جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « جمله » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Two main approaches to solve one group of liar paradox's versions _that is, the group in which demonstratives are used_ are denying self-reference sentences and denying that the liar sentence is a statement, which is the primary and genuine bearer of truth. The major problem with the first approach is that they have not explained why we do not have self-referential sentences and usually try to omit them with conventions. The main problem with the second approach is that they have not explained why the liar sentence would not constitute a statement. We, in this inquiry, after casting a new twosome division for all versions of the liar paradox, will present a solution, or probably a way of dissolution, for a cluster of the versions, namely the cluster in which demonstratives are used explicitly or implicitly_ a solution that, in a way, has the two approaches in it. The solution is this: since firstly propositions are primary and essential bearers of truth and secondly pointing out to an inexistent that is neither existent nor in relation with an existent is impossible, so no proposition in correspondence with the sentence "this sentence is false" is formed in our minds, because before this sentence is formed completely and before ascribing the predicate to the subject, no sentence was formed so that we could refer to it and ascribe a predicate to it. So we would not have any propositions in correspondence with the sentence so that it would be descripted to the truth/falsity primarily and by-itself and the sentence would be true/false by virtue of it, because a portion of the sentence_ namely the subject_ has not sense, namely before predication we do not have “this sentence”.

One of the arguments made for proving the existence of Allah which was considered to be a valid argument before Mulla Sadra، was an argument which was based on the concept of the set of possibilities and their need of a cause beyond themselves. Avicenna had put forth this argument and Sheik Shahabeddin Suhrawardi considered it needless of the refutation of infinite regress. The fact that this argument was not in need of the refutation of infinite regress made it very significant، but Mulla Sadra considered this argument، without the refutation of infinite regress، a void argument and، even with the addition of the refutation of infinite regress، he did not consider it an independent argument. The present paper seeks to investigate this argument and answer the critiques leveled against it by Mulla Sadra and، ultimately، it considers this argument to be valid with an aggregate perspective taking it as a mirror of the contagion of command، though Mulla Sadra’s critiques of those، who consider an existence for the aggregate beyond the beings، seems to be valid.

In the past two centuries there have been five points where empiricism has taken a turn for the better. The first is the shift from ideas to words. The second is the shift of semantic focus from terms to sentences. The third is the shift of semantic focus from sentences to systems of sentences. The fourth is, in Morton White's phrase, methodological monism: abandonment of the analytic-synthetic dualism. The fifth is. naturalism: abandonment of the goal of a first philosophy prior to natural science. Quine in his article proceed to elaborate on each of the five.