely thought that mind–body substance dualism is implausible at best, though mere “property” dualism is defensible and even flourishing. This paper argues that substance dualism is no less plausible than property dualism and even has two advantages over it.

In a 2010 paper Daley argues, contra Fodor, that several syntactically simple predicates express structured concepts. Daley develops his theory of structured concepts within Tichý’s Transparent Intensional Logic . I rectify various misconceptions of Daley’s concerning TIL. I then develop within TIL an improved theory of how structured concepts are structured and how syntactically simple predicates are related to structured concepts.