Showing papers on "Antecedent (grammar) published in 1975"

The logic of conditionals

Abstract: The standard use of the propositional calculus ('P.C.’) in analyzing the validity of inferences involving conditionals leads to fallacies, and the problem is to determine where P.C. may be ‘safely’ used. An alternative analysis of criteria of reasonableness of inferences in terms of conditions of justification rather than truth of statements is proposed. It is argued, under certain restrictions, that P. C. may be safely used, except in inferences whose conclusions are conditionals whose antecedents are incompatible with the premises in the sense that if the antecedent became known, some of the previously asserted premises would have to be withdrawn.

Antecedent genre as rhetorical constraint

Abstract: (1975). Antecedent genre as rhetorical constraint. Quarterly Journal of Speech: Vol. 61, No. 4, pp. 406-415.

Ernest W. Adams. Subjunctive and indicative conditionals. Foundations of language, vol. 6 (1970), pp. 89–94.

Abstract: The purpose of this note is to dispute Michael Ayers' claim that "there is no special problem of subjunctive conditionals".' Ayers argues for the following theses: (1) there is no special problem of counterfactual conditionals, (2) the subjunctive conditional should not be confused with the counter factual, (3) the subjunctive conditional does not, as many authors have argued, differ from its indicative counterpart in that the former logically entails either that its antecedent is false, or that the speaker believes it to be false, whereas the latter does not, and (4) there appear to be no special problems in attempting to characterize the conditions of verification and falsification of subjunctive conditionals which are not shared equally by indicative con ditionals. Now, I agree with theses (1)-(3), but I feel that thesis (4) is mis leadingly put, and when it is less misleadingly formulated, it is false. What I wish to argue is that subjunctive and indicative conditionals differ not so much as to their conditions of verification and falsification, as in the degrees to which they are justified or supported by evidence. There are occasions on which subjunctive conditionals are very well justified by evidence, but the corresponding indicatives are quite unjustified. Furthermore, the kind of justification here spoken of is fundamental to a characterization of 'the logic' of these sorts of statements. First I will exhibit three closely related examples of situations in which a subjunctive is justified, but its corresponding indicative is not. Then I will speculate briefly on the significance of these examples. The upshot will be to conclude that subjunctive and indicative conditionals are indeed logically distinct species, and there remains a special problem of analyzing subjunctives even after the indicatives are analyzed. A hypothetical example of the kind I have in mind is the following. Sup pose that on a given occasion three persons, A, B and V, are isolated in a room which is sealed off from the outside. During this time, the third person, V ('the victim'), is murdered by being shot through the heart. The circum stances are such that only A and B could have done the shooting, though both deny it and accuse the other, and no one else witnessed the murder. An in vestigation is therefore instituted. It establishes that A had in fact a very

Some Doubts about Scientific Data

Abstract: Because of the many criticisms of the notion of a theory independent observation language, it is useful to look at a few actual examples of scientific data to see what theories might be implicit and in what way. There are several possibilities. The theories could be previously accepted, under active investigation, or of a kind that has never been systematically examined. The present study explores these possibilities in the data of several scientific journal articles. The conclusion is that theories and regularities of all three kinds can be found as antecedent conditions of data statements. Any descriptive account of scientific inference must find room for such presuppositions.