<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
         xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/">

<channel rdf:about="http://www.umsu.de/wo/">
  <title>wo's weblog</title>
  <link>http://www.umsu.de/wo/</link>
  <description>Musings in Analytical Philosophy</description>
  <items>
    <rdf:Seq>
    <rdf:li resource="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/557" />
<rdf:li resource="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/556" />
<rdf:li resource="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/555" />
<rdf:li resource="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/554" />
<rdf:li resource="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/553" />
    </rdf:Seq>
  </items>
</channel>

  <item rdf:about="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/557">
    <title>Quick logic question</title>
    <link>http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/557</link>
    <dc:date>2010-05-07T17:21:00+02:00</dc:date>
    <description><![CDATA[Suppose you add to the language of first-order logic a sentence operator L for which you stipulate that all instances of


   (L(p -> q) &amp; Lp) -> Lq


are valid and that validity is closed under prefixing L's:


   if p is valid, then so is Lp.


For example, L could be the modal operator 'necessarily', or it could
mean the same as ''. If it means the same as
'', then


   


is invalid, since it translates as


   .


So the principle of Universal Instantiation...]]></description>
  </item>
    <item rdf:about="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/556">
    <title>ANU</title>
    <link>http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/556</link>
    <dc:date>2010-04-20T17:58:00+02:00</dc:date>
    <description><![CDATA[<p>Last week I accepted an offer for a post-doc at the ANU, starting in September. I will be working with Al Hajek on "the objects of probability". Should be great.</p>
]]></description>
  </item>
    <item rdf:about="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/555">
    <title>Extensionality and Leibniz' Law</title>
    <link>http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/555</link>
    <dc:date>2010-04-12T21:31:00+02:00</dc:date>
    <description><![CDATA[
Extensional contexts are usually defined as positions in a
sentence at which co-refering terms can be substituted without
affecting the truth-value of the sentence. So 'Cicero' occupies an
extensional position in 'Cicero denounced Catiline', but not in
'Philip said that Cicero denounced Catiline'. One might think that a
term t occupies an extensional position in A(t) if and only if all
instances of the following schema are true:


   (LL) x=y -> A(x)  A(y).


'x=y' is true iff '...]]></description>
  </item>
    <item rdf:about="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/554">
    <title>"Norms of assertion"</title>
    <link>http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/554</link>
    <dc:date>2010-04-02T11:55:00+02:00</dc:date>
    <description><![CDATA[
Two rather different things sometimes seem to go under the name
"norms of assertion", and it might be useful to keep them
apart. Often, e.g. by Williamson, norms of assertion are characterised
as constitutive norms of a particular speech act. Roughly, a
constitutive norm for an activity X is a norm you must obey, or try to
obey, in order to partake in activity X. The rules of chess are a
paradigm example: to play chess, you have to move the pieces in a
particular way across the board...]]></description>
  </item>
    <item rdf:about="http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/553">
    <title>Pre-fission possibilities</title>
    <link>http://www.umsu.de/wo/2010/553</link>
    <dc:date>2010-03-26T19:22:00+01:00</dc:date>
    <description><![CDATA[
  Suppose tonight you will fission into two persons. One of your
  successors will wake up Mars and one on Venus. There are then two
  possibilities for how things might be for you tomorrow: you
  might wake up on Mars, and you might wake up on Venus. These are
  distinct centered possibilities that do not correspond to distinct
  uncentered possibilties. There is just one possibility for the
  world, but two possibilities for you. Indeed, the two possibilities
  are two actualities:...]]></description>
  </item>
  </rdf:RDF>
