In this dissertation on Hilary Putnam's philosophy, I investigate his development regarding meaning and necessity, in particular mathematical necessity. Putnam has been a leading American philosopher since the end of the 1950s, becoming famous in the 1960s within the school of analytic philosophy, associated in particular with the philosophy of science and the philosophy of language. Under the influence of W.V. Quine, Putnam challenged the logical positivism/empiricism that had become strong in America after World War II, with influential exponents such (...) as Rudolf Carnap and Hans Reichenbach. Putnam agreed with Quine that there are no absolute a priori truths. In particular, he was critical of the notion of truth by convention. Instead he developed a notion of relative a priori truth, that is, a notion of necessary truth with respect to a body of knowledge, or a conceptual scheme. Putnam's position on necessity has developed over the years and has always been connected to his important contributions to the philosophy of meaning. I study Hilary Putnam's development through an early phase of scientific realism, a middle phase of internal realism, and his later position of a natural or commonsense realism. I challenge some of Putnam’s ideas on mathematical necessity, although I have largely defended his views against some other contemporary major philosophers; for instance, I defend his conceptual relativism, his conceptual pluralism, as well as his analysis of the realism/anti-realism debate. (shrink)

In dieser Arbeit wird gezeigt, daß der Hegelsche Anspruch, allein aus dem Anfang als dem Abstrakten und Unmittelbaren das Konkretere und Reichere zu entwickeln, nicht aufrechtzuhalten ist. Damit wird nicht die Dialektik, und insbesondere nicht die Dialektik des Anfangs, preisgege- ben. Es wird aufgezeigt, wie Hegel bei Entwicklung der Kategorien in der Wissenschat'tder Logik stets Bezug nehmen muß auf ein heteroge- nes Etwas. Er versucht dies zu kaschieren. Der Unterschied der ersten Kategorien Sein und Nichts ist aus der unbestimmten Unmittelbarkeit (...) von Sein und Nichts nicht zu begründen. Für den Unterschied von Sein und Nichts muß ein Etwas zitiert werden. Erst dieses Zitat eines Hetero- genen ermöglicht den Fortgang der systematischen Darstellung. Damit ist die idealistische Dialektik in der Darstellung aufgehoben; sie ist negiert und vernichtet, weil sie als falsche aufgezeigt ist, und sie ist aufbewahrt und bestimmend für die Darstellung, weil die Kritik des Fal- schen konstitutiv für das Weitere ist. Im Folgenden werden die Übergänge zu den Kategorien Sein, Nichts, Werden, Entstehen, Vergehen, Nicht-Werden und Dasein analysiert, und es wird aufgezeigt, an welchen Stellen ein heterogenes Etwas zitiert werden muß, um eine korrekte systematische Entwicklung der Katego- rien zu erhalten. (shrink)

A recent paper by Jakl, Jung and Pultr succeeded for the first time in establishing a very natural link between bilattice logic and the duality theory of d-frames and bitopological spaces. In this paper we further exploit, extend and investigate this link from an algebraic and a logical point of view. In particular, we introduce classes of algebras that extend bilattices, d-frames and N4-lattices to a setting in which the negation is not necessarily involutive, and we study corresponding logics. We (...) provide product representation theorems for these algebras, as well as completeness, algebraizability results for the corresponding logics. (shrink)

In this paper, we intend to discuss if and in what sense semiosis (meaning process, cf. C. S. Peirce) can be regarded as an "emergent" process in semiotic systems. It is not our problem here to answer when or how semiosis emerged in nature. As a prerequisite for the very formulation of these problems, we are rather interested in discussing the conditions which should be fulfilled for semiosis to be characterized as an emergent process. The first step in this work (...) is to summarize a systematic analysis of the variety of emergence theories and concepts, elaborated by Achim Stephan. Along the summary of this analysis, we pose fundamental questions that have to be answered in order to ascribe a precise meaning to the term "emergence" in the context of an understanding of semiosis. After discussing a model for explaining emergence based on Salthe's hierarchical structuralism, which considers three levels at a time in a semiotic system, we present some tentative answers to those questions. (shrink)