Untitled

Gampel, Eric H.

doi:10.1023/a:1017967412131

Cited by 23 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this article, conversely, the intention is to explore more general scalar potentials. The strategy of using the autonomous particle solution as a way to to deep the understanding of several topics of the usual QM is of course not new, and one can mention thermal wave packets [43], quantum mechanics in curved space [44,45,46], isospectral Hamiltonians [47], quantum measurement [48], quantum properties [49], and also the quantum Zeno effect [50]. Following this idea, one will consider complex and quaternionic autonomous particles, their wave functions, energy conservation, and scattering through a rectangular barrier.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quaternionic Quantum Particles

Giardino

2019

Adv. Appl. Clifford Algebras

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If Ψ is a quaternionic wave function, then iΨ = Ψi. Thus, there are two versions of the quaternionic Schrödinger equation (QSE). In this article, we present the second possibility for solving the QSE, following on from a previous article. After developing the general methodology, we present the quaternionic free particle solution and the scattering of the quaternionic particle through a scalar barrier.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quaternionic Quantum Particles

Giardino

2019

Adv. Appl. Clifford Algebras

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many analytic philosophers of language support the claim that meaning is a normative notion (cf. Boghossian, 1989; Buleandra, 2008; Brandom, 1994, 2000; Ebbs, 1997; Gampel, 1997; Ginsborg, 2011; Kaplan, 2020; Kiesselbach, 2014, 2020; Kripke, 1982; McDowell, 1984, 1994; Millar, 2002; Peregrin, 2012, 2014; Whiting, 2007, 2009, 2016). However, a growing number of works cast doubt on the idea that meaning is normative (Bilgrami, 1993; Boghossian, 2005; Glüer, 1999; Glüer & Pagin, 1999; Glüer & Wikforss, 2015, 2022; Hattiangadi, 2006, 2007; Honkasalo, 2022; Reinikainen, 2020; Wikforss, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rules, practices, and assessment of linguistic behaviour

Kaluziński

2023

Theoria

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I focus on the idea that language is a rule‐constituted and rule‐governed practice. This notion has been criticised recently. It has been claimed that, even if linguistic meaning is determined by rules, these rules are not genuinely normative because they do not govern actions within the practice by themselves. It has been emphasised that one needs to consent (e.g., has relevant intention or desire) to be a part of that practice. First, I distinguish between two issues: (1) How do rules come to life? (and the answer to that question is by enactment or communal acceptance), and (2) does being assessed by the standards set by the rules require some form of consent for one's actions to be evaluated by these standards? Then, I demonstrate how, by introducing the notion of “default normativity”, one can defend the idea that there are normative practices that are constituted and governed by rules and that language is one of them.

show abstract

The Normativity of Meaning

Hattiangadi¹

2017

A Companion to the Philosophy of Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Untitled

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 publications

Quaternionic Quantum Particles

Quaternionic Quantum Particles

Rules, practices, and assessment of linguistic behaviour

The Normativity of Meaning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About