论文标题
关于比尔勒逻辑的合理性
On the Soundness of Bealer's Logics
论文作者
论文摘要
在他的书中提出并最充分地阐述了Bealer的强度逻辑T1和T2，并在\ Cite {C}中也提出了{Quite and Concept}（质量与概念}（1982）\ cite {qc}。这些逻辑在与非新神性或非文字主义本体论和意义理论相关的经典一阶扩展方面是独一无二的。从结构上讲，它们与Zalta \ cite {Zalta}同一时间提出的二阶系统相似。在上面引用的书籍和文章中，Bealer详细介绍了T1和T2的健全性和完整性证明（Zalta的系统似乎缺乏的）。但是，有一个关键步骤可以证明没有证据，而且似乎并非平凡。在本文中，我们既简化了系统T1和T2的原始呈现，又提供了相当复杂的，涉及Bealer缺少的引理的证据。
Bealer's intensional logics T1 and T2 were proposed and expounded most fully in his book \emph{Quality and Concept} (1982) \cite{QC} as well in \cite{C}. These logics are unique in being extensions of classical first-order associated to a non-nominalist or non-inscriptionalist ontology and theory of meaning. Structurally they are similar to the second-order systems proposed about the same time by Zalta \cite{zalta}. In the book and article referenced above Bealer presents a detailed sketch of a proof of soundness and completeness for T1 and T2 (something which seems to be lacking for Zalta's systems). However there are key steps to the soundness proofs which are stated without proof and which seem to be non-trivial. In this paper we both simplify the original presentation of systems T1 and T2 and supply the rather complex and involved proofs of Bealer's missing lemmas.
