There are certain purely logical principles which are useful in regard
to structure. When we are dealing with inferred entities, as to which,
as explained in Part II., we know nothing beyond structure, we may be
said to know the equations, but not what they mean: so long as they
lead to the same results as regards percepts, all interpretations are
equally legitimate. Let us take an example. Suppose we have a set of
propositions about an electron which we will call . According to
the subject-predicate logic, and according to the view that matter is
a substance, there is a certain entity which is mentioned in all
statements about this electron. According to the view which resolves
an electron into a series of events, the propositions in question will
be differently analyzed. Assuming a certain schematic simplicity, we
might set the matter out as follows: there is a certain relation
which sometimes holds between events, and when it holds between
and , and are said to be events in the biography
of the same electron. If belongs to the field of , "the
electron to which belongs" will mean the relation with its
field limited to terms belonging to the -family of ; and the
-family of consists of together with the terms which
have the relation to and the terms to which has the
relation . "This electron" will mean "the electron to which this
belongs." "An electron" will mean "a series such that there is an
such that the series is the electron to which belongs." In order
to mention some particular electron, we must be able to mention some
event connected with it, e.g. the scintillation when it hits
a certain screen. Thus, instead of saying "the event happened
to the electron " we shall say "the event happened to the
electron to which happened," or, more simply, " belongs to
the -family of ." The formal properties of the propositional
function " belongs to the -family[Pg 288] of " ( being
constant) are the same as those of " belongs to the electron
." If we want any two electrons to be mutually exclusive, in the
sense that no event can happen to both, we can insure it by assuming
that if has the relation (or the converse relation) to both
and , then belongs to the -family of . If
we do not want this, we do not make this assumption about . It is
because of the identity in formal properties that the one propositional
function can be substituted for the other. Whenever we suggest a new
view as to structure, we have to make sure that it does not falsify any
of the old formulæ, though it may give them a new interpretation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account