Main Page | Report this Page
 
Loading..
   
Science Forum Index  »  Logic Forum  »  Definition of definition
Page 1 of 1    
Author Message
Uahlim e/o non Uahlim
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:49 pm
Guest
What is a definition?
Does exist a definition of definition?

Thank You.

--
Le temps passe mais l'ombre reste.
Oilime a' la recherche du temps perdu!

http://www.photorate.org/details.php?image_id=16479&mode=search
Back to top
G. Frege
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 4:28 pm
Guest
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 17:49:05 GMT, "Uahlim e/o non Uahlim"
<ti.nit@liver.oilime> wrote:

Quote:

What is a definition?
Does exist a definition of definition?

Right. We can try to *explain* what we actually m e a n with the term

"definition" when *we* use it. For example in Wittgenstein's Tractatus
Logico-Philosophicus (1921) you will find ONE such explanation:


If I use two signs with one and the same meaning, I express this
by putting between them the sign "=".

"a = b" means then, that the sign "a" is replaceable by the sign
"b".

(If I introduce by an equation a new sign "b", by determining
that it shall replace a previously known sign "a", I write the
equation -- definition -- (like Russell) in the form
"a = b Def.". A definition is a symbolic rule.)


[Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, 4.241]


------------

F.
Back to top
Uahlim e/o non Uahlim
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 6:11 pm
Guest
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:28:23 +0100, G.Freg wrote:

Quote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 17:49:05 GMT, "Uahlim e/o non Uahlim"
ti.nit@liver.oilime> wrote:


What is a definition?
Does exist a definition of definition?

Right. We can try to *explain* what we actually m e a n with the term
"definition" when *we* use it. For example in Wittgenstein's Tractatus
Logico-Philosophicus (1921) you will find ONE such explanation:


If I use two signs with one and the same meaning, I express this by
putting between them the sign "=".

"a = b" means then, that the sign "a" is replaceable by the sign "b".

(If I introduce by an equation a new sign "b", by determining
that it shall replace a previously known sign "a", I write the equation
-- definition -- (like Russell) in the form "a = b Def.". A definition
is a symbolic rule.)


[Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, 4.241]


------------

F.

Thank You very much!

--
Le temps passe mais l'ombre reste.
Oilime a' la recherche du temps perdu!

http://www.photorate.org/details.php?image_id=16479&mode=search
Back to top
Witt
Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 6:54 pm
Guest
"G. Frege" <no_spam@aol.com> wrote in message
news:agtovv4pgciikohjds7h4ik1qotc8so3sj@4ax.com...
Quote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 17:49:05 GMT, "Uahlim e/o non Uahlim"
ti.nit@liver.oilime> wrote:


What is a definition?
Does exist a definition of definition?

Right. We can try to *explain* what we actually m e a n with the term
"definition" when *we* use it. For example in Wittgenstein's Tractatus
Logico-Philosophicus (1921) you will find ONE such explanation:


If I use two signs with one and the same meaning, I express this
by putting between them the sign "=".

"a = b" means then, that the sign "a" is replaceable by the sign
"b".

Yes, In every context. There is no predicate that applies to a
that does not apply to b. Fa & ~Fb .-> ~(a=b).

x=y -> AF(Fx <-> Fy) is valid.

Quote:

(If I introduce by an equation a new sign "b", by determining
that it shall replace a previously known sign "a", I write the
equation -- definition -- (like Russell) in the form
"a = b Def.". A definition is a symbolic rule.)


[Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, 4.241]


------------

F.
Back to top
 
Page 1 of 1       All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:49 am
Science Forum Index

Powered by phpBB & ML | Disclaimer



Contact Us