Pat Hayes wrote:
>> And, I guess,
>>
>> "the 'continuous present' indicated by the English 'ing' ending, as in
>> It is raining, means that the proposition 'rains' is true throughout
>> some interval containing 'now'" [IKL guide]
>>
>> should be read as
>>
>> "the 'continuous present' indicated by the English 'ing' ending, as in
>> It is raining, means that the false proposition 'rains' stands in the
>> ist relation to some interval containing 'now'"?
>
> Why do you assume that 'rains' is logically false? I have no idea what
> its actual logical truth-value is; (01)
because I take (02)
(that (rains)) (03)
to be a proposition that it rains, without any indexicals, that is, that
it rains everywhere, at all times. Or how should it be understood? (04)
> but in any case that would be
> irrelevant to its *contextual* truth, which is modelled in IKL by the
> ist relation. "True throughout an interval" and "standing in the ist
> relation to an interval" are just two ways to say the same thing. Or
> perhaps, if you feel that truth at a time is something fundamental, by
> all means say that the ist-formulation is IKL's way of modelling or
> describing or representing the notion of truth at a time. (05)
But are we not taking a round here, saying that (ist c p) *does* mean
that p *is true* in c, even if it is false? (06)
vQ (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (08)
|