synētheia

2023-2 Metaphysics of the Self Segment 1 (T. Metzinger, "The No-Self Alternative")  Q) What is Metzinger’s primarily target of Ontologicial anti-realismMetzinger suggests the ontological anti-realism about the self (ARSO), which claims the self is not a substance. In other words, selves are not self-subsistent entities. The target of this claim is to reveal that there is no solid basis for assum..

2023-2 Metaphysics of the Self Segment 1 (M. Schecthman, "Stories, Lives, and Basic Survival")  Q) On Schechtman’s view ('narrative self-constitution view.'), what amounts to having a narrative?According to Schechtman’s narrative self-constitution view, having a narrative would require that a person be able, at least sometimes, to become conscious of her narrative and make it explicit. This is n..

2023-2 Metaphysics of the Self Segment 1 (G. Strawson, "The Self")  Q) What are the main features of conscious concerns Strawson’s synchronic view?Strawson suggests that the self is a single, distinct mental thing existing at a given time synchronically and a subject of experience. He denies the claim that the self is an agent or has personality. More importantly, he holds that the core conditio..

2023-2 Modal Logic (Segment 2) Q)UG, MP. E! is primitive, ∼ , ∨ are primitive and we have the usual definitions. Sketch proofs of:① ├FL (∀x)( E!x ≡ (∃y)(x = y)).② ├FL (∀y) ((∀x) ϕx ⊃ ϕy).Now consider the system FL* which is just like the above except that (∀y) ((∀x) ϕx ⊃ ϕy) replaces axiom schemas 2 and 3, and E! is dropped as a primitive sign.Sketch proofs of:③ ├FL* (∀x) (∃y)(x = y)④ ├FL* (∀x)B..

2023-2 Modal Logic (Segment 3) Q) Explain the system S1. In what sense is it the case that the “unrestricted” rules of Necessitation does not hold in S1. Does pc tautology necessitation hold in S1 ? What is the Cresswell argument (See my SS1 paper) that S1 has no theorems of the form LL(p⊃ p)? Explain the semantic system for S2 and S3 and S4 where one introduces odd vs normal worlds. Note that b..

2023-2 Modal Logic (Segment 2) Q) Use tableaux to show the difference between what we have called the A semantics and the B semantics (+ inclusion requirement) and the C-semantics for quantified modal logic. Be sure to explain by reference to the question of the validity of the Carnap-Barcan Formula (BF) and its converse. Be sure to explain the situation withAx1 (∀x) (ϕx) ⊃ ϕy, where y is free f..

2023-2 Modal Logic (Segment 1) Q) Use the technique of Modal Conjunctive Normal form to test the follow for S5 Validity and if Valid construct a proof using the technique.ML(p ⊃ LMp)M(Lp ⊃Mq)⊃ M(p⊃ q)L(p ∨ Lq) .⊃. Lp ∨ LqLMLp ⊃ Lp

2023-2 Modal Logic (Segment 1) ① Give a recipe justifying the following derived rule: ├K p ∨ q ⇒ ├K Lp ∨ Mq ② Some Drived Rules

2023-2 Modal Logic (Segment 2) Q) Quantification theory may be formalized this way: Prove the following in the systems indicated.1. ├ L(∀x)ϕx . ⊃. (∀x)Lϕx2. ├ β (∀x)Lϕx . ⊃. L(∀x)ϕx (Recall that system β is T + p ⊃ LMp. )3. ├ M(∃x)ϕx . ⊃. (∃x)Mϕx (The system is QML + (∀x)Lϕx . ⊃. L(∀x)ϕx)4. ├ (∀x)Lα ⊃ L(∀x)α (The system is QML+ (∀x)L(α ⊃ β) .⊃. L((∀x)α ⊃ (∀x)β)

2023-2 Modal Logic (Segment 1)Q) Give a proof of the following in the systems indicated:├S5 Mp ∧ Mq .⊃. M(p ∧ Mq)├B MLp ⊃ LMp├S5 Lp ⊃ LLp├S5 p ⊃ LMp├S5 L(p ∨ Lq) .⊃. Lp ∨ Lq├S4 M(p ∧ Mq) .⊃. Mp ∧ Mq