, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 617–631 | Cite as

Equivalence of Problems (An Attempt at an Explication of Problem)

  • Pavel Materna
Original Paper


On the one hand, Pavel Tichý has shown in his Transparent Intensional Logic (TIL) that the best way of explicating meaning of the expressions of a natural language consists in identification of meanings with abstract procedures. TIL explicates objective abstract procedures as so-called constructions. Constructions that do not contain free variables and are in a well-defined sense ´normalized´ are called concepts in TIL. On the second hand, Kolmogorov in (Mathematische Zeitschrift 35: 58–65, 1932) formulated a theory of problems, using NL expressions. He explicitly avoids presenting a definition of problems. In the present paper an attempt at such a definition (explication)—independent of but in harmony with Medvedev´s explication—is given together with the claim that every concept defines a problem. The paper treats just mathematical concepts, and so mathematical problems, and tries to show that this view makes it possible to take into account some links between conceptual systems and the ways how to replace a noneffective formulation of a problem by an effective one. To show this in concreto a wellknown Kleene’s idea from his (Introduction to metamathematics. D. van Nostrand, New York, 1952) is exemplified and explained in terms of conceptual systems so that a threatening inconsistence is avoided.


Transparent intensional logic (TIL) Constructions Problem Concept Conceptual system 



I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments. This paper has been supported by Grant Agency of Czech Republic Project No. P401/10/0792.


  1. Materna P (1998) Concepts and objects. Acta Philosophica Fennica, vol 63. HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  2. Materna P (2004) Conceptual systems. Logos Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  3. Bealer G (1982) Quality and concept. Clarendon Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bolzano B (1837) Wissenschaftslehre. SulzbachGoogle Scholar
  5. Church A (1956) Introduction to mathematical logic. Princeton, Princeton UPGoogle Scholar
  6. Church A (1993) A revised formulation of the logic of sense and denotation. Alternative (1). Noûs 27:141–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DJM (2010) Procedural Semantics for Hyperintensional Logic. Springer Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Frege G (1891) Funktion und Begriff. Jena, H. PohleGoogle Scholar
  9. Frege G (1892) Űber Begriff und Gegenstand. Vierteljahrschrift fűr wissenschaftliche Philosophie 16:192–205Google Scholar
  10. Gödel K (1972, 1990) Some remarks on the Undecidability Results. In Gödel, K. Collected works Vol. II., New York, Oxford, Oxford UPGoogle Scholar
  11. Kleene SC (1952) Introduction to metamathematics. D. van Nostrand, New York, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  12. Kolmogorov A (1932) Zur Deutung der intuitionistischen Logik. Mathematische Zeitschrift 35, 58–65. Translated in Mancosu, P. (1998). From Brouwer to Hilbert. The Debate on Foundations of mathematics in the 20 s. Oxford UP, 328–334Google Scholar
  13. Medvedev JT (1955) Stepeni trudnosti massovyh problem. Doklady AN SSSR, t.4, No 4, 501–504Google Scholar
  14. Montague R (1970) Universal Grammar. Theoria 36:373–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Raclavský J, Kuchyňka P (2011) Conceptual and derivation systems. Log Log Philos 20(1–2):159–174Google Scholar
  16. Tichý P (1978) Questions, answers, and logic. Am Philos Q 15:249–264Google Scholar
  17. Tichý P (1982) Foundations of partial type theory. Rep Math Logic 14:59–72Google Scholar
  18. Tichý P (1986) Constructions. Philos Sci 53:514–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tichý P (1988) The Foundations of Frege′s Logic. De Gruyter, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tichý P (2004) Collected Papers in Logic and Philosophy, eds. V. Svoboda, B. Jespersen, and C. Cheyne. Prague: Filosofia, Czech Academy of Sciences; Dunedin: University of Otago PressGoogle Scholar
  21. Zalta E (1988) Intensional Logic and the Metaphysics of Intentionality. MIT Press, Cambridge, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of PhilosophyAcademy of Sciences of Czech RepublicPrague 1Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations