Basic questions on truth
著者
書誌事項
Basic questions on truth
(Episteme / editor, Mario Bunge, v. 24)
Kluwer Academic Publishers, c2000
- hard : alk. pap
大学図書館所蔵 全3件
  青森
  岩手
  宮城
  秋田
  山形
  福島
  茨城
  栃木
  群馬
  埼玉
  千葉
  東京
  神奈川
  新潟
  富山
  石川
  福井
  山梨
  長野
  岐阜
  静岡
  愛知
  三重
  滋賀
  京都
  大阪
  兵庫
  奈良
  和歌山
  鳥取
  島根
  岡山
  広島
  山口
  徳島
  香川
  愛媛
  高知
  福岡
  佐賀
  長崎
  熊本
  大分
  宮崎
  鹿児島
  沖縄
  韓国
  中国
  タイ
  イギリス
  ドイツ
  スイス
  フランス
  ベルギー
  オランダ
  スウェーデン
  ノルウェー
  アメリカ
注記
Includes bibliographical references (p. [207]-221) and index
内容説明・目次
内容説明
The task of the book is not to give a survey of the main theories on truth found in the literature. There are several books available which do this: The one of David for Deflationist (and Disquotational) Theories of Truth; that of Chapuis for Revision Theories of Truth; that of Kirkham for Correspondence Theories and several others; that ofRescher for Coherence Theories of Truth. Moreover the book is not an analy sis just of Tar ski's theory, like that of Moreno or the respective chapters in Kirkham, though Tarski's theory plays an important role in the whole work presented. The task of the book is to give a detailed answer to some basic questions on truth which have been perennial problems through the centuries and are still discussed today. The answer is given in the light of our knowledge today and with the help of modem logic. But the book explicitly aims at connecting recent problems with re lated ones in the whole history of philosophy. The method to incorporate important philosophers of the tradition into the analysis is that of disputation, i. e. of putting some of their main thesis into objections or counterobjections pro or contra a posi tive answer to the respective question. After the pros and cons are given a detailed answer to the question is proposed and finally commentaries and corrections are given to the objections and counterobjections in the light of the proposed answer.
目次
- Introduction. Acknowledgments. 1. Is it Appropriate to Ask `What is Truth?' 2. Is it Appropriate to ask for the Meaning or for the Definition of the Expression `Truth
- , `The True' of `True'? 3. Is the Expression True Superfluous and Therefore not a Predicate? 4. Can the Rules of a Deductive System be called True or False? 5. Are Definitions True or False? 6. Judgements, Propositions, Sentences. 7. Is a Sentence True if it Corresponds to Reality? 8. Are there Negative Facts or Properties? 9. Can a False Theory be Nearer to the Truth than another False Theory? 10. Ens et Verum Convertuntur? References.
「Nielsen BookData」 より