Talk:Explication: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:56, 31 March 2009

	Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Carnap

I have added some examples of Carnapian explications. It needs a language check from someone who speaks English fluently.

I have also changed the headline. I don't find any argument in the section, so I don't think it is appropriate to call the section "Carnap's argument". The next headline should probably be changed too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.155.226 (talk) 14:39, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have also changed the headline of the section about explication as a proses v. as an outcome. "Explication" is a noun in both cases. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.155.226 (talk) 14:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence "Carnap's argument provides a helpful foundation in understanding.." expresses a point of view. In my opinion we should probably either delete it or rephrase it: "According to nn, Carnap provides a.."

Revision as of 14:43, 31 March 2009 edit SineBot (talk \| contribs) Bots 2,549,274 edits m Signing comment by 129.177.155.226 - "" ← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:56, 31 March 2009 edit undo 129.177.155.226 (talk) No edit summary Next edit →
Line 6:		Line 6:

	I have also changed the headline of the section about explication as a proses v. as an outcome. "Explication" is a noun in both cases. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/129.177.155.226\|129.177.155.226]] ([[User talk:129.177.155.226\|talk]]) 14:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->		I have also changed the headline of the section about explication as a proses v. as an outcome. "Explication" is a noun in both cases. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/129.177.155.226\|129.177.155.226]] ([[User talk:129.177.155.226\|talk]]) 14:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			The sentence "Carnap's argument provides a helpful foundation in understanding.." expresses a point of view. In my opinion we should probably either delete it or rephrase it: "According to nn, Carnap provides a.."