1. How can one validly infer a universal statement from any number of existential statements? 2. Since subcontraries are negations of universal statements , they were called'particular'statements by the medieval logicians. 3. Later scholars tend to avoid universal statements about mythology. 4. In GB, anyone of various putative universal statements permitting a specified degree of variation within languages. 5. My point is that the source does not characterize the meaninglessness of universal statements as a problem. 6. :: : Be careful of universal statements . 7. Inductivist methodology supposed that one can somehow move from a series of singular existential statements to a universal statement . 8. The first-order predicate calculus avoids such ambiguity by using formulae that carry no existential import with respect to universal statements . 9. :: The only relevant point on which we all agree is that " the verification principle renders universal statements meaningless ". 10. Deprived of a " realistic " setting, the characters make a pessimistically universal statement : " True love " doesn't exist.
Mobile