On thought and proposition

Janusz Kaczmarek

On thought and proposition

Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Philosophica nr 9, 43-49

1993

A C T A U N I V E R S I T A T I S L O D Z I E N S I S

F O L I A P H I L O S O P H I C A 9 . 1993

J a n u sz K a czm a rek

O N T H O U G H T A N D P R O P O S I T IO N

W e c a n easily u n d e rs ta n d th e co n ce p t o f p ro p o s itio n in th e n a tu ra l way: we s ta r t fro m a n y class o f ju d g m e n ts as

T h e sn o w is w h ite,

w h ich c a n be th o u g h t o r u tte rd by som e p eo p le. W h a t is c o m m o n in such in d iv id u a l ju d g m e n ts is u su ally d efin ed by th e te rm pro p o sitio n . H o w ev e r, we c an ask: w h a t is th e c o m m o n o f d ifferen t in d iv id u a l ju d g m e n ts ? O n e u su ally answ ers: a c o n te n t o f ju d g m e n t, sense, w hich is in d e p e n d e n t o f its u tte ra n c e o r c o n sc io u sn ess o f it. S o, in d e p e n d en tly o f th e a u th o r, place a n d tim e o f an u tte ra n c e o f e.g. P y th a g o re 's th e o re m th e c o n te n t o f th is th e o re m is in v a ria b le , is c o n sta n t.

N e th erv eles, as G . F reg e h a s re m a rk e d , th e sam e c o n te n t (w h ich w as called ‘G e d a n k e ’ - th o u g h t, by F reg e) c a n be in c lu d e d in a d e clarativ e , in te rro g a tiv e o r im p e ra tiv e sentence. It seem s, h o w ev er, th a t w h e n w e w a n t to d e liv e r an in fo rm a tio n , fo r ex am p le: to re n d e r th e sense o f P y th a g o re ’s th e o re m w e use d e clarativ e sen ten ces, w e u tte r ju d g m e n ts . T h u s w e a re in c lin e d to c o n c lu d th a t w h a t is c o m m o n in d iffe re n t ju d g m e n ts is n o t o n ly th e c o n te n t o f th e d e clarativ e sen te n c e b u t also th e fo rm o f a d e c la ra tiv e sen ten ce. L et u s n o tice th a t a p p a r t fro m a c o m m o n c o n te n t e x p ressed in u tte re n c e s th e re is still o ne m o re fa c to r in c o m m o n i.e. th e form . C o n se q u e n tly in m y view , p ro position c o m p re h e n d e d as w h a t is c o m m o n a n y class o f ju d g m e n ts is n o t o n ly ‘the c o n te n t', b u t „ th e c o n te n t w ith the fo rm o f d e c la ra tiv e s en te n c e ".

In logic tra d itio n , th e p ro p o s itio n is u su ally d efin ed by m e a n s o f the c o n ce p ts o f m e a n in g a n d sense i.e. as m e a n in g o r sense o f d e c la ra tiv e sentence. H o w ev er h ere a p ro b le m arises, th e o n e o f u n iv o c a l u n d e rs ta n d in g o f th o se term s. T h e c o n c e p t o f m e a n in g is defin ed in m a n ifo ld w ays in, fo r ex am p le, th e o ry o f m e a n in g (a m o n g o th e rs J. S. M ill, B. R u ssell) a n d th e o ry o f m e a n in g

4 4 J a n u s z K a c z m a re k

tre a te d as ideal o b je c t (E. H u sserl. G . F reg e, A . C h u rc h ). N e x t, th e term sense is th e m o s t оГеп u sed in tu itiv ely a lth o u g h o n e c an find in F reg e o r H u sse rl the follow ing d e fin itio n : th e sense is s o m e th in g „w h ich c o n ta in s th e w ay o f b ein g g iv en ". T h e re is also th e p ro p o s a l o f A jd u k iew icz, w h o d efines p ro p o s itio n by m ean s o f th e c o n c e p t o f c o n n o ta tio n .

L et us sk etc h o u t so m e c h arac te ristic s o f th e n o tio n s o f p ro p o s itio n . 1. F R E G E . I th in k th a t th e an aly zis o f F reg e tex t sh aw s th a t u n d e rs ta n ­ d in g G edanke as a p ro position is n o t q u ite p ro p e r. F reg e w rites: „ I n d e clarativ e sen te n c e tw o th in g s sh o u ld be d istin g u ish ed : th e c o n te n t c o m m o n to th e ir q u e stio n a n d asse rtio n . T h e fo rm e r is a th o u g h t (G e d a n k e ) o r inclu d es the th o u g h t. T h u s , th e th o u g h ts c a n be e x p ressed w ith o u t b ein g p u t as tru e . In d e c la ra tiv e sen ten ces th ese th in g s a re so u n ite d th a t th e ir a re h a rd ly d istin g u is­ hed (se p a ra te d ). So w e d istin g u ish

1° g ra s p in g th o u g h t, th a t is th in k in g ;

2° a ck n o w le d g in g th e tru th fu ln e ss o f th o u g h t, th a t is U rte il; 3° a sse rtin g o f U rte il, th a t is a ss e rtio n ” 1.

T h e m o s t o fte n U rte il is u n d e rs to o d as the sense o f a d e c la ra tiv e sen ten ces w ith th e ex ce p tio n o f th e case w hen it is id en tified w ith th e v ery sentence. H o w e v e r F reg e d istin g u ish es su ch senses o f sen ten ces in view o f w hich th e q u e stio n o f tru th fu ln e ss c a n arise fro m th o se senses in view o f w hich this q u e stio n d o e s n o t a p p ie a rs (e.g. in view o f the sense o f im p e ra tiv e sen ten ce). In

Über S in n u n d B ed eu tu n g F reg e claim s th a t U rte il is a p assag e fro m th o u g h t to

its v a lu e 2.

2. C H U R C H . In C h u rc h ’s p a p e r3 w e m eet su ch c h a ra c te ris tic o f p ro p o s i­ tio n . P ro p o sitio n is a n a b s tr a c t o b ject (as a fu n c tio n o r class) w ith o u t p sy ch o lo g ical asp e c ts c h a ra c te ris tic fo r O c k h a m p ro p o s itio m e n ta lis a n d fo r tra d itio n a l ju d g m e n t. C h u rc h d efines p ro position by m e a n s o f sense o f a sen ten ce; th e sense o f a sen ten ce b ein g e ith e r w h a t a m a n a p p re h e n d s w hile u n d e rs ta n d in g a sen ten ce o r w h a t h av e tw o sen ten ces b ein g c o rre c t tra n s la tio n in tw o d iffe re n t la n g u a g es. C h u rc h follow s F r a g e e x p la in in g th e te rm ‘G e d a n k e ’ w h ich is to m e a n (a n d so te rm ‘G e d a n k e ’ d e n o te ): „ n ic h t d as su b jectiv e T u n des D e n k en s, so n d e rn d essen o b je k tiv e n In h a lt, d e r fäh ig ist, g em ein sam es E ig e n th u m v o n V ielen zu sein ".

3. C A R N A P . U sin g th e c o n c e p t o f e x te n sio n a n d in te n sio n C a r n a p shaw s th a t p ro p o sitio n s a re in te n sio n o f sentences. T r u th v alu es a re tre a te d as e x te n sio n s o f sentences. T h u s , p ro p o s itio n b eco m es th e p r o p e rty o f tru t h

1 СГ. G . F r e g e . D e r G e d a n ke. E in e lo gisch e U n tersu c h u n g , „ B e iträ g e z u r P h ilo s o p h ie d e s d e u ts c h e n Id e a lis m u s ” . 1918.

2 G . F r e g e . Ü ber S in n u n d B e d e u tu n g , „ Z e its c h rift f ü r P h ilo s o p h ie u n d p h ilo s o p h is c h e K r it i k ” 1892. C .

3 A . C h u r c h , In tr o d u c tio n to M a th e m a tic a l L o g ic , P r in c to n U n iv . P re s s , P r in c e to n N . J.

v alu es4. V a n d erv ek e n re m a rk s 5 th a t in C a r n a p p ro p o s itio n s a re lim ited to th e tr u th c o n d itio n s a n d , c o n se q u e n tly , every p ro p o s itio n c a n be u n d e rs to o d as a 0-1 seq u en ce. In Intro d u ctio n to S e m a n tic s C a r n a p tre a ts p ro p o s itio n s as a d e sig n a tu m o f sen ten ces sim ila rity as a in d iv id u a ls a re ta k e n fo r d e sig n a tu m o f in d iv id u a l c o n s ta n ts 6. In Intro d u ctio n to S y m b o lic L o g ic p ro p o s itio n s rem ain d e sig n a ta b u t n o t o f th e in d iv id u a l level (i.e. ex ten sio n o f in d iv id u a l c o n sta n ts ) b u t th a t o f th e sense o f in d iv id u a ls (i.e. in te n sio n o f in d iv id u a l c o n s ta n ts ) 7.

4. A J D U K I E W IC Z . T h e c o n c e p t o f p ro p o s itio n is in tro d u c e d by m e a n o f th e c o n c e p t o f c o n n o ta tio n . H o w ev e r A jd u k iew icz re m a rk s th a t „ th e fo r­ m u la tio n th a t th e c o n n o ta tio n o f a n a m e is th e set o f p ro p e rtie s w hich u n iv o c a lly d e te rm in e s its e x te n sio n , c a n n o t be c o n sid e re d as a d e fin itio n o f the c o n n o ta tio n o f a n am e, since a given class o f o b jects, fo rm in g th e e x te n sio n o f a n a m e , c an be u n iv o c a lly d e te rm in e d by d iffe re n t sets o f p ro p e rtie s. A n d a c o n n o ta tio n o f a n a m e is n o t ju s t a n y set o f p ro p e rtie s w h ich u n iv o cally d e te rm in e s its ex te n sio n , b u t a set d is tin g u ish ed a m o n t th o se w h ich satisfy th a t c o n d itio n ” 8. A n a ly sin g th e ex am p les as

„ th e b ro th e r o f J o h n 's m o th e r” a n d

„ th e m o th e r o f J o h n ’s b ro th e r”

A jd u k iew icz co n clu d es th a t „ it is n ecessary:

1° to d e te rm in e th e c o n n o ta tio n o f th e ex p re ssio n E in su ch a w ay th a t its c o m p o n e n t p a rts sh o u ld be so m e o b jectiv e re fe re n ts o f all c o m p o n e n t e x p re ssio n s o f th e e x p re ssio n E, a n d n o t o n ly its c o m p o n e n t nam es.

2° to d e te rm in e th e c o n n o ta tio n o f th e ex p re ssio n E in su ch a w ay th a t it s h o u ld reflect n o t on ly th e w o rd s c o n ta in e d in th a t e x p re ssio n , b u t also the s y n ta c tic p laces w hich th o se w o rd s o c cu p y in th e ex p re ssio n E " 9.

S o, th e c o n n o ta tio n o f the e x p ressio n E is u n d e rs to o d as the fu n c tio n d e te rm in e d fo r th e u ltim a te sy n tac tic places o f th e ex p re ssio n o b ta in e d fro m th e ex p re ssio n E by th e e x p a n sio n o f all th e a b b re v ia tio n s it c o n ta in s, w hich e sta b lish e s a o n e -o n e c o rre s p o n d e n c e b etw een th o se p laces a n d th e d e n o ta tio n s o f th e w o rd s o c cu p y in g su ch places in th e e x p a n d e d ex p re ssio n E.

T h e d e fin itio n o f c o n n o ta tio n is g e n eral a n d it m a y a lso be u sed w ith resp ect to sen ten ces. S o , th e c o n c e p t o f p ro p o sitio n we c a n d efin e as

4 R . C a r n a p . In tr o d u c tio n to S y m b o lic L o g ic , D o v e r P u b lic a tio n s . N e w Y o r k 1958. * D . V a n d e r v e k e n . W h a t Is a P rop ositio n? , ..C a h ie r s ď é p is té m ó lo g ie " 1991. № 9103 U n iv e r s ité d u Q u é b e c à M o n tré a l.

6 R . C a r n a p. In tr o d u c tio n to S e m a n tic s , H a r v a r d U n iv e r s ity P re s s . C a m b rid g e . M a s s . 1942. 7 C a r p . In tr o d u c tio n to S y m b o lic ...

8 К . A j d u k i e w i c z , P ro p o sitio n u s th e C o n n o ta tio n o f S e n le n n c c , „ S tu d ia L o g ic a ” 1967, N o . 21.

4 6 J a n u s z K a c z m a re k

a c o n n o ta tio n o f a sentence. F o r ex am p le th e c o n n o ta tio n (p ro p o sitio n ) o f the sen ten ce

S o k ra te s likes A lcib iad es

( 1 Л ) ( 1 , 0 ) ( 1 , 2 )

is th e fu n c tio n esta b lish in g a o n e -o n e c o rre s p o n d e n c e betw een the sy n tactic places o f its w o rd s a n d th e ir d e n o ta tio n , i.e.:

< ( 1 ,1 ) - S o c ra te s, (1.0) - likes, (1,2) - A lc ib ia d es > .

5. A U S T IN , S E A R L E . T h e se a u th o rs p o in t o u t so m e specific elem en ts o f (u ttered ) sen ten ces o f d ifferen t ty p e as

С Sam sm o k es h a b itu a lly . (*) < D o es S am sm o k e h a b itu a ly ?

L W o u ld th a t S am sm o k ed h a b itu a ly .

N am ely , w h a t is in c o m m o n h e re is th e referen ce to so m e o b jects a n d p re d ic a tin g a b o u t it: th e d ifferen ce co n sists in illo c u tio n a ry act: o f a sse rtin g , a sk in g a b o u t, a n d w ishing, respectively. T h u s the c o n ce p t o f referen ce and p re d ic a tio n a re d e ta c h e d fro m c o m p le te sp each a ct. T h is referen ce to objects a n d p re d ic a tio n a b o u t th em , a p p e a rin g in d ifferen t illo c u tio n a ry a ct, a rc called

p ro p o sitio n '0. S en ten ces (*) c an be tra n s la te d in to schem es:

('P ') , ?’P \ W 'P '

w here P is th e n a m e o f p ro p o s itio n .

6. V A N D E R V E K E N . V an d erv ek e n , w h o tries to co m b in e A u stin ’s a n d S e a rle 's a p p ro a c h w ith th e resu lts o f F reg e a n d C h u rc h , u n d e rs ta n d s pro p o si­

tions as a З-elem en ts seq u en ce

ll(Rn(a i - ..., a„))|| = < { ||R „ ||, ||a , ||... ||a„||},

{j £ I: < lla iII(j)... Ila „ ||(j)> є IIR-nlIÜ)}, { f e 2Ua: f( I Aa H) = 1 } > ,

w h ere a j , ..., a n a re in d iv id u a l c o n sta n ts . R n is p re d ic a te o f d egree η, I is non e m p ty set (th e elem en ts o f w h ich re p re sen t p o ssib le w o rld s), Ц*|| d esig n ate d e n o ta tio n o f ex p re ssio n *, A a is a a to m ic p ro p o s itio n a l te rm , w hich have a p a ir a s a d e n o ta tio n , th a t is

||R n(a ,, ..., a n)|| = < { | | R J , l|a ,||, ..., ||a n ||},

{j є I: < ||a , ||( j ) , ..., ||a „ ||© > є ||R „ ||(j)} > a n d U a is th e set o f a to m ic p r o p o s itio n s " .

10 J . L. A u s t i n , H o w to D o T h in g s w ith W ord s, C la r e n d o n P re s s . O x f o rd 1962; J . R. S e a r I e. S p ee ch A c ts . A n E ssa y in th e P h ilo so p h y o f L a n g u a g e , C a m b rid g e U n iv e rs ity P re s s . 1969. 11 D . V a n d e r v e k e n . M e a n in g a n d S p e e c h A c ts , V ol. 1 2, C a m b rid g e U n iv e rs ity P ress. 1990/1991; i d e m . W h a t Is a P ro p o sitio n ...

T h e first e le m en t o f th e trip lex we call th e set o f p ro p o s itio n a l c o n stitu e n ts , th e seco n d e le m en t re p re sen ts th e set o f po ssib le w o rld in w h ich th e rela tio n satisfied a n d th e th ird elem en t re p re se n ts tru th c o n d itio n s . L et us re m a rk th a t in set o f p ro p o s itio n a l c o n stitu e n ts we sp ea k a b o u t senses a n d n o t a b o u t objects. V a n d erv ek e n sp eak s: „A ll p ro p o s itio n s a re g en eral p ro p o s itio n s w hose c o n stitu e n ts a re senses a n d n o t o b je c ts” 12.

It is the c o n c e p tio n o f V a n d erv ek e n a n d th e a p p r o a c h o f A jd u k iew icz m e n tio n d a b o v e th a t seem to th e m o s t in te re stin g . W hy? B ecause th e ir an aly zis o f p ro p o s itio n s in d ic a tes th e necessity o f tra n s fe r to th e s tru c tu re o f th e p ro p o s itio n a lo n e , a n d p ro v id e s th e m a n n e r o f d isce rn in g th e c o n te n t o f sentence.

N o w , ľ a m g o in g to d iscu ss th e c o n c e p tio n o f V a n d e rv e k e n in tw o fo ld perspective: p h ilo so p h ic a l a n d logical.

1. A c co rd in g to A u stin , Searle a n d V a n d erv ek e n p ro p o s itio n is a c o m ­ p o n e n t o f a n illo c u tio n a ry a c t a n d , th u s it a p p e a rs in d iffe re n t u tte ra n c e s o f type (*). In spite o f o u r in tro d u c to ry re m a rk s, th e fo rm o f d e c la ra tiv e sen ten ce, w hich d e te rm in e s th e ty p e o f illo c u tio n a ry a c t is n o t c o n sid e re d a p a r t o f p ro p o s itio n (a n d o th e r illo c u tio n a ry force m a rk e rs likew ise). O n th e o th e r h a n d V a n d erv ek e n te n d s to co m b in e th e re su lts o f A u stin a n d Searle w o rk s w ith th e ‘p u re ’ logical th e o rie s o rig in a tin g fro m F reg e a n d C h u rc h . O n this g ro u n d it is e m p h a siz e d th a t p ro p o s itio n s a re 'k n o w le d g e c a rrie r’ a n d th e b asic c o m p o n e n t o f scientific th eo ries. M o re o v er, let us n o tic e th a t w e a re ra th e r co n cern ed w h e th e r P y th a g o re claim s th a t in a rig h t-a n g le d trian g le a 2 + b 2 = c 2 a n d n o t ju s t su p p o se s o r expresses his w ish. F u r th e r , o b serv e th a t i f a th e o re m is tra n s la te d fro m o n e lan g u ag e to a n o th e r, th e n , to p reserv e th e sense o f p ro p o s itio n , its fo rm m u st be p ro p e rly re n d e re d . O b v io u sly , w e d o n o t tra n s la te P h y ta g o re ’s th e o re m in to q u e stio n . I t seem s th a t th e c o n c e p tio n o f V a n d erv ek e n p e rm its su ch s itu a tio n ; th e p ro p o s itio n b ein g id en tical.

T h e re fo re , in m y o p in io n , w h a t V a n d erv ek e n calls p ro p o s itio n sh o u ld be refered to as th o u g h t (in id eal sense), w hich c o rre s p o n d s to F re g e ’s ‘G e d a n k e ’. A n d pro p o sitio n s h o u ld be a ck n o w le d g e as a th o u g h t in th e fo rm o f d e clarativ e sentences. I h o p e th a t th e a b o v e d e fin itio n o f p ro p o s itio n re m a in s in a g re em en t w ith F reg e claim s:

1° „ P ro p o s itio n (U rteil) fo r m e is n o t g ra sp in g o f th o u g h t (G e d a n k e ) also, b u t reco g n izin g its tru th v a lu e ” ,

2° „ In each p ro p o s itio n - even m o st triv ial - th e re is a step m a d e fro m the level o f th o u g h t to th e level o f referen ce” (i.e. lo g ical v alu es in th is case) a n d 3° „ In te rro g a tiv e a n d d e clarativ e sentences c o n ta in th e sam e th o u g h t; b u t th e d e c la ra tiv e sen te n c e inclu d es a n e x tra , n am ely th e asse rtio n . A n d th e in te rro g a tiv e c o n ta in s a n e x tra , n am ely th e re q u e st” 13.

12 V a n d e r v e k e n , W h a t Is a P ro p o sitio n ... 13 F r e g e , D e r G e d a n ke...

4 8 J a n u s z K a c z m a re k

2. T h e logical re m a rk . T h e c o n c e p t o f p ro p o s itio n in V a n d erv ek e n s fo rm u la tio n is - as w e have re m a rk e d - very g e n eral. It is so g en eral th a t in case o f su ch sentences as

(**) T h e p re sid e n t o f the U S A k n o w s th e m iss o f th e w o rld ; th e fo llo w in g p a ra d o x occur: the p o ssib le w o rld (co n te x t) in w hich the sen ten ces a re tru e a re k n o w n , w hile we c a n n o t sp ea k a b o u t th e sense o f such sen ten ces (p ro p o sitio n s) in a p o ssib le w o rld . So it is n ecessary to build a d e fin itio n o f p ro p o s itio n w h ich w o u ld e n a b le sp e a k in g a b o u t p ro p o s itio n in po ssib le w o rld . E a c h p ro p o s itio n c o m p rise s a re la tio n b etw een o b jects w hich a re u n d e rs to o d in som e asp ects (th a t is as co n ce p t). L et us re m a rk , how ever, th a t c o n sid c ra tin g th e sense o f a n a m e we m e a n th e w ay o f ‘b ein g g iv en ’ o f this ob jects. C o n se q u e n tly , a d m itin g the resu lts o f F ra g e , in u n d e rs ta n d in g o f p ro p o s itio n , w e m u st ta k e po ssib le w o rld in to a c c o u n t, th a t is th e reference to th e c o n c e p t o f ob jects. T h e sen ten ce (**) ex p resses d ifferen t p ro p o s itio n s d e p e n d in g o n w e th e r u tte re d in 1980 o r in 1990 fo r e x am p le. W hile u tte rin g th is sen ten ce w e express th e p ro p o s itio n in w hich

1) w e m ean som e o b jects (fo r e x am p le G . B u sh a n d th e m iss X); 2) th e se ob jects a re u n d e rs to o d by m e a n s o f c o n c e p t „ b ein g a p re s id e n t” a n d ..b e in g a m iss o f th e w o rld ” ,

3) th e o b jects a re in a d e q u a te re la tio n .

T h e n , it seem s, th a t th e d e fin itio n o f p ro p o s itio n given b y V a n d erv ek e n sh o u ld be a little m o d ified . D e n o ta tio n o f p ro p o s itio n a l te rm in p o ssib le w o rld і is (in case - n = 2):

l|R

2

2

{і o r * } > , w h ere * is g a p a n d

||(R 2( a ,, a 2))||i = < { ||A a ||j}, {f e 2<u »> :f(||A a ||i) = 1 } > ,

w h ere A a is a b b re v ia tio n fo r R 2( a i ,a 2) a n d U j is set o f all a to m ic p ro p o s itio n (a to m ic th o u g h t) in p o ssib le w o rld i.

T h e m o d ified d e fin itio n o f p ro p o s itio n gives us th e p o ssib ility to sh aw th a t sen ten ce (**) expresses d ifferen t p ro p o s itio n o n e s in d iffe re n t c o n te x t o f u tte ra n c e . M o re o v e r, I th in k , the d e fin itio n satisfies th e c o n d itio n s a ssu m e d by V a n d erv ek e n . It also seem s th a t th e m o d ific a tio n o f sem a n tic s s h o u ld n o t com e accro ss g re a te r d ifficults. F o r ex am p le, we defin e

ІІАр л Bplli = < { l|A a ||i} и {||B a ||;}, id 2( ||A p ||i) n id 2(||B p ||i ) > ,

4 9

an d

l|t(A p)||j = T iff exist a t least o n e f є id 2(|[A.p||j) su ch th a t fo r all u j £ i d |( ||A p||j ) [f(uj) = 1 iff id.-ifu,!) = і],

w h ere Α ρ,Β ρ a re a b b re v ia tio n fo r te rm s fo r p ro p o s itio n s , t is sy n ca te g o re m a tic ex p re ssio n . t(A p) is a n e le m e n ta ry sen te n c e o f la n g u a g e L w hich is tru e in a w o rld if a n d o n ly if the p ro p o s itio n ex p ressed by A p is tru e in th a t w o rld .

D e p a r tm e n t o f Logic L o d ź U n iv e rs ity P o la n d

J a n u s z K a c z m a r e k

O M Y Ś L I I S Ą D Z I E W S E N S I E L O G I C Z N Y M

P o ję cie s ą d u w sen sie lo g iczn y m n ic j e s t je d n o z n a c z n ie s c h a r a k te r y z o w a n e w lite ra tu r z e log iczn e j. J e d n a k ż e w e w s z y stk ic h w a ż n y c h d e fin ic ja c h w s k a z u je się n a z n a c z e n ie , sen s lu b k o n o ta c ję z d a ń o z n a jm u ją c y c h . W a r ty k u l e a u t o r p o d a je ró ż n e d e fin ic je i c h a ra k te ry s ty k i w y p r a c o w a n e m . in. p rz e z F re g e g o . C h u r c h a . Ą jd u k ic w ic z a i V a n d c rv o k e n a o r a z w s k a z u je na g łó w n e c z y n n ik i, k tó re n ale ży p o d d a ć a n a liz ie p rz y o p ra c o w y w a n iu d efin ic ji s ą d u .

W y c h o d z ą c o d p o jęc ia s ą d u j a k o te g o , c o w s p ó ln e w ró ż n y c h s ą d a c h w se n sie p s y c h o lo g ic z ­ n y m a u t o r f o r m u łu je w ła s n ą d e fin ic ję s ą d u w sen sie lo g ic z n y m ta k . a b y u w z g lę d n io n e były:

1) s t r u k t u r a s ą d u : 2) s e n s z d a ń o z n a jm u ją c y c h :