{"id":6065,"date":"2020-08-19T12:29:51","date_gmt":"2020-08-19T11:29:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/event\/metaphysics-and-logic-seminar-tba-13\/"},"modified":"2020-12-07T17:21:21","modified_gmt":"2020-12-07T17:21:21","slug":"metaphysics-and-logic-seminar-tba-13","status":"publish","type":"tribe_events","link":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/event\/metaphysics-and-logic-seminar-tba-13\/","title":{"rendered":"Metaphysics and Logic Seminar Fraser Macbride"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Title: CONVERSE PREDICATES AND THE INTERPRETATION OF SECOND ORDER QUANTIFICATION\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>ABSTRACT<\/strong>: In this paper I argue that we cannot interpret second-order quantification as quantification over properties and relations. My argument forges a hitherto unexplored connection between debates typically conducted independently, one metaphysical, about whether there are converse relations, the other logical, about the interpretation of second-order quantifiers. I begin from the semantics of converse predicates. Either we suppose that pairs of mutually converse predicates co-refer or they do not. If we suppose they do co-refer, I argue that we lack an understanding of the relevant class of higher-order predicates which are required for second-order quantification over a domain of relations to make sense. If we suppose they don\u2019t co-refer but pick out distinct converse relations then I argue that even if we do understand the relevant class of higher-order predicates enough to make sense of quantification over relations, we do so only at great theoretical cost. Either way, I conclude that second-order quantification should not be interpreted as quantification over properties and relations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Title: CONVERSE PREDICATES AND THE INTERPRETATION OF SECOND ORDER QUANTIFICATION\u00a0 \u00a0ABSTRACT: In this paper I argue that we cannot interpret second-order quantification as quantification over properties and relations. My argument&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_tribe_events_status":"","_tribe_events_status_reason":"","_tribe_events_is_hybrid":"","_tribe_events_is_virtual":"","_tribe_events_virtual_video_source":"","_tribe_events_virtual_embed_video":"","_tribe_events_virtual_linked_button_text":"","_tribe_events_virtual_linked_button":"","_tribe_events_virtual_show_embed_at":"","_tribe_events_virtual_show_embed_to":[],"_tribe_events_virtual_show_on_event":"","_tribe_events_virtual_show_on_views":"","_tribe_events_virtual_url":"","footnotes":""},"tags":[],"tribe_events_cat":[25],"class_list":["post-6065","tribe_events","type-tribe_events","status-publish","hentry","tribe_events_cat-metaphysics-and-logic-group","cat_metaphysics-and-logic-group"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events\/6065","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/tribe_events"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events\/6065\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6984,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events\/6065\/revisions\/6984"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6065"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6065"},{"taxonomy":"tribe_events_cat","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.st-andrews.ac.uk\/philevents\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tribe_events_cat?post=6065"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}