1. 1_1.
The human skeleton has some 220 bones, about the same number as a cat when tail bones are excluded. A small monkey has around 120. Of course, what matters for present purposes is independently moving parts. This demotes «thousand leggers» and -- thanks to fingers, among other things -- takes us out of the cat's league.
2. 1_2.
At any given time in evolutionary history, the then-current herbivores tended to have smaller brains than the contemporary carnivores. See Richard Dawkin, The Blind Watchmaker (New York: Norton, 1986), p. 190.
3. 1_3.
The issues of this section are treated in greater detail in the author's A Useful Inheritance (Savage MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1990).
4. 1_4.
See A. S. Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World [New York, 1928].
5. 1_5.
S D. A. Bromley et al. Physics in Perspective. Student Edition (Washington, D.C., 1973); pp. 16, 13. See also Gerald Holton, «Models for Understanding the Growth and Excellence of Scientific Research,» in Stephen R. Graubard and Gerald Holton, eds., Excellence and Leadership in the Democracy (New York, 1962), p. 115.
6. 1_6.
«Looking back, one has the impression that the historical development of the physical description of the world consists of a succession of layers of knowledge of increasing generality and greater depth. Each layer has a well defined field of validity; one has to pass beyond the limits of each to get to the next one, which will be characterized by more general and more encompassing laws and by discoveries constituting a deeper penetration into the structure of the Universe than the layers recognized before.» (Edoardo Amaldi, «The Unity of Physics,» Physics Today. vol. 261, no. 9 [September 1973], p. 24.) See also E. P. Wigner, «The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences, «Communication on Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 13 (1960), pp. 1-14; as well as his «The Limits of Science,» Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 93 (1949), pp.521-526. Compare also Chapter 8 of Henry Margenau, The Nature of Physical Reality (New York, 1950).
7. 1_7.
D. A. Bromley et al., Physics in Perspective. Student Edition (Washington D.C., 1973; National Research Council/National Academy of Science Publications), p.23.
8. 1_8.
Sir Denys H. Wilkinson, The Quarks and Captain Ahab or: The Universe as Artifact (Stanford, 1977; Schiff Memorial Lecture), pp. 12-13.
9. 1_9.
Gerald Holton, «Models for Understanding the Growth and Excellence of Scientific Research,» in Stephen R. Graubard and Gerald Holton (editors), Excellence and Leadership in a Democracy (New York, 1962), p. 115.
10. 1_10.
Some of the themes of this chapter are also addressed in Chapter 7 «Cost Escalation in Empirical Inquiry» of the author's Cognitive Economy (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1989). Scientific Progress (Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1978), and The Limits of Science (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984) are also relevant.
11. 2_1.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Deontica aristotelica», 1992, p. 182.
12. 2_2.
Georg H. von WRIGHT, «Deontic Logic», 1951, pp. 1 ff..
13. 2_3.
Tecla MAZZARESE, Logica deontica e linguaggio giuridico, 1989, pp. 3-5; Deontica, 1990, pp. 5-17. Cf. Carlos ALARCÓN CABRERA (ed.), Estudios de deóntica, 1995.
14. 2_4.
Cf. Amedeo G. CONTE, «Regola costitutiva in Wittgenstein», 1981, pp. 59 ff.; «Paradigmi d'analisi della regola in Wittgenstein», 1983, pp. 37 ff.; «Regola costitutiva, condizione, antinomia», 1983, pp. 21 ff.; «Phénoménologie du langage déontique», 1985, pp. 175 ff.; «Materiali per una tipologia delle regole», 1985, pp. 345 ff.; «Regole eidetico-costitutive», 1985, pp. 26 ff.; «Fenomeni di fenomeni», 1986, pp. 29 ff.; «Semiotics of Constitutive Rules», 1988, pp. 143 ff.; «Eidos. An Essay on Constitutive Rules», 1988, pp. 251 ff.; «Costitutività di regole», 1989, col. 462 ff.; «L'enjeu des règles», 1991, pp. 122 ff.; «Deontica wittgensteniana», 1993, pp. 115 ff.
15. 2_5.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Regola costitutiva in Wittgenstein», 1981, pp. 59-66; «Regola costitutiva, condizione, antinomia», 1983, pp. 23 ff.; «Phénoménologie du langage déontique», 1985, pp. 187-190; «Materiali per una tipologia delle regole», 1985, pp. 361-364; «Eidos. An Essay on Constitutive Rules», 1988, pp. 252-256.
16. 2_6.
Georg H. von WRIGHT, «Deontic Logic and the Theory of Conditions», 1968.
17. 2_7.
Georg H. von WRIGHT, «Deontic Logic and the Theory of Conditions», 1968, pp. 6 ff.
18. 2_8.
Giampaolo M. AZZONI, «Condizioni costitutive», 1986, pp. 160 ff.; Il concetto di condizione nella tipologia delle regole, 1988. Cf. Piero POLLASTRO, «Fenomenologia delle regole costitutive», 1983; Tecla MAZZARESE, «Metaregole», 1985, pp. 65 ff.; Mario JORI, «In margine all'ultimo Conte», 1986, pp. 443 ff.; Riccardo GUASTINI, «Norme che sono condizioni sufficienti del loro oggetto?», 1986, pp. 213 ff.; Carlos ALARCÓN CABRERA, Normas y paradojas, 1993, pp. 87 ff., Carlos ALARCÓN CABRERA, «On Contian Deontics», 1995, pp. 186-188.
19. 2_9.
Georg H. von WRIGHT, «Norms, truth and logic», 1983, pp. 152-153.
20. 2_10.
Georg H. von WRIGHT, «On Condi«tional Obligations», 1994, p. 3.
21. 2_11.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Deon in Deontics», 1991, p. 349.
22. 2_12.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Deon in Deontics», 1991, pp. 352-353; «Deontica aristotelica», 1992, pp. 197 ff. Cf. Maria-Elisabeth CONTE, «Epistemico, deontico, anankastico», 1995; Giampaolo M. AZZONI, Cognitivo e Normativo: il Paradosso delle Regole Tecniche, 1991, pp. 19 ff.; Luigi DE CARO, «Premessa alla traduzione italiana della Logica del dovere di G. Ledig», 1993, pp. 444 and note 8; Giuseppe LORINI, «Deontica tra logica e filosofia», 1993, pp. 602 ff.; Stefano RADICE, «Regole costitutive e sillogismo normativo», 1992, pp. 422-427; Carlos ALARCÓN CABRERA, «Validità semantica e sillogismo normativo», 1995).
23. 2_13.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Studio per una teoria della validità», 1970, pp. 334-342.
24. 2_14.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, p. 436.
25. 2_15.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, note 15; «Validità», 1975, pp. 418 ff.
26. 2_16.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, pp. 456-457; «Validità athetica», 1990, p. 163; Giampaolo M. AZZONI, «Cognitivo e Normativo: il Paradosso delle Regole Tecniche», 1991, note 61. Cf. Georg H. von WRIGHT, Norm and Action. A Logical Enquiry, 1963, pp. 191 ff.; Paolo DI LUCIA, Deontica in von Wright, 1992, pp. 30 ff.; Carlos ALARCÓN CABRERA, «Validità sintattica vs. invalidità sintattica in Theodor Geiger», 1994.
27. 2_17.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, pp. 446-448.
28. 2_18.
For Azzoni, the concept of athetic semantic validity as athetic deontic truth is defined, following Kalinowski, by means of two theses: a) the thesis of «La designatività delle norme»: norms designate normative states of things; b) the thesis of «L'apofanticità delle norme»: norms may be true or false (Giampaolo M. AZZONI, «Validità semantica in deontica», 1992, pp. 171 ff.).
29. 2_19.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «In margine all'ultimo Kelsen», 1967, pp. 119-120; Primi argomenti per una critica del normativismo, 1968, pp. 23-24.
30. 2_20.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Aspetti della semantica del linguaggio deontico», 1977, pp. 150-151. Cf. Amedeo G. CONTE, «Forma performativa», 1994; Amedeo G. CONTE, «Performativo vs. normativo», 1994; Andrea ROSSETTI, «Performativi in Jean-Louis Gardies: verità, verificabilità, vero-funzionalità», 1994.
31. 2_21.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, pp. 431 ff.; I question the notion of `athetic pragmatic validity' in Carlos ALARCÓN CABRERA, «Validez pragmàtica. Una discusión con A. G. Conte», 1993, pp. 341 ff.; Normas y paradojas, 1993, pp. 37 ff.
32. 2_22.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, pp. 446-448. The thesis that the pragmatic validity of a deontic act is not a necessary condition for the syntactic validity of the produced deontic status seems acceptable to me: there may be valid deontic status (athetically valid) which are not produced by deontic acts. However, the thesis that the pragmatic validity of a deontic act is a sufficient condition for the syntactic validity of the produced deontic status seems to me questionable; in fact, may there not be deontic status, produced by deontic acts, which are invalid (athetically invalid)? (Vid. Carlos ALARCÓN CABRERA, «Validità sintattica vs. invalidità sintattica in Theodor Geiger», 1994).
33. 2_23.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Deon in Deontics», 1991, p. 351.
34. 2_24.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, p. 451.
35. 2_25.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Deontica aristotelica», 1992, pp. 228-234. About the paradigm `deontic regularity' vs. `adeontic regularity' (`following a rule' vs. `continuing on a regularity'), cf. Amedeo G. CONTE, «Codici deontici», 1976, p. 15; «Minima deontica», 1988, pp. 457-459; «Validità athetica», 1990, pp. 166-169; Theodor GEIGER, Vorstudien zu einer Soziologie des Rechts, 1947.
36. 2_26.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Deon in Deontics», 1991, p. 351.
37. 2_27.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Tre domande sull'abrogazione», 1987, pp. 40-41. Cf. Carlos E. ALCHOURRÓN and Eugenio BULYGIN, «Sobre la existencia de las normas jurídicas», 1979; Eugenio BULYGIN, «Time and Validity», 1982; Tecla MAZZARESE, «Negazione ed abrogazione in deontica (a proposito d'un saggio di C. E. Alchourrón ed E. Bulygin)», 1981, pp. 205-216; Tecla MAZZARESE, «Variazioni in tema d'abrogazione», 1987, pp. 77-91; Giampaolo M. AZZONI, «Abrogazione, regole costitutive, validità», 1987, pp. 33-37; Carlos ALARCÓN CABRERA, «Deóntica de la validez», 1995.
38. 2_28.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Aspetti della semantica del linguaggio deontico», 1977, pp. 154-162. Cf. Amedeo G. CONTE, «Adeontic Negation», 1990, pp. 75-79; «Deóntica de la negación en Jerzy Sztykgold», 1995: «Filosofía de la validez deóntica: una ecuación de tres incógnitas», 1995; Amedeo G. CONTE / Paolo Di LUCIA, «Thetic Function of Deontic Terms», 1995.
39. 2_29.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Aspetti della semantica del linguaggio deontico», 1977, p. 167. Cf. Riccardo GUASTINI, «Contributo ad una teoria dell'abrogazione», 1988, pp. 630-631.
40. 2_30.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Tre domande sull'abrogazione», 1987, pp. 42-43.
41. 2_31.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Tre domande sull'abrogazione», 1987, pp. 41-42. Nevertheless, in «Minima deontica», Conte points out that the pragmatic validity predicated of a repealing act can also be athetic or praxeological (dependent on conditions which are not posed by rules, on conditions inherent in the concept of an act, in its intrinsic constitution). Thus, a repealing act of syntactically invalid norms would lack praxeological validity, since the act of repeal presupposes the (syntactic) validity of the norm being repealed (Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, pp. 431-433). In my opinion, it would be better to use, in that case, the expression `praexeonomic-eidetic validity' (pragmatic validity determined by eidetic-constitutive rules), with a meaning that would oppose that of `praxeonomic-anankastic validity' (pragmatic validity determined by anankastic-constitutive rules. (Vid. Carlos ALARCÓN CABRERA, «Validez pragmática. Una discusión con A. G. Conte», 1993, pp. 341 ff.; Normas y paradojas, 1993, pp. 37 ff.).
42. 2_32.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, p. 441. Cf. Amedeo G. CONTE, «Ordinamento giuridico», 1966, p. 9.
43. 2_33.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, p. 468.
44. 2_34.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, p. 466.
45. 2_35.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, pp. 466-467.
46. 2_36.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Deontico vs. dianoetico», 1986, pp. 490-491. Cf. Amedeo G. CONTE and Tecla MAZZARESE, «Regole fondate su regole», 1985, pp. 283-288.
47. 2_37.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Minima deontica», 1988, p. 467.
48. 2_38.
Amedeo G. CONTE, «Su Carcaterra», 1976, pp. 101-105.
49. 3_1.
Joseph Melia, «A Note on Lewis's Ontology,» Analysis 52/3 (July 1992): 191-192.
50. 3_2.
J. Bookman, «Why `false->false' is true -- a discovery explanation,» The Mathematics Teacher 71 (1978): 675-676 and the correspondence thereon, The Mathematics Teacher 72 (1979): 405. Steven Cushing, «Material Support for Material Implication,» Journal of Pragmatics 18 (July 1992): 88- 89. Joseph S. Fulda, «Material Implication Revisited,» The American Mathematical Monthly 96 (March 1989): 247-250. Joseph S. Fulda, «Material Implications,» The American Mathematical Monthly 99 (May 1992): 480. Joseph S. Fulda, «Denied Conditionals Are Not Negated Conditionals,» Sorites 2 (July 1995): 44-45. William H. Hanson, «Indicative Conditionals Are Truth-Functional,» Mind 100 (January 1991): 53-72. Ronald Rubin and Charles Young, Formal Logic: A Model of English (Mayfield Publishing Company, 1989), pp. 95-97. C. Ray Wylie, «`False implies false' is true,» The Mathematics Teacher 72 (1979): 404-405.
51. 3_3.
Often it will not be possible to decide what is or is not counteressential because of our imperfect and incomplete knowledge of natural laws. But we are concerned here with truth, not knowledge of truth, and if research into paranormal phenomena indicates that ghosts do or could exist, that will not touch the theory, only the particular example. As long as one grants that not everything could arise from the actual world via natural laws, we can accept the distinction between counteressentials and subjunctive conditionals, while conceding that there are some, perhaps a great many, counterfactuals of whose classification we may be uncertain or incapable.
52. 3_4.
The idea that universally general propositions can be used to represent some conditionals originates with Russell. One example of such -- in the indicative -- is «If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and looks like a duck, it is a duck.» The «it» here is surely not pronominal (semantically), and the proposition ranges over the universe of discourse.
53. 3_5.
David Lewis, Counterfactuals (Harvard University Press, 1973), pp. 31-36.
54. 3_6.
Professor Michael Levin made some very helpful observations on two early drafts of this paper, as did an anonymous referee on one. The perceptive, patient, critical comments of Professor J. Michael Dunn were of central importance to this paper. Nevertheless, the idea and its development with all its deficiencies remain mine. The author would like to dedicate this essay to the memory of his beloved teacher, Dr. Arthur Spier, a man of science and learning alike.
55. 4_1.
Unfortunately we cannot yet handle TeX or LaTeX files. The convertors we've tried have proved useless.
56. 4_2.
At our home site, ftp.csic.es, there is -- hanging from our main directory /pub/sorites -- a subdirectory, WWW, which, among other files, contains one called `HTML.howto', wherein the interested reader can find some useful information on HTML editors and convertors.
57. 4_3.
For the time being, and as a service to our readers and contributors, we have a directory called `soft' hanging from our home directory /pub/sorites at the node ftp.csic.es. The directory contains some of the non-commercial software we are referring to, such as archivers or 8-to-7 encoders (or 7-to-8 decoders).
58. 4_4.
In the case of WordPerfect 5.1, the procedure is as follows. Suppose you have a file called `dilemmas.wp5' in your directory c:\articles, and you want to submit it to SORITES. At your DOS prompt you change to your directory c:\articles. We assume your WordPerfect files are in directory c:\WP51. At the DOS prompt you give the command `\wp51\convert'; when prompted you reply `dilemmas.wp5' as your input file whatever you want as the output file -- suppose your answer is `dilemmas.ker'; when prompted for a kind of conversion you choose 1, then 6. Then you launch you communications program, log into your local host, upload your file c:\articles\dilemmas.ker using any available transmission protocol (such as Kermit, e.g.). And, last, you enter your e_mail service, start an e_mail to to <sorites@ifs.csic.es> and include your just uploaded dilemmas.ker file into the body of the message. (What command serves to that effect depends on the e_mail software available; consult your local host administrators.)
With WordPerfect 6 the conversion to kermit format is simple and straightforward: you only have to save your paper as a `kermit (7 bits transfer)' file.
59. 4_5.
Those devices are temporary only. Later on we'll strongly advise and encourage those of our contributors who can use neither WordPerfect format nor one of the other word-processor formats our convertors can handle automatically to resort to HTML, with certain conventions in order to represent Greek characters as well as logical and set-theoretic symbols.
60. 5_1.
The reader may find an excellent discussion of copyright-related issues in a FAQ paper (available for anonymous FTP from rtfm.mit.edu [18.70.0.209] /pub/usenet/news.answers/law/Copyright-FAQ). The paper is entitled «Frequently Asked Questions about Copyright (V. 1.1.3)», 1994, by Terry Carroll. We have borrowed a number of considerations from that helpful document.
Back to the top of this issue of SORITES