Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From Predication to Programming

  • Published:
Minds and Machines Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A free logic is one in which a singular term can fail to refer to an existent object, for example, `Vulcan' or `5/0'. This essay demonstrates the fruitfulness of a version of this non-classical logic of terms (negative free logic) by showing (1) how it can be used not only to repair a looming inconsistency in Quine's theory of predication, the most influential semantical theory in contemporary philosophical logic, but also (2) how Beeson, Farmer and Feferman, among others, use it to provide a natural foundation for partial functions in programming languages. Vis à vis (2), the question is raised whether the Beeson-Farmer-Feferman approach is adequate to the treatment of partial functions in all programming languages. Gumb and the author say “No”, and suggest a way of handling the refractory cases by means of positive free logic. Finally, Antonelli's solution of a problem associated with the Gumb-Lambert proposal is mentioned.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Antonelli, A. (2000), ‘Protosemantics for positive free logic’ Journal of Philosophy 29 (August Issue).

  • Beeson, M. (1985), Foundations of Constructive Mathematics, Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farmer, W. (1991), ‘Reasoning about partial functions with the aid of a computer’, Erkenntnis 43, pp. 279–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feferman. S. (1991), ‘Definedness’, Erkenntnis 43, pp. 295–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gumb, R. and Lambert, K. (1997), ‘Definitions in nonstrict positive free logic’, Modern Logic 7, pp. 25–55. For a fully corrected version see http://www.cs.uml.edu/~gumb.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, D. (1967), ‘What is Russell's theory of definite descriptions’ in W. Yourgrau and A. Breck, eds., New York: Plenum Press, pp. 227–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, K. and van Fraassen, B. (1972), Derivation and Counterexample, Encino, CA: Dickenson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, K. (1974), ‘Predication and extensionality’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 3, pp. 255–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, K. (1991) in K. Lambert, ed., Philosophical Applications of Free Logic, New York and London: Oxford, pp. 273–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, R. and Lambert, K. (1968). ‘Universally free logic and standard quantification theory’, Journal of Symbolic Logic 33, pp. 8–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scales, R. (1969), Attribution and Existence, University of Michigan Microfilms.

  • Quine, W.V. (1960), Word and Object, New York: Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universities of California at, Irvine, and Salzburg

    Karel Lambert

Authors
  1. Karel Lambert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lambert, K. From Predication to Programming. Minds and Machines 11, 257–265 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011215918556

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011215918556

Search

Navigation