The paper offers a kind of a critical reflection on the discussion about the philosophy of Skolem-Lowenheim’s theorem between J. Życiński and A. Lemańska. This discussion appeared on the pages of "Studia Philosophiae Christianae" between 1986 and 1988 and focused on the question of the limits of extrapolation of the Skolem–Löwenheim’s theorem outside the area of formalised discourse. The author takes an intermediate position between the “extrapolation’s optimism” of J. Życiński and the “extrapolation’s scepticism” of A. Lemańska.
PL
Artykuł prezentuje rodzaj krytycznej refleksji w związku z dyskusją na temat twierdzenia Skolema-Löwenheima, jaka toczyła się między J. Życińskim i A. Lemańską. Dyskusja ta miała miejsce na stronach Studia Philosophiae Christianae w latach 1986-1988 i koncentrowała się wokół pytania o granice ekstrapolacji twierdzenia Skolema-Löwenheima poza domenę teorii sformalizowanych. Autor zajmuje pozycję pośrednią pomiędzy "ekstrapolacyjnym optymizmem" Życińskiego a "ekstrapolacyjnym sceptycyzmem" Lemańskiej.
This paper examines a pro-realist interpretation of Hilary Putnam’s so-called Model-Theoretic Argument (against the metaphysical realism) put forward by Jan Woleński in his monograph Epistemologia. We argue that neither the mutual rela-tionships between theories and their models nor the objective of Putnam’s argument, nor the role of the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem in this argument were adequately grasped by the author of Epistemologia. In particular, we point out that Woleński’s interpretation is too literal (with respect to the problem of relationships between theories and their models) and simply unsound. We also intend to show that the Model-Theoretic Argument is much more elusive than it can be observed from a realist point of view.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.