著者
西條 剛央
出版者
科学基礎論学会
雑誌
科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.40, no.2, pp.93-114, 2013-03-25
被引用文献数
1

The purpose of this paper is to show the philosophical functions of structural constructivism by solving the fundamental problems of the philosophy of science and providing a theoretical basis for the human sciences. Firstly, the paper explains the basic principles and concepts of structural constructivism. Secondly, it identifies the difficult problems that previous notable scholars could not solve in the science of philosophy. Thirdly, it argues that by applying the structuralist of the philosophy of science and structural constructivism, those philosophical problems can be resolved and a theoretical basis for the human sciences can be established. This indicates the theoretical and epistemological superiority of structural constructivism.
著者
中尾 央
出版者
科学基礎論学会
雑誌
科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.40, no.1, pp.1-8, 2012
参考文献数
46

This paper analyzes modularity in biological and cultural evolution. Evolutionarily modularized or quasi-independent biological traits can vary relatively independently from other traits and have higher variability, and developmentally modularized biological traits have robust developmental processes and higher variability and heritability. First, I point out that these two concepts should not be confused. Second, by focusing on the concept of evolutionary modularity, I argue that it can increase (and actually have increased at least in some cases) evolvability also in the context of cultural evolution if cultures are modularized through looking at some specific examples of cultural evolution.
著者
西條 剛央
出版者
科学基礎論学会
雑誌
科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.40, no.2, pp.93-114, 2013-03-25 (Released:2017-08-01)
参考文献数
59
被引用文献数
1

The purpose of this paper is to show the philosophical functions of structural constructivism by solving the fundamental problems of the philosophy of science and providing a theoretical basis for the human sciences. Firstly, the paper explains the basic principles and concepts of structural constructivism. Secondly, it identifies the difficult problems that previous notable scholars could not solve in the science of philosophy. Thirdly, it argues that by applying the structuralist of the philosophy of science and structural constructivism, those philosophical problems can be resolved and a theoretical basis for the human sciences can be established. This indicates the theoretical and epistemological superiority of structural constructivism.
著者
細川 雄一郎
出版者
科学基礎論学会
雑誌
科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.47, no.1, pp.15-34, 2019 (Released:2019-11-07)
参考文献数
32
被引用文献数
1

By applying the extended system of modal logic developed in [32], we present a logical analysis of the Gettier problem. Based on the result, in particular, we clarify the following point. In the literature on the Gettier problem, most authors seem to share the opinion that in general ‘belief’ precedes ‘knowledge’: we believe a proposition while we do not necessarily believe ourselves to have known it to be true. Interestingly, our analysis suggests that the story is the other way round in a sense: in general, for some proposition p, we believe that we have known that p, then we believe that p. Accordingly, even if given some reason for wanting to believe that p, we usually do not have the bare belief that p. Instead, in such a situation, more deliberately we think that it might be that p, or it can be hypothesized that p. Then, we can say, what we have at the start is not the bare belief that p, but “might possibility” or “hypothetical possibility” that p, which presumably involves abductive reasoning.
著者
谷田 雄毅
出版者
科学基礎論学会
雑誌
科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.49, no.1, pp.1-14, 2021 (Released:2021-12-14)
参考文献数
39

In this paper, we discuss an uncertainty of mental concepts. In the application of mental concepts, we often face disagreement. For example, observing a behavior, some person judges he/she is sad, but others do not. Surprisingly, in his Last Writings on the Philosophy of Psychology, Wittgenstein says that there is an uncertainty of criteria in the mental concepts. In other words, he thinks disagreement in judgements about other’s mental state originates from conceptual dimension rather than empirical dimension. (e.g., differences in context and information quantity) The goal of our study is to clarify why mental concepts have this kind of uncertainty.
著者
秋吉 亮太 高橋 優太
出版者
科学基礎論学会
雑誌
科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.41, no.1, pp.1-22, 2013-11-30 (Released:2017-08-31)
参考文献数
50
被引用文献数
1 2

Gentzen proved the consistency of elementary arithmetic (i.e. first-order Peano arithmetic) in 1936 before his most famous and influential proof in 1938. The consistency proof in 1936 contains some ambiguous parts and seems to be quite different from his consistency proof in 1938. The aim of the consistency proof in 1936 is "to give finitist sense" to provable formula. In this paper, we give an exact reconstruction of the consistency proof in 1936 and claim that "to give finitist sense" is a uniform idea behind Gentzen's three consistency proofs including the proof in 1938. First we explain Gentzen's basic ideas of the proof in 1936 in detail. In particular, the idea of finitist interpretation and the main structure of the proof are explained. Secondly, we define a reduction step via the modern method of proof theory called "finite notation for infinitary derivations" due to Mints-Buchholz. It is shown that the reduction essentially coincides with Gentzen's reduction in 1936. Especially we give a definition of "normalization tree" describing Gentzen's reduction step. Moreover, the well-foundedness of this tree is proved. The well-foundedness of the normalization tree implies the consistency of elementary arithmetic. Together with Buchholz's analysis of Gentzen's 1938 consistency proof, this shows that the proof in 1938 is just a special case of the proof in 1936. Thirdly, we clarify what the normalization tree is. According to Gentzen, the normalization tree makes us possible to see the "correctness" of a provable formula in elementary arithmetic. Then we propose a uniform reading of three consistency proofs as based on the same spirit. Finally we discuss some relationship between Gentzen's idea, the method of "finite notation for infinitary derivations", and Gödel's idea of his famous Dialectica interpretation. According to our analysis, Gentzen's idea and the method of "finite notation for infinitary derivations" can be explained in the same way as "carrying out finite proof as program". Moreover, we suggest that Gödel's interpretation (no-counterexample interpretation) should be obtained by describing the normalization tree as functionals.
著者
北島 雄一郎
出版者
科学基礎論学会
雑誌
科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.34, no.1, pp.21-28, 2007-03-25 (Released:2009-07-31)
参考文献数
19

Bell's inequalities in algebraic quantum field theory have been studied by Landau, Summers and Werner, and Halvorson and Clifton. Halvorson and Clifton showed that many normal states on local algebras associated with space-like separated bounded open regions violate Bell's inequalities under the the axioms of algebraic quantum field theory. In the present paper, I point out that many faithful normal states on local algebras associated with space-like separated bounded open regions violate Bell's inequalities under the axioms of algebraic quantum field theory.
著者
高谷 遼平
出版者
科学基礎論学会
雑誌
科学基礎論研究 (ISSN:00227668)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.49, no.1, pp.49-63, 2021 (Released:2021-12-14)
参考文献数
35

This paper is about the status of compositionality in our linguistic communication and its theorizing. The principle of compositionality has been regarded as an essential precondition under which semantic theories are built since the principle seems to properly explain some important facts about natural language, such as learnability and novelty. According to recent discussions, however, the precise understanding of compositionality casts doubt on its necessity. In this paper, I take a closer look at how we have started and improved our semantic investigations, and present a new argument for compositionality which is based on our linguistic intuition about the notion of un-synonymy and substitution. My point of the argument is that compositionality can serve as a useful tool for theorizing natural language semantics even if semantic rules themselves are described non-compositionally.