A Comparative Analysis of the Lvov-Warsaw School and Frege-Russells Tradition :: Lvov-Warsaw School Frege Russell Tradition

A Comparative Analysis of the Lvov-Warsaw School and Frege-Russells TraditionABSTRACT The reckon of this paper is a comparative depth psychology of the Lvov-Warsaw School and Frege-Russells tradition. The Comparison of these is made on the grounds of the analysis of existence. Choosing existence as the object of the analysis is genuinely essential. It is so because understanding of the category of existence is strongly connected with the whole system. Thus, while analyzing the category, one can make a reconstruction of the concept organization (in both traditions) show their functioning and compare them to each other. It is easy to notice that in both these systems a) analyzing is strongly connected with the way of expressing existence in a language, b) the essential problem is to which category existence belongs, c) the main question is whether existence is a predicate. Since the problem of analyzingespecially the problem of applying logic in philosophy vie an essential role both in Frege-Russells system and Twardowskis school, the author of this paper wants to show how this was understood there (especially application of logic to some philosophical problems). I. basic Remarks G. Frege in the introduction of his Grundlage der Aritmetik formulates a general principle nach der Bedeutung der Wrter im Zusammenhang, nicht in iherer Vereinzelung gefragt werden mu (G. Frege, Grundlage der Arithmetik, Darmstadt 1961, p. XXII, p. 161. H. Sluga, Gottlob Frege, London 1980, p. 94.). This principle is often called a context principle. It is stated in there that 1) A term has a meaning when it belongs to a proposition (is one of its elements) 2) Previous analysis of a proposition is a condition for analysis of the term. Such a view presupposes that proposition is something complex and heterogeneous i.e., its elements belong to different semantic categories. The principle given above makes the following distinctions possible 1) discrepancy of grammatical elements from l ogical elements, 2) Division of subjective (psychological) elements from objective elements. Quine in his Two Dogmas of Empiricism states that applying this principle makes an important reorientation in semanticsthe reorientation whereby the primary fomite of meaning came to be seen no longer in the term but in the statement (W.V.O. Quine, Two Dogmas of Empiricism, in From a logical point of view, impudent York 1963, p. 39). From the above it is easy to see that the meaning of a term is connected with its function in the proposition, for as we know the function depends upon its location in the proposition.