This study gives an arithmetic calculus to determine tautologies, contradictions and satisfiable formulas of the first order logic. The presented calculus may easily be extended on modal and deontic logic. The mathematical foundation of this arithmetic calculus is a Boolean ring.

Aristotle axiomatically divides the 28 syllogisms of necessity of Anal, prior. I 9-11 into two classes: those with a necessary conclusion and those with a non-necessary conclusion. The fact that Aristotle axiomatically comprehends only 24 syllogisms of necessity, however, raises two questions: 1. What method does he use to decide about the remaining four syllogisms? 2. Is this method consistent with the initial one? This essay pursues the answers to these questions first by means of semantic analysis, showing that Aristotle (...) ultimately considers assertoric propositions to be possible and therewith non-necessary propositions. Aristotle employs this approach, developed within the axiomatic, to the four syllogisms in question, thereby integrating them into the axiomatic. Finally, this essay answers the question of consistency by way of a formalization of the syllogisms of necessity. (shrink)

Summary This study continues in calculating formulas of the first order logic. Whereas the preceding part delt with monadic predicates, the present part treats polyadic predicates. The presumptions were supplied analogously.

The goal of this paper is an interpretation of Aristotle's modal syllogistics closely oriented on the text using the resources of modern modal predicate logic. Modern predicate logic was successfully able to interpret Aristotle's assertoric syllogistics uniformly , that is, with one formula for universal premises. A corresponding uniform interpretation of modal syllogistics by means of modal predicate logic is not possible. This thesis does not imply that a uniform view is abandoned. However, it replaces the simple unity of the (...) assertoric by the complex unity of the modal. The complexity results from the fact that though one formula for universal premises is used as the basis, it must be moderated if the text requires . Aristotle introduces his modal syllogistics by expanding his assertoric syllogistics with an axiom that links two apodictic premises to yield a single apodictic sentence . He thus defines a regular modern modal logic. By means of the regular modal logic that is thus defined, he is able to reduce the purely apodictic syllogistics to assertoric syllogistics. However, he goes beyond this simple structure when he looks at complicated inferences. In order to be able to link not only premises of the same modality, but also premises with different modalities, he introduces a second axiom, the T-axiom, which infers from necessity to reality or - equivalently - from reality to possibility. Together, the two axioms, the axiom of regularity and the T-axiom, define a regular T-logic. It plays an important role in modern logic. In order to be able to account for modal syllogistics adequately as a whole, another modern axiom is also required, the so-called B-axiom. It is very difficult to decide whether Aristotle had the B-axiom. The two last named axioms are sufficient to achieve the required contextual moderation of the basic formula for universal propositions. (shrink)

7 Klaus Hansen Feindberiihrungen mit versohnlichem Ausgang Carl Schmitt und der Liberalismus Das Ende des "Dritten Reiches" liegt iiber 40 Jahre zuruck. Noch immer hiilt sich eine ganze Gesellschaft, die es "nicht fertiggebracht hat, eine andere Geschichte hervorzubringen" (Jean Baudrillard), durch die nachgetragene Kritik und Schuldfeststellung ihrer Meisterdenker schadlos. Der "Nazi-Philosoph" Martin Heidegger beherrscht die feuilletonistische Hermeneutik der Jahreswende 1987 / 88; der "Nazi-Jurist" Carl Schmitt war von 1945 bis zu seinem Tode, 40 Jahre spiiter, immer wieder Gegenstand poli­ (...) tologischer und politi scher Verdammungsverdikte. Wer sich auf Carl Schmitt einliillt, begibt sich in einen Irrgarten, der emp­ fanglichen Gemiitern ein Faszinosum fUr sich ist. Die Beitriige von Sombart, Altmann und Thcker im vorliegenden Buch versuchen, dieser Schmitt'schen Attraktion auf die Spur zu kommen - und stellen dabei mehr Forschungsdesi­ derate als gesicherte Erkenntnisse fest. Vor allem aber geht es in dies em Buch darum, Carl Schmitt die Gerechtig­ keit einer angemessenen Auseinandersetzung widerfahren zu lassen. Freilich nicht dem "ganzen" Carl Schmitt, aber doch jenen Aspekten seines Werkes, die sich mit der Kritik des Liberalismus befassen. Carl Schmitt kritisiert den Liberalismus aus der Position eines Anti-Libera­ len, die sich in vierfacher Umschreibung skizzieren liillt. Der Anti-Liberalismus Schmitts ruhrt 1. von der anthropologischen Grundauffassung her. In der Tradition von Ma­ chiavelli und Hobbes stehend, sieht Schmitt den Menschen als "bose" und "gefahrlich" an. (shrink)

Appraisal theories of emotion, and particularly the Component Process Model, claim that the different components of the emotion process (action tendencies, physiological reactions, expressions, and feeling experiences) are essentially driven by the results of cognitive appraisals and that the feeling component constitutes a central integration and representation of these processes. Given the complexity of the proposed architecture, comprehensive experimental tests of these predictions are difficult to perform and to date are lacking. Encouraged by the “lexical sedimentation” hypothesis, here we propose (...) an indirect examination of the compatibility of the theoretical assumptions with the semantic structure of a set of major emotion words as measured in a cross-language and cross-cultural study. Specifically, we performed a secondary analysis of the large-scale data set with ratings of affective features covering all components of the emotion process for 24 emotion words in 27 countries, constituting profiles of emotion-specific appraisals, action tendencies, physiological reactions, expressions, and feeling experiences. The results of a series of hierarchical regression analyses to examine the prediction of the theoretical model are highly consistent with the claim that appraisal patterns determine the structure of the response components, which in turn predict central dimensions of the feeling component. (shrink)

This volume is a comprehensive roadmap to the burgeoning area of affective sciences, which now spans several disciplines. The Handbook brings together, for the first time, the various strands of inquiry and latest research in the scientific study of the relationship between the mechanisms of the brain and the psychology of mind. In recent years, scientists have made considerable advances in understanding how brain processes shape emotions and are changed by human emotion. Drawing on a wide range of neuroimaging techniques, (...) neuropsychological assessment, and clinical research, scientists are beginning to understand the biological mechanisms for emotions. As a result, researchers are gaining insight into such compelling questions as: How do people experience life emotionally? Why do people respond so differently to the same experiences? What can the face tell us about internal states? How does emotion in significant social relationships influence health? Are there basic emotions common to all humans? This volume brings together the most eminent scholars in the field to present, in sixty original chapters, the latest research and theories in the field. The book is divided into ten sections: Neuroscience; Autonomic Psychophysiology; Genetics and Development; Expression; Components of Emotion; Personality; Emotion and Social Processes; Adaptation, Culture, and Evolution; Emotion and Psychopathology; and Emotion and Health. This major new volume will be an invaluable resource for researchers that will define affective sciences for the next decade. (shrink)

Machine intelligence already helps medical staff with a number of tasks. Ethical decision-making, however, has not been handed over to computers. In this proof-of-concept study, we show how an algorithm based on Beauchamp and Childress’ prima-facie principles could be employed to advise on a range of moral dilemma situations that occur in medical institutions. We explain why we chose fuzzy cognitive maps to set up the advisory system and how we utilized machine learning to train it. We report on the (...) difficult task of operationalizing the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence and patient autonomy, and describe how we selected suitable input parameters that we extracted from a training dataset of clinical cases. The first performance results are promising, but an algorithmic approach to ethics also comes with several weaknesses and limitations. Should one really entrust the sensitive domain of clinical ethics to machine intelligence? (shrink)