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

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  axiom
help Sort By:

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

Leon Chwistek's Theory of the Plurality of Realities in Art - Psychological Foundations

100%
Bednarz G.
Studia Humanistyczne AGH
|
2018
|
vol. 17
|
issue 1
EN
In my article, I briefly present the axioms of Leon Chwistek’s theory of manifold reality (TMR). This theory is the basis of his theory of art (TMRA). The aim of my article is to present and discuss psychological foundations of Chwistek’s theory of art. In particular, I present and discuss: (1) two meanings of the notion “work of art” derived on the basis of two relations: work – experience of enthusiasm, and work – aesthetic experience; (2) two meanings of the notion “content of the work of art”; (3) relations between the axioms (beliefs) of TMR and means of every type of art contained in TMRA.
2
Content available remote

Axioms, axiomatization and law

86%
Madej M., Horák F.
The Lawyer Quarterly
|
2018
|
vol. 8
|
issue 3
254-270
EN
This paper examines the possibility and the desirability of axiomatization in law. In the first part, the paper examines the notion of axiom and the ways how it was or could be introduced into law. It is here where the authors openly invite the reader to lose the conventional approach and think about alternative ways to build basic legal concepts. In the second part, the paper continues by presenting several theories which endeavored (or appeared to endeavor) to show that law can (and should be) axiomatized and which even attempted to axiomatize it. After establishing whether these theories were successful at all, the authors add some of their own ideas on the topic of axiomatization.
3

Krytyka teorii wielości rzeczywistości Leona Chwistka przez Romana Ingardena. Analiza z perspektywy interpretacji logicznej

86%
Bednarz G.
Kwartalnik Filozoficzny
|
2019
|
vol. 47
|
issue 3-4
39-50
EN
The aim of the article is to show how one can avoid Ingarden’s criticism of Chwistek’s theory by assuming its logical interpretation, the author of which is Teresa Kostyrko. I am arguing that there is no common domain of the four realities which Chwistek distinguished. This aim is achieved by means of a critical analysis of Ingarden's objections to Chwistek’s theory of plurality of realities.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Problem aksjomatyczności zasady autowłasności w filozofii politycznej libertarianizmu

58%
Dominiak Ł.
Athenaeum. Polskie Studia Politologiczne
|
2016
|
vol. 49
42-64
EN
The subject-matter of the present paper is one of the fundamental theoretical bases of the libertarian political philosophy: the principle of self-ownership. The research problem of the paper is the following question: Is the self-ownership principle an axiom? The research method employed in the paper is the method of disputatio. Based on the conducted research, the paper proposes the affirmative thesis: the self-ownership principle is an axiom. The paper presents a conceptual framework that distinguishes between self-possession, selfownership, and the justification of the latter. It also develops a line of argument which demonstrates that although prima facie only the self-possession is an axiom, self-possession necessarily implies selfownership, granting thereby the axiomatic status to the latter too.
PL
Przedmiotem badań podejmowanym w tekście jest jedna z głównych podstaw teoretycznych libertarianizmu: zasada autowłasności. Problemem badawczym artykułu jest pytanie: Czy zasada autowłasności jest aksjomatem? Metodą badawczą zastosowaną w artykule jest metoda disputatio. Na podstawie przeprowadzonych badań w tekście proponowana jest teza afirmatywna: zasada autowłasności ma status logiczny aksjomatu. Artykuł prezentuje wypracowaną siatkę pojęciową rozróżniającą samoposiadanie, auto własność i uzasadnienie autowłasności oraz rozwija linię argumentacyjną wskazującą, że choć prima facie to samoposiadanie, a nie autowłasność jest aksjomatem, to ponieważ samoposiadanie z konieczności implikuje autowłasność, to także autowłasność musi mieć status logiczny aksjomatu.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Does Science Progress Towards Ever Higher Solvability Through Feedbacks Between Insights and Routines?

51%
Marciszewski W.
Studia Semiotyczne
|
2018
|
vol. 32
|
issue 2
153-185
EN
The affirmative answer to the title question is justified in two ways: logical and empirical. (1) The logical justification is due to Gödel’s discovery (1931) that in any axiomatic formalized theory, having at least the expressive power of PA (Peano Arithmetic), at any stage of development there must appear unsolvable problems. However, some of them become solvable in a further development of the theory in question, owing to subsequent investigations. These lead to new concepts, expressed with additional axioms or rules. Owing to the so-amplified axiomatic basis, new routine procedures like algorithms, can be reached. Those, in turn, help to gain new insights which lead to still more powerful axioms, and consequently again to ampler algorithmic resources. Thus scientific progress proceeds to an ever higher scope of solvability. (2) The existence of such feedback cycles – in a formal way rendered with Turing’s systems of logic based on ordinal (1939) – gets empirically supported by the history of mathematics and other exact sciences. An instructive instance of such a process is found in the history of the number zero. Without that insight due to some ancient Hindu mathematicians there could not arise such an axiomatic theory as PA. It defines the algorithms of arithmetical operations, which in turn help intuitions; those, in turn, give rise to algorithmic routines, not available in any of the previous phases of the process in question. While the logical substantiation of the point of this essay is a well-established result of logico-semantic inquiries, its empirical claim, based on historical evidences, remains open for discussion. Hence the author’s intention to address philosophers and historians of science, and to encourage their critical responses.
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.