Wojciech Krysztofiak

In this paper, a formal theory is presented that describes syntactic and semantic mechanisms of philosophical discourses. They are treated as peculiar language systems possessing deep derivational structures called architectonic forms of philosophical systems, encoded in philosophical mind. Architectonic forms are constituents of more complex structures called architectonic spaces of philosophy. They are understood as formal and algorithmic representations of various philosophical traditions. The formal derivational machinery of a given space determines its class of all possible architectonic forms. Some of them stand under factual historical philosophical systems and they organize processes of doing philosophy within these systems. Many architectonic forms have never been realized in the history of philosophy. The presented theory may be interpreted as falling under Hegel’s paradigm of comprehending cultural texts. This paradigm is enriched and inspired with Propp’s formal, morphological view on texts. The peculiarity of this modification of the Hegel-Propp paradigm consists of the use of algebraic and algorithmic tools of modeling processes of cultural development. To speak metaphorically, the theory is an attempt at the mathematical and logical history of philosophy inspired by the Internet metaphor. And that is why it belongs to the tradition of doing metaphilosophy in The Lvov-Warsaw School, which is continued today mainly by Woleński, Pelc, Perzanowski, and Jadacki.

The paper presents a new argument supporting the ontological standpoint according to which there are no mathematical facts in any set theoretic model (world) constructed on the grounds of second order arithmetical theories founded upon set theory. Slingshot arguments directed against facts, situations and other propositional entities are usually blocked by rejecting one of the main inference rules used in various versions of this argument. Authors distinguish two types of main inference rules used in these variants: (i) for non-propositional expressions: iota-conversion rules (ι-conv), iota-substitution rules (ι-subs), lambda-conversion principle (λ-conv); and (ii) for propositional expressions: the principle of substitutivity for logical equivalents (PSLE). Even if strategies for defending facts by the rejection of one of the mentioned rules are accepted, it may be shown that the acceptance of the requirement that mathematical facts (situations or truth-makers) differing with regard to their constituents are different facts, leads to the contradiction in meta-theories of set theoretic models for first order arithmetical theories. In the paper, a new type of slingshot argument is presented, which may be called hyper-slingshot . The difference between meta-theoretical hyper-slingshots and conventional slingshots consists in the fact that the former are formulated in the semantic meta-language of mathematical theories without the use of the iota-operator or the name-forming lambda-operator, whereas the latter require for their expression at least one of these non-standard term-operators. Furthermore, in hyper-slingshots PSLE is not used, whereas in conventional slingshots, PSLE plays a crucial inferential role. Hyper-slingshots implement simpler language tools in comparison with those used in conventional slingshots

The paper presents a formal model of the system of number representations as a multiplicity of mental number axes with a hierarchical structure. The hierarchy is determined by the mind as it acquires successive types of mental number axes generated by virtue of some algebraic mechanisms. Three types of algebraic structures, responsible for functioning these mechanisms, are distinguished: BASAN-structures, CASAN-structures and CAPPAN-structures. A foundational order holds between these structures. CAPPAN-structures are derivative from CASAN-structures which are extensions of BASAN-structures. The constructed formal model unifies two competitive conceptions of cognitive arithmetic: namely, the conception of the mental number line and the conception of parallel individuation. The paper is the continuation of a paper entitled Representational structures of arithmetical thinking, in which rich empirical evidence supporting the model is presented. The main result achieved in the present paper may be philosophically interpreted as an attempt to formalize the Kantian conception of the pure idea of time, understood as the a priori form of human arithmetical thinking. In this way, our theory may be comprehended as a result of applying the hard method of logical reconstruction of fundamental epistemological categories.

In the paper there is presented the argument for the situational paradigm of theory of language. In comparison to the nominativistic semantics it is argued in the paper that the propositional semantics is a better tool of explaining various speech acts in which the principle of compositionality is collapsed. In the paper there are also described referential mechanisms of metaphorical speech acts. In accordance with these mechanisms the metaphorical status of speech acts is determined by the collapse of Fregean referential compositionality of speech acts. In the paper there are constructed two notions of compositionality. First of them may be called classical Fregean concept of compositionality which establishes a semantic correlate of a complex speech act on a functional basis of semantic correlates of constituents of a complex speech act. According to the second notion of compositionality, correlates of constituents of a complex speech act are recursively deter-mined by a correlate of a complex speech act. Mataphorical speech acts possess such a property that correlates of their constituent expressions are determined in processes of de-coding by recursive compositionality functions. Maximal metaphors are speech acts in which recursive as well as Fregean compositionality collapse. In the paper it is argued that the traditional nominativistic semantics is not able to explain communicational functioning of metaphorical speech acts. That is why the conclusion of the paper resolves itself to the thesis that the situational semantic paradigm which should base on recursive notion of compositionality, is better than the nominativistic paradigm

The paper presents a new model of the structure of basic arithmetical representa-tions encoded in minds which enable them to solve simple story-tasks. According to the dominating paradigm the process of acquiring basic counting abilities culminates in encoding the exact number line in mind. This linear number representation enables the mind to solve simple story-tasks which do not require any mathematical mastery knowledge comprising laws, definitions and theorems. Some researchers try to show that the process of encoding the exact number line stems from transformations of the approximate number line (the mental number line) whereas others model this process as being dependent on the linguistic and logical resources of mind

The aim of the article is applying some version of phenomenological speech acts theory into the domain of philosophical (existential) discourse. There are identified various language-mechanisms of existential philosophising. Especially, locutionary (noematic) and illocutionary (noetic) aspects of acts existentialising are considered. The main thesis of the paper may be formulated in the following words: In acts of existential discourse, mechanisms of reference determine that an existentialising subject is directed to the mental entities such as illocutionary representations of fears, cares, wastes and other. The predication in such acts of philosophising is internal and also personal, temporal and sometime virtual. In the paper, there is also presented the illocutionary analysis of a fragment of Heidegger's text coming from Sein und Zeit

The paper presents a new argument supporting the ontological standpoint according to which there are no mathematical facts in any set theoretic model of arithmetical theories. It may be interpreted as showing that it is impossible to construct fact-arithmetic. The importance of this conclusion arises in the context of cognitive science. In the paper, a new type of slingshot argument is presented, which is called hyper-slingshot. The difference between meta-theoretical hyper-slingshots and conventional slingshots consists in the fact that the former are formulated in the semantic meta-language of mathematical theories without the use of the iota-operator or the lambda-operator as the abstractor, whereas the latter require for their expression at least one of these non-standard term-operators. Hyper-slingshots implement simpler language tools in comparison with those used in conventional slingshots

The paper is intended to discuss main semantic presuppositions of language, being of service to express the philosophical problem of idealism/realism in its various versions. At the beginning, the author shows that the terms „idealism” and „realism” are polysemic. The fact of this polysemy makes impossible to construct precise definitions of both the opposed notions. Then there are characterized four types of reasonings, constituting the ground for formulating the question of idealism/realism. It appears that in order to discuss the problem idealism/realism, we must have at our disposal a specific metalanguage. The author reconstructs main semantic presuppositions of this metalanguage: these presuppositions constitute the so-called „possible-world” semantic schema. The general thesis of the papers goes like this: a language for expressing philosophical discours, concerning the question of idealism/realism, is a bearer of semantic presuppositions, stating the existence of possible worlds, mutually connected with the aid of various relations

The presentation of the formal conception of noemata is the main aim of the article. In the first section, three informal approaches to noemata are discussed. The goal of this chapter is specifying main controversies and their sources concerned with different ways of the understanding of noemata. In the second section, basic assumptions determining the proposed way of understanding noemata are presented. The third section is devoted to the formal set-theoretic construction needed for the formal comprehension of noemata. In the fourth section, definitions of noemata and their various kinds, as well as definitions of other phenomenological notions are formulated. In the last section, possibilities of further developing the proposed formal conception are indicated.

The paper presents the construction of a new class of logics, which are called logics of derivational trees. The presentation comprises three sections: (i) intuitive psychological motivations for these logics stemming from some results of developmental psycho-linguistics (Piaget, Chomsky), (ii) the construction of formal calculus with help of algorithmic tools, and (iii) the construction of set-theoretic semantic model for our logic. They determine criteria of valid deriving and transforming structures which are usually described in the literature as derivational trees. These structures are used in linguistics or in computational sciences as tools of modelling deep sentential structures or information-bases. Furthermore cognitive anthropologists notice that most of our ordinary taxonomies arranging the experienced world in our Lebenswelt possess various tree-structures. It seems that our abilities of applying tree-structures (without explicit knowledge concerned with algebraic mechanisms of construing tree-structures) in various segments of our life are mental and behavioral manifestation of some special logical disposal belonging to the machinery of logical competence in general. It is interesting to put the hypothesis according to which the competence of construing and applying tree-structures is even more primitive than the competence of applying logical rules of natural deduction. The presented calculus possesses some peculiar feature, namely its formal language is composed of expressions of three syntactic levels. In standard, formal languages all expressions may be divided as belonging to two levels: the level of formulas and the level of constituents of formulas. In the language of derivational trees there are distinguished the following levels: (i) the level of lexical expressions, (ii) the level of derivation-expressions, (iii) and finally the level of transformation-expressions. These last category fulfils the role of formulas. Proofs are appropriate sequences of derivation-expressions. However what is proved is not a derivation-expression but it is a transformation-expression. The peculiarity of our logic consists in that an expression which is proved, does not belong to the category of constituents of proofs