LEADER 03737nam a22005895i 4500
001 806850
003 TR_AnAIT
005 20260127002940
007 cr nn 008mamaa
008 100301s2007 ne | s |||| 0|eng d
020 |a9781402062049|9978-1-4020-6204-9
024 7 |a10.1007/978-1-4020-6204-9|2doi
041 |aeng
049 |aTürk Tarih Kurumu Kütüphanesi
050 4|aBD300-450
072 7|aHPJ|2bicssc
072 7|aPHI013000|2bisacsh
072 7|aQDTJ|2thema
082 04|a111|223
090 |aDK/8144
100 1 |aCocchiarella, Nino B.|eauthor.|4aut|4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
245 10|aFormal Ontology and Conceptual Realism|h[electronic resource] /|cby Nino B. Cocchiarella.
250 |a1st ed. 2007.
264 1|aDordrecht :|bSpringer Netherlands :|bImprint: Springer,|c2007.
300 |aXXIV, 332 p.|bonline resource.
336 |atext|btxt|2rdacontent
337 |acomputer|bc|2rdamedia
338 |aonline resource|bcr|2rdacarrier
347 |atext file|bPDF|2rda
490 1 |aSynthese Library, Studies in Epistemology, Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science,|x2542-8292 ;|v339
505 0 |aFormal Ontology -- Formal Ontology and Conceptual Realism -- Time, Being, and Existence -- Logical Necessity and Logical Atomism -- Formal Theories of Predication -- Formal Theories of Predication Part II -- Intensional Possible Worlds -- Conceptual Realism -- The Nexus of Predication -- Medieval Logic and Conceptual Realism -- On Geach Against General Reference -- Le?niewski’s Ontology -- Plurals and the Logic of Classes as Many -- The Logic of Natural Kinds.
520 |aTheories about the ontological structure of the world have generally been described in informal, intuitive terms, and the arguments for and against them, including their consistency and adequacy as explanatory frameworks, have generally been given in even more informal terms. The goal of formal ontology is to correct for these deficiencies. By formally reconstructing an intuitive, informal ontological scheme as a formal ontology we can better determine the consistency and adequacy of that scheme; and then by comparing different reconstructed schemes with one another we can much better evaluate the arguments for and against them and come to a decision as to which system it is best to adopt. Conceptual realism, which is defended here as the best system to adopt, contains both an intensional and a natural realism as well as an Aristotelian essentialism based on a logic of natural kinds. "This book is a significant contribution to the field of formal ontology, and to analytical ontology in general - it presents an original and powerful systematic position with a host of important technical results." Johanna Seibt, University of Aarhus, Denmark.
650 0|aOntology.
650 0|aLogic.
650 0|aLanguage and languages|xPhilosophy.
650 0|aPhilosophy, Medieval.
650 0|aMachine theory.
650 0|aMetaphysics.
650 14|aOntology.
650 24|aLogic.
650 24|aPhilosophy of Language.
650 24|aMedieval Philosophy.
650 24|aFormal Languages and Automata Theory.
650 24|aMetaphysics.
710 2 |aSpringerLink (Online service)
773 0 |tSpringer Nature eBook
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9781402062032
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789048113989
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789048175659
830 0|aSynthese Library, Studies in Epistemology, Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science,|x2542-8292 ;|v339
856 40|uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6204-9
912 |aZDB-2-SHU
912 |aZDB-2-SXPR
950 |aHumanities, Social Sciences and Law (SpringerNature-11648)
950 |aPhilosophy and Religion (R0) (SpringerNature-43725)