Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W128553690> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 67 of
67
with 100 items per page.
- W128553690 endingPage "64" @default.
- W128553690 startingPage "17" @default.
- W128553690 abstract "I try to show here how, when and why Quine’s doctrine of ontological reduction evolved, and also the links which can be traced between that doctrine, Russell’s view of reduction (or construction] as “new knowledge”, and Benacerraf’s ideas. In addition, I discuss some relevant criticisms of Quine' s position, mainly those by Tharp, Chihara and Steiner.
 After a section trying to unify Quine’s main theses as proceeding from the paraphrastical methods of Russell’s theory of descriptions, I hold that Quine’s evolution towards a deeper sort of ontological reduction was a result of his attempts to clarify the difficulties of his original explanation of mathematical reduction. Thus, the doctrine of mathematical reduction in Word and Object, which was an important source of inspiration to Benacerraf and others, was only a first draft where Quine’s pragmatism shows the diverse reconstructions of the same mathematical concepts to be equivalent and also all correct, despite their possible incompatibility with the only condition to play the relevant roles. The general context then was one of increasing ontological relativity, but the underlying identification of reduction and elimination was —I think so— the main idea. A similar position was held in Set Theory and its Logic, where Quine put the emphasis on the fact that a model for arithmetic is provided simply by introducing a set-theoretical interpretation which would be able to preserve truth.
 However, in 1964 a turning point appears: now there is a distinction between two different ontological reductions, one attempting only to replace certain entities by constructions playing their roles, the other attempting also to eliminate the original entities as well, by showing their dispensability. The reason was that Quine realized that through the Löwenheim-Skolem theorem we should accept that any theory can be reduced to natural numbers, which seemed to him trivial, but met his previous criterion for acceptable reductions. Then he introduced the need for a “proxy function” admitting as arguments all the objects of the universe of the first theory, taking values in the universe of the second theory, and having to be formulated in a third “inclusive” theory. As this condition is not met by the “reduction” inferred from the Löwenheim-Skolem theorem, it was not a “true” ontological reduction.
 [Traducción: Gisela Hummell N.]" @default.
- W128553690 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W128553690 creator A5037094892 @default.
- W128553690 date "1992-12-13" @default.
- W128553690 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
- W128553690 title "La reducción ontológica y sus problemas" @default.
- W128553690 doi "https://doi.org/10.22201/iifs.18704905e.1992.820" @default.
- W128553690 hasPublicationYear "1992" @default.
- W128553690 type Work @default.
- W128553690 sameAs 128553690 @default.
- W128553690 citedByCount "0" @default.
- W128553690 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W128553690 hasAuthorship W128553690A5037094892 @default.
- W128553690 hasBestOaLocation W1285536901 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C111335779 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C177264268 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C27206212 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C2776211767 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C2779343474 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C527412718 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C9270016 @default.
- W128553690 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C111335779 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C111472728 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C138885662 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C166957645 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C177264268 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C199360897 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C2524010 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C27206212 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C2776211767 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C2779343474 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C33923547 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C41008148 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C41895202 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C527412718 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C9270016 @default.
- W128553690 hasConceptScore W128553690C95457728 @default.
- W128553690 hasIssue "70" @default.
- W128553690 hasLocation W1285536901 @default.
- W128553690 hasOpenAccess W128553690 @default.
- W128553690 hasPrimaryLocation W1285536901 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W2042416419 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W2157502692 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W2159871774 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W2232056220 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W2311825824 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W2326410101 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W2367543636 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W3124129869 @default.
- W128553690 hasRelatedWork W3209062011 @default.
- W128553690 hasVolume "24" @default.
- W128553690 isParatext "false" @default.
- W128553690 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W128553690 magId "128553690" @default.
- W128553690 workType "article" @default.