愤愤不平
发表于 2025-3-28 15:09:53
Valid on Formal Grounds,aking language to be a natural phenomenon. Robert Kilwardby endeavoured to combine these traditions, but turns out to have taken a stance much closer to Kant, and to have given little importance to linguistic facts in his account of how syllogistic validity and thereby validity in general is grounde
Benzodiazepines
发表于 2025-3-28 21:57:31
Historical-Analytical Studies on Nature, Mind and Action388837.jpg
不透气
发表于 2025-3-29 00:54:17
http://reply.papertrans.cn/39/3889/388837/388837_43.png
outer-ear
发表于 2025-3-29 06:13:10
Towards a Calculus of Object Programs,hen grounds his appeal to the theory of the dialectical topics in formulating the truth conditions of conditional propositions and the validity conditions of arguments corresponding to different grounding relationships.
舰旗
发表于 2025-3-29 10:40:06
http://reply.papertrans.cn/39/3889/388837/388837_45.png
陪审团每个人
发表于 2025-3-29 15:12:16
http://reply.papertrans.cn/39/3889/388837/388837_46.png
Spongy-Bone
发表于 2025-3-29 17:38:02
,The Incoherence of Ockham’s Ethics,avour of grounding our obligations to obey God on God’s goodness. But whichever of the two we pick, we end up with an incoherent view. Given some things Ockham says, it should not be possible for Ockham’s God to make it right to hate God, yet Ockham also says that this is possible. I see no way to rescue Ockham’s ethics from incoherence.
Goblet-Cells
发表于 2025-3-29 21:08:56
http://reply.papertrans.cn/39/3889/388837/388837_48.png
Euphonious
发表于 2025-3-30 01:19:46
http://reply.papertrans.cn/39/3889/388837/388837_49.png
Accord
发表于 2025-3-30 04:30:18
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-16404-2 offer two case studies: one that explores dependence relations in the work of Leibniz, and the other the cosmology of the Chinese Buddhist thinker Fazang. Although I do not defend the claim that there is in fact some work for a theory of Grounding, my argument is highly suggestive of it.