Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-17T15:12:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
AdrianoMS_DISSERT.pdf: 2088118 bytes, checksum: dd824a46d35773271668ba84f8280fa8 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2009-12-15 / The main goal of this work is to clarify the central concepts involved in the study of formalization of conditional sentences. More specifically, it has been done a comparative analysis of the two greater and more traditional proposals of conditional
formalization (Lewis 1973c e Adams 1975). These proposals were responsible for the creation of a way of analysis that still present in the current debate about this subject. This work pursues to explain the principal assumptions held within these proposals.
According to certain disambiguation techniques from Bennett (2003) and Lycan (2005), this work tries to explicit how these assumptions connect to the aims sought by the initial approaches. The following results show that there is a not declared presumption, the definition of the object of study of these theories, i.e., the definition of conditional sentence. This work argues that despite of not explicitly declared the definition of the
study object has a central role in the intelligibility of the debate itself / estudo da formaliza??o das senten?as condicionais. Mais especificamente, empreendemos uma an?lise comparativa de duas das principais e mais tradicionais propostas de formaliza??o dos condicionais (Lewis (1973c) e Adams (1975)), propostas respons?veis pela inaugura??o de vertentes de an?lise que ainda se fazem presentes no debate contempor?neo sobre o tema. Visamos, fundamentalmente, o esclarecimento das principais assun??es presentes nessas propostas. Com base em certas t?cnicas de desambigua??o presentes em Bennett (2003) e em Lycan (2005), buscamos explicitar como essas assun??es articulam-se, efetivamente, aos objetivos almejados pelas
abordagens inaugurais. Os resultados que se seguem mostram que existe um pressuposto, n?o explicitamente declarado, t?cito, a defini??o do objeto de estudo dessas teorias, isto ?, a defini??o de senten?a condicional. Argumentamos que, apesar de n?o
claramente declarada, a defini??o do objeto de estudo desempenha um papel fundamental na pr?pria inteligibilidade do debate
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:repositorio.ufrn.br:123456789/16470 |
| Date | 15 December 2009 |
| Creators | Silva, Adriano Marques da |
| Contributors | CPF:07459696404, http://lattes.cnpq.br/9145510143589362, Moura, Jos? Eduardo de Almeida, CPF:03372464400, http://lattes.cnpq.br/8344744432173365, Alves, Daniel Durante Pereira, CPF:10911885803, http://lattes.cnpq.br/0105245515649663, Cruz, Angela Maria Paiva |
| Publisher | Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Filosofia, UFRN, BR, Metaf?sica |
| Source Sets | IBICT Brazilian ETDs |
| Language | Portuguese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion, info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRN, instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, instacron:UFRN |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0023 seconds