Re: SUPPORT FOR DECLARATIVE TRANSITION CONSTRAINTS

From: Brian <brian_at_selzer-software.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 15:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5cf2816b-cc3f-417e-8ace-08d88b3404ba_at_e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>


On Sep 27, 5:19 pm, r..._at_raampje.lan (Reinier Post) wrote:
> Brian wrote:
> >Definite descriptions are terms.  They're complex terms, but they're
> >terms nonetheless.
>
> >"the employee named paul c" differs from "there is one and only one
> >employee named paul c" in that under an interpretation, "the employee
> >named paul c" maps to an element in the domain of discourse whereas
> >"there is one and only one employee named paul c" maps to an element
> >in the domain of truth values.
>
> Yes, logicians tend to model the meaning of language in this way;
> but it is a flawed, or at the least very simplistic, way of modeling.
> And language-specific, too: articles such as 'the' don't exist
> in many languages.
>
> >'The x such that Qx' expresses that there is exactly one x that
> >satisfies Q, but it is also a term: it is exactly that x that
> >satisfies Q.  Of course if there is no x such that Q, then the
> >definite description fails to denote, and as a consequence any atomic
> >formula that references the description is, by definition, false,
> >along with the expression, 'there is exactly one x that satisfies Q.'
>
> Is the negation of (any statement containing) such an atomic formula
> true or false?

Your question is a bit unspecific. Atomic formulae that contain nondenoting terms are false. Formulae that are not atomic may not be. The negation of an atomic formula that is by definition false is by the definition of negation, true.

>
> >> > is the only place where "the employee named paul c" is referenced in
> >> > the database, then under the domain closure assumption,  DELETEing
> >> > that tuple not only denies the propsition that it represents, but also
> >> > denies the proposition "there is an employee named paul c."
>
> >> No.  The latter proposition is irrelevant to the business at hand.
>
> >How can you possibly make such a bald assumption?
>
> Is paul c. the king of France in disguise?
>
> ><snip>
>
> --
> Reinier
Received on Tue Sep 28 2010 - 00:35:01 CEST

Original text of this message