Misplaced Pages

#692307

32-704: [REDACTED] Look up presente in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. Presente may refer to: The Present ¡Presente! , the newsletter of the School of the Americas Watch Presente.org , an American advocacy group that "exists to amplify the political voice of Latino communities" in the United States Presente (Renato Russo album) , 2003 Presente (Bajofondo album) , 2013 Topics referred to by

64-414: A different associated light cone. One has to conclude that in relativistic models of physics there is no place for "the present" as an absolute element of reality, and only refers to things that are close to us. Einstein phrased this as: "People like us, who believe in physics, know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion" . In physical cosmology ,

96-470: A given event, can not be in direct cause-effect relationship . Such collections of events are perceived differently by different observers. Instead, when focusing on "now" as the events perceived directly, not as a recollection or a speculation, for a given observer "now" takes the form of the observer's past light cone . The light cone of a given event is objectively defined as the collection of events in causal relationship to that event, but each event has

128-519: A set Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } of formulas if there is a formal proof in F S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {FS}}} of A {\displaystyle A} from the set Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } . This is denoted Γ ⊢ F S A {\displaystyle \Gamma \vdash _{\mathcal {FS}}A} . The turnstile symbol ⊢ {\displaystyle \vdash }

160-409: Is Mike's brother's son. Therefore Fred is Mike's nephew." Since this argument depends on the meanings of the words "brother", "son", and "nephew", the statement "Fred is Mike's nephew" is a so-called material consequence of "Fred is Mike's brother's son", not a formal consequence. A formal consequence must be true in all cases , however this is an incomplete definition of formal consequence, since even

192-494: Is a frog; and (c) Kermit is not green. Modal-formal accounts of logical consequence combine the modal and formal accounts above, yielding variations on the following basic idea: The accounts considered above are all "truth-preservational", in that they all assume that the characteristic feature of a good inference is that it never allows one to move from true premises to an untrue conclusion. As an alternative, some have proposed " warrant -preservational" accounts, according to which

224-542: Is a logical consequence of P {\displaystyle P} cannot be influenced by empirical knowledge . Deductively valid arguments can be known to be so without recourse to experience, so they must be knowable a priori. However, formality alone does not guarantee that logical consequence is not influenced by empirical knowledge. So the a priori property of logical consequence is considered to be independent of formality. The two prevailing techniques for providing accounts of logical consequence involve expressing

256-412: Is different from Wikidata All article disambiguation pages All disambiguation pages Present It is sometimes represented as a hyperplane in space-time , typically called "now", although modern physics demonstrates that such a hyperplane cannot be defined uniquely for observers in relative motion. The present may also be viewed as a duration . Contemporary history describes

288-405: Is no model I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} in which all members of Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } are true and A {\displaystyle A} is false. This is denoted Γ ⊨ F S A {\displaystyle \Gamma \models _{\mathcal {FS}}A} . Or, in other words, the set of

320-428: Is one in which the conclusion is entailed by the premises , because the conclusion is the consequence of the premises. The philosophical analysis of logical consequence involves the questions: In what sense does a conclusion follow from its premises? and What does it mean for a conclusion to be a consequence of premises? All of philosophical logic is meant to provide accounts of the nature of logical consequence and

352-656: The accelerating expansion of the universe has removed the local supercluster beyond the cosmological horizon (at about 150 billion years). In radiocarbon dating , the "present" is defined as AD 1950 . In English grammar , actions are classified according to one of the following twelve verb tenses: past ( past , past continuous , past perfect , or past perfect continuous ), present (present, present continuous , present perfect , or present perfect continuous ), or future ( future , future continuous , future perfect , or future perfect continuous ). The present tense refers to things that are currently happening or are always

SECTION 10

#1733092786693

384-431: The historical timeframe immediately relevant to the present time and is a certain perspective of modern history . You shouldn't chase after the past or place expectations on the future. What is past is left behind. The future is as yet unreached. Whatever quality is present you clearly see right there, right there. What we perceive as present is the vivid fringe of memory tinged with anticipation. "The present" raises

416-421: The logical form of the sentences: (2) The relation is a priori , i.e., it can be determined with or without regard to empirical evidence (sense experience); and (3) The logical consequence relation has a modal component. The most widely prevailing view on how best to account for logical consequence is to appeal to formality. This is to say that whether statements follow from one another logically depends on

448-516: The argument " P is Q ' s brother's son, therefore P is Q ' s nephew" is valid in all cases, but is not a formal argument. If it is known that Q {\displaystyle Q} follows logically from P {\displaystyle P} , then no information about the possible interpretations of P {\displaystyle P} or Q {\displaystyle Q} will affect that knowledge. Our knowledge that Q {\displaystyle Q}

480-401: The case. For example, in the sentence, "she walks home everyday," the verb "walks" is in the present tense because it refers to an action that is regularly occurring in the present circumstances. Verbs in the present continuous tense indicate actions that are currently happening and will continue for a period of time. In the sentence, "she is walking home," the verb phrase "is walking" is in

512-392: The characteristic feature of a good inference is that it never allows one to move from justifiably assertible premises to a conclusion that is not justifiably assertible. This is (roughly) the account favored by intuitionists such as Michael Dummett . The accounts discussed above all yield monotonic consequence relations, i.e. ones such that if A {\displaystyle A}

544-410: The concept in terms of proofs and via models . The study of the syntactic consequence (of a logic) is called (its) proof theory whereas the study of (its) semantic consequence is called (its) model theory . A formula A {\displaystyle A} is a syntactic consequence within some formal system F S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {FS}}} of

576-400: The diagram on the right was to portray a 3-dimensional object having access to the past, present, and future in the present moment (4th dimension). It follows from Albert Einstein 's Special Theory of Relativity that there is no such thing as absolute simultaneity . When care is taken to operationalise "the present", it follows that the events that can be labeled as "simultaneous" with

608-442: The future without us being determined to do it) since at least Boethius . Thomas Aquinas offers the metaphor of a watchman, representing God, standing on a height looking down on a valley to a road where past, present and future, represented by the individuals and their actions strung out along its length, are all visible simultaneously to God. Therefore, God's knowledge is not tied to any particular date. The original intent of

640-414: The interpretations that make all members of Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } true is a subset of the set of the interpretations that make A {\displaystyle A} true. Modal accounts of logical consequence are variations on the following basic idea: Alternatively (and, most would say, equivalently): Such accounts are called "modal" because they appeal to

672-427: The modal notions of logical necessity and logical possibility . 'It is necessary that' is often expressed as a universal quantifier over possible worlds , so that the accounts above translate as: Consider the modal account in terms of the argument given as an example above: The conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises because we can not imagine a possible world where (a) all frogs are green; (b) Kermit

SECTION 20

#1733092786693

704-417: The nature of logical truth . Logical consequence is necessary and formal , by way of examples that explain with formal proof and models of interpretation . A sentence is said to be a logical consequence of a set of sentences, for a given language , if and only if , using only logic (i.e., without regard to any personal interpretations of the sentences) the sentence must be true if every sentence in

736-456: The past and is finished as of the current reference to the action. Finally, verbs in the present perfect continuous tense refer to actions that have been continuing up until the current time, thus combining the characteristics of both the continuous and perfect tenses. An example of a present perfect continuous verb phrase can be found in the sentence, "she has been walking this route for a week now," where "has been walking" indicates an action that

768-416: The present continuous tense because it refers to a current action that will continue until a certain endpoint (when "she" reaches home). Verbs in the present perfect tense indicate actions that started in the past and is completed at the time of speaking. For example, in the sentence, "She has walked home," the verb phrase "has walked" is in the present perfect tense because it describes an action that began in

800-429: The present moment are the happiest. A number of meditative techniques aim to help the practiser live in the present moment. Christianity views God as being outside of time and, from the divine perspective past, present and future are actualized in the now of eternity . This trans-temporal conception of God has been proposed as a solution to the problem of divine foreknowledge (i.e. how can God know what we will do in

832-489: The present time in the chronology of the universe is estimated at 13.8 billion years after the singularity determining the arrow of time . In terms of the cosmic expansion history , it is in the dark-energy-dominated era , after the universe's matter content has become diluted enough for dark energy to dominate the total energy density. It is also in the universe's Stelliferous Era , after enough time for superclusters to have formed (at about 5 billion years), but before

864-646: The question: "How is it that all sentient beings experience now at the same time?" There is no logical reason why this should be the case and no easy answer to the question. Buddhism and many of its associated paradigms emphasize the importance of living in the present moment—being fully aware of what is happening, and not dwelling on the past or worrying about the future . This does not mean that they encourage hedonism , but merely that constant focus on one's current position in space and time (rather than future considerations, or past reminiscence) will aid one in relieving suffering. They teach that those who live in

896-413: The same term [REDACTED] This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the title Presente . If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article. Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Presente&oldid=1181374732 " Category : Disambiguation pages Hidden categories: Short description

928-557: The set is true. Logicians make precise accounts of logical consequence regarding a given language L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}} , either by constructing a deductive system for L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}} or by formal intended semantics for language L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}} . The Polish logician Alfred Tarski identified three features of an adequate characterization of entailment: (1) The logical consequence relation relies on

960-412: The structure or logical form of the statements without regard to the contents of that form. Syntactic accounts of logical consequence rely on schemes using inference rules . For instance, we can express the logical form of a valid argument as: This argument is formally valid, because every instance of arguments constructed using this scheme is valid. This is in contrast to an argument like "Fred

992-431: Was happening continuously in the past and continues to happen continuously in the present. [REDACTED] Quotations related to present at Wikiquote Logical consequence Logical consequence (also entailment ) is a fundamental concept in logic which describes the relationship between statements that hold true when one statement logically follows from one or more statements. A valid logical argument

Presente - Misplaced Pages Continue

1024-491: Was originally introduced by Frege in 1879, but its current use only dates back to Rosser and Kleene (1934–1935). Syntactic consequence does not depend on any interpretation of the formal system. A formula A {\displaystyle A} is a semantic consequence within some formal system F S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {FS}}} of a set of statements Γ {\displaystyle \Gamma } if and only if there

#692307