Ontological logic requirements: a perspective of analytic philosophy

Ontology is a long tradition of Western philosophy, on behalf of the characteristics of Western Philosophy Western philosophy experienced from ontology to epistemology, from epistemology to language steering ontological seem to have lost the center position in the philosophical arena, however. careful scrutiny, both in epistemology, or the philosophy of language, ontology still constitute these philosophical discussion, either explicitly or implicitly, background, interest in ontology has been throughout which, just to a different look, a different level, by a roundabout way revealed Thus, we can see that the landscape of modern Western philosophy, brief rejection of metaphysics, ontology all kinds of resurgence. analysis in the Anglo-American tradition, appeared, such as the "existence of this situation" is a real predicate, Quine's "ontological commitment", Strawson's description of metaphysics, a series of discussions. highlights the ontology Western philosophy ingrained complex, and this complex is the reason in Western thought lingering, fundamental research, the basic way of thinking is that the ontological reflected Western thought, logical way of thinking. "Because," the significance of ontological categories is its logical prescriptive in this article that is trying to do the preliminary study of this feature of the ontological problem mainly in the context of modern analytic philosophy.

One fact that is impossible, logic is impossible with the understanding ontology core areas "BEing" There are different views on how the concept should understand domestic scholars used to be understood as "presence", and recently advocated understood as "the voice of high modern Anglo-American analytic philosophy to the discussion of the ontological problem, but often straight in existence" (existence) of the sense talking about, say that this is a very interesting phenomenon here, I being not to discuss the translation of "Being" usage directly from us to talk about the "existence" to do some thinking.

First to introduce the two concepts, impossible facts and logic impossible. Several concepts of "necessity", "accidental", "possible", "impossible" is the topic of modern analytic philosophy often mentioned in accordance with Cripe grams of view, these concepts are metaphysical range, so related and ontology. while talking about the "impossible", often have two meanings on the impossible, "the fact is impossible" and " logic is impossible. "fact impossible, even though we say it is impossible, but still conceivable if it is possible to look like, for example," a three-year-old child to grasp Russell's theory of types ", which virtually impossible, but we can imagine that if he mastered Russell's theory of types is what, for example, he would tell us that the basic content of the type on the use of type theory to investigate the problem and solve the paradox. while for logic impossible ", we can not imagine that it may be the case. example," a three-year-old child is an adult, unless you "is" understood as "like", "claiming to be", etc. Otherwise, if the adhere to the "normal usage, you can not imagine if this proposition might be what it is like, this is not your imagination reach logical, but this is not possible with Grice and Manchester Lawson's point of view, the so-called logic is impossible, is incomprehensible. because you know perfectly well that the three-year-old children than adults, "What do you mean, but you can not know the" three-year-old child is grown "What do you mean. use Wittgenstein's words: "I can not imagine in turn, what it was like."
Expression analysis in the contemporary discussion of the philosophy of "existence", a frequently mentioned problem is the existence of this we look "is not a real predicate? David Pierce, similar something exists, something does not exist, "this expression, its particularity lies in the former alleged tautology latter is alleged contradiction. That is to say, the former logically Wing really after Wing false logic. former So is necessarily true, which is bound to false means that "... there is no propositional logic this is impossible., which means to say something does not exist, it is incomprehensible, you can not make sense to say that something does not exist.

However, this is obvious from our everyday intuition of conflict in our day-to-day language is meaningful to talk about a thing does not exist. Pearce cited three examples: (1) for things in the virtual world we can say that it does not exist. example, Pegasus does not exist ", which means" Pegasus "does not exist in the real world. (2) for the things of the past, you can say it does not exist now. example, "Metrical does not exist." (3) For the illusion of something, you can say that it is not true of the presence of, for example, "a mirage does not exist".

Of course, perhaps we can also think of some other cases, but in any case, the above example has shown that in everyday language really meaningful to talk about something does not exist, it is not logically impossible. Means that we At this time talking about the concept of "existence" does not reach a logical provisions.

We note that, in the above example, the reason why we can meaningfully talk about does not exist, because we have to determine the existence and there is no standard, a frame of reference, a semantic conditions, such as authenticity, time, etc. It is this semantic conditions so that "there are" highly abstract concept is still not completely get rid of the experience factor.

Second, the "existence", "", "argument" and ontology, as on the part we can see, the day-to-day understanding of "existence" still has a stipulation on the experience, for example, the stipulation on the time, space provisions. Wangtai Qing do not agree with the "existence of a reason to" translate "Being" is that the existence and time, the space can not be separated, but it is undeniable that the "existence" even if not the most abstract concept, but also a highly abstract concept past "Being" translated as "existence", it is also based on the concept of such a highly abstract In addition, even if the original Greek word "Being", in addition to the copula usage, it does have existence usage So, from the "presence" to "is" a key to our understanding of the ontological In this regard, I have two points.

First, from the "presence" to "the" ontological eventually exclude experience prescriptive and reach a logical prescriptive process. As stated Wangtai Qing said, "there are often linked and the" time and space "and the time and space, since Kant has been to Strawson, are considered to be the framework of experience, the experience so far as anything else, are in time and space. "there" is any right to it and the time of such a space conceptual link is still with the experience with the last point related, which is why we can still make sense to talk about something that does not exist. ontological logic prescriptive, it must be connected to this last a little the experience associated also be ruled out. So we can see there in Parmenides, we must demonstrate "invariance:" The Greek concept of change including variability and spatial movement. Palestinian Mooney Germany precisely from these two areas to illustrate 'is' is unchanged. "That is the argument of Parmenides, it is to exclude the provisions on the time and space. addition, according to the study of linguistics, Greece text "is" one of the Indo-European root bhu, "Build in Plato, he will be conscious meaning" excluding out. Hegel There, he is clearly the "is" defined as purely prescriptive "direct prescriptive, it is only equal to itself ... it is pure non-prescriptive and empty. posted on Free papers Download Center http://eng.hi138.com
modern analytic philosophy, due to the breakthrough of modern logic, there a new predicate logic, "exists" Although it can still be the syntax predicates in a traditional sense, but not a first-order predicate logic sense, the first-order predicate logic, "there" has become a quantifier. analytic philosophers Quine is even more made on this basis "exists is to change the yuan's value" (to be commitment is to be the value of a variant) ontological doctrine from the surface, these analytic philosophers from the perspective of modern logic of the discussion seems to discussions on the "traditional philosophical ontology is not the same but close examination, but it is the same strain, the same strain precisely reflected in the tradition of this logic. Parmenides, Plato or Hegel, is to get away from it all experience prescriptive and achieve pure logic prescriptive, but they always use natural language and characteristics of modern logic is symbolic and formal, morphological and semantic separation by using a set of artificial languages, morphological and semantic completely separated. process, it is to get rid of the experience requirement process for a variable element in predicate logic, it is a symbol only, "the use of variables is said that the whole reasoning series 'any' some use self identity. "This is precisely as Hegel said," it is only equal to "determine the range of the argument before, it is purely prescriptive.

Logical analysis of the comparison of philosophy and traditional philosophy, ontology prescriptive further unfolds before us.
Second, talk about the "existence" enter "" the ontology an effective way. Academic circles "BEing" translated into "there" many have criticized, but we have seen from the discussion of modern analytic philosophy, they discussion of the ontological problem is often started from "existence" (existence) Could it be that Western philosophy of their own for their own understanding not as good as we do? such a small chance. then, we will have on this phenomena reflect That is to say, "Being" should not be translated into "existence" and should be translated into "Perhaps this is a step forward in the ontology, but progress should not only philosophical stay on in the surface layer of the translation problem, but rather should show in philosophical understanding we should not only see the "different" in the areas of philosophy, but also why we should analyze the past "there" to translate " Being "? why modern analytic philosophy are still talking about" Existence "is not a predicate? This is to deepen our philosophical understanding of ontology necessary.

In my opinion, "as one of the highest philosophical category, not the people's awareness and understanding of a normal from a any prescriptive" is "very difficult for us to generate any meaningful understanding, any understanding are more or less content experience. "there" concept, as described above, is in a critical concepts from experience to logic, both a high level of abstraction to experience the world and experience the world, while maintaining last hint of contact (ie, we can still meaningfully understand about the "existence", "does not exist" to talk about, but is on the point of death) for the activities of human reason, even if it is a very abstract rational activity always through in an understandable way before they can effectively enter while talking about is the ontological problem we get into a very effective way for the "existence", because, although both distance ontological core areas recently, but is still in an understandable way, of course, where obviously there is tension between an understanding, I think, the Yang of passage or may be helpful for us to understand this tension:
...... Human understanding of objective things to a certain extent, and then go back and re-understanding of objective things, it can not be reversed. Example, the understanding of natural substances Initially always felt from the surface phenomenon, before we know the chemical elements, and then look back at the original the phenomenon, it can not fail to leave the emotional stuff, but it seems from a non-emotional abstract but this understanding never guess fanciful, but the spirit of the development to a certain stage to correct a deeper understanding.

Third, more experience, language and metaphysics tendency mainly from the understanding of the "existence" explores the ontology of logical prescriptive, but still there is a problem so we tryin: Why is it necessary from there "up to" is "also means that the ontological Why must rise to the logic of prescriptive?
I believe that this reflects a deep-rooted metaphysical tendency in Western philosophy from Parmenides, Western philosophy showed distrust for the world of experience, that the truth of the world, the nature of the world must be hidden in the empirical phenomena, so eliminate empirical prescriptive ways to achieve the ultimate truth, as Kant said: "metaphysical concept of knowledge itself that it can not be experienced." In the Western tradition, philosophy and science are homologous, while two 's distinction is that philosophy is conceptual analysis, trying to achieve the aspirations of its own truth in the level of language is so, because the language was originally used to describe the experience, giving us an intelligible world. " meaningful understanding "means, as Michael Oakeshott said, the experience of the world is a meaningful world, as long as there is experience, there is significant." word meaning from experience ... these words crystallization of human experience in a major way. "Whitehead is even more that the essence of language is that:
It uses the experience of some of the factors, the latter is the most easy to abstract out for people to consciously accept the easiest experience reproduction of human long-term use of these factors and their significance linked. Significance contains extremely more species diversity of the human experience.

Thus, the level of the language to eliminate the experience prescriptive process is to eliminate the process of semantics, the end point of this process is the significance of the boundaries, that is, to understand the boundaries, in other words, the boundaries of negation is meaningless is incomprehensible, you can not imagine the boundaries of the opposite of what it is like. As previously said, this is possible, also to the situation of a logical prescriptive logic so we can see whether Hegel no prescriptive ", or to achieve the morphological and the complete separation of the semantics of modern logic, are essentially the product of this metaphysical tendency. metaphysician again this understanding boundaries as their A Kimi Durkee point, on this basis, through a reverse process to construct their own ontological system. "from the reality of the concept in the ontology, only with the relationship between this concept to determine its sense, this is the logic of the concept of prescriptive and what logic prescriptive, these concepts in order to leave the empirical facts make inferences. "to this, on the significance of the provisions of this logic, we might be able to on the Wolf have a more profound understanding of the classic definition of ontology:
Ontology discussed various abstract completely general philosophical category, such as "is" and "is" to become a good scope of duality, entity, cause and effect, the phenomenon further abstract metaphysics. Posted in the free papers Download Center http://eng.hi138.com

Logic Papers