On the Definitions of Basic Kinds of Properties
On the Definitions of Basic Kinds of Properties

Summary/Abstract: In the recent Festschrift dedicated to Pavel Cmorej, a rigorous classification concerning various kinds of properties modeled within the intensional framework was published (see DBKP1). However, one subtle error, not found before the publication, infiltrated into several passages of DBKP. Now the author suggests a way to rectify the definitions affected by it. The error is rather ‘technical’ and philosophically quite uninteresting – it ‘only’ turns few intuitively correct and philosophically welcomed definitions of kinds of properties into incorrect ones. Of course, there is a condition under which the straightforward simple classification of properties is valid (see below). In this rectification, I do not expose the apparatus, shortcut conventions, or preliminary definitions; for this purpose please see DBKP. Properties (and other attributes) were modeled as intensions, i.e. functions from possible worlds to classes of (n-tuples of) individuals. Within this functional framework, ‘classical’ classes are construed as total characteristic functions. But in DBKP, also partial characteristic functions, partial classes serving as extensions of properties, were allowed. This leads to inaccuracies in DBKP. Generally, the partiality always causes troubles.

• Details
• Contents