Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

The Problem of Measurement in Neooperationalist Semantics

100%
Boruszewski J.
Filozofia Nauki
|
2014
|
vol. 22
|
issue 3
67-80
PL
The aim of the article is to elaborate on the project of Jan M. Żytkow’s neooperationalist semantics. The basic idea of neooperationalism is to interpret em-pirical terms by coherent sets of operational procedures. Żytkow formulated a definition of coherence of a set of procedures for procedures of ?A type. Such procedures take the form of whether-questions and represent diagnostic procedures. Żytkow applied his definition of coherence also to the measurement procedures, but he did not introduce their formal representation in the language of interpretation. The author of the article, following Żytkow’s suggestion, has introduced representation of measurement procedures by means of which-questions. Such an attempt requires extending the lexicon of language of interpretation and introducing a new type of procedure - ? type procedure. Introducing which-questions involves a significant problem as to whether the uniqueness assumption of these questions is satisfied. Depending on whether this assumption is satisfied or not, we obtain two different accounts of measurement which correspond to opposite positions in the realism-antirealism controversy.
2
Content available remote

Problemy z pojęciem wiedzy w ramach epistemicznej koncepcji znaczenia Michaela Dummetta

100%
Boruszewski J.
Filo-Sofija
|
2007
|
vol. 7
|
issue 7
207-222
EN
According to epistemic theory of meaning the meaning is not understanding-transcendent – understanding is a kind of knowledge and the meaning is the content of this knowledge. The main problem of such a theory is to provide an adequate characteristic of the notion of knowledge. Dummett claims that understanding cannot be reduced neither to purely practical abilities, nor to explicit theoretical knowledge. In his opinion the most important part of the knowledge that constitutes understanding is a kind of implicit knowledge, something halfway between practical ability and theoretical knowledge. Unfortunately is not so simple to provide sufficiently clear characteristics of it. Moreover, because of implicitness of this knowledge, there is problem with manifestation of possession of such knowledge. Understanding should be related to the practice of making assertions. In the article I try to argue for soundness of thesis that important part of knowledge that constitutes understanding is a kind of procedural knowledge. This type of knowledge (called “knowledge-how”) cannot be reduced to propositional or conceptual knowledge (“knowledge-that”). Procedural knowledge has manifestation in activities doing in accordance with some set of the rules, but possession of this knowledge does not require explicit knowledge-that of the rules. Procedural knowledge is also located in the middle of the spectrum – between reflex actions and theoretical knowledge.
3
Content available remote

Maszyny i symbole (I) – semantyczne aspekty cybernetyki i automatyzacji

100%
Boruszewski J.
Filo-Sofija
|
2011
|
vol. 11
|
issue 1(12)
397-425
EN
This article is the first part of the cycle titled “Machines and symbols”. The main issue of this cycle may be formulated as a question: can machines and technical devices operate with symbols? A very important problem raised in this essay is the difference between symbols and signals. The concept of signal is also broadly discussed in the paper, because there are many different definitions of this concept. The present text contains semantic and philosophical considerations concerning cybernetics, mathematical theory of communication, industrial semiotics and semio-technics. In these theories, terms “symbol” and “signal” are often used interchangeably which leads to misconceptions. One of the most frequent misconceptions is confusing discrete signals with symbols. The author focused on communication systems where machines are senders and humans are receivers, because descriptions of these systems tend towards anthropomorphization of a machine-sender. This tendency makes signals sent out by machines treated as symbols comprehensible by a human-receiver. Another interesting aspect of machine-human communication systems is the treatment of a human-receiver as some kind of machine. Such an idea is called “mechanomorphism”.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.