Talk:Calculus ratiocinator

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

sentential logic[edit]

The connection between the calculus ratiocinator and sentential logic the the section below is not made clear. I have therefore removed it until this can be clarified. Sholto Maud 06:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

In writings not published before 1903 and not properly analyzed until Wolfgang Lenzen did so in the 1980s, Leibniz set out what is now known as sentential logic: conjunction, disjunction, negation, identity, set inclusion, and the empty set. What he (and everyone until Frege and Peirce) lacked was quantified variables ranging over a universe of discourse.

ample descent[edit]

The author's contributions are welcomed. Perhaps the author could sign in as a contributer rather than remain anonymous. An explanation of the comment below would be appreciated. Sholto Maud 06:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

" and his ample intellectual descent tends to concur"

Link to qualitative flows[edit]

This quote seems to be more to do with Characteristica universalis than 'calculus ratiocinator'. It also needs to be more clear. Sholto Maud 06:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

"Consequently, one might view the universal characteristic as a universal symbolism depicting the mathematics of the qualitative flows and transformations of our cosmos. The calculus ratiocinator would then be a way of calculating the corresponding flow quantities."

Synthetic Proposition[edit]

I'm not convinced that the meaning of the word "synthesis" is the same in the philosophy of language as in the philosophy of engineering. Hence I'm not convinced that the adjustment made by a previous author (to dismbiguate synthesis to synthetic proposition) is appropriate. Sholto Maud 05:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

universal calculus[edit]

Is calculus ratiocinator the same thing as "universal calculus"[1]? (talk) 02:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Rescher article[edit]

This looks useful: JSTOR 2267644. (talk) 09:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)