{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,25]],"date-time":"2025-06-25T04:20:01Z","timestamp":1750825201087},"reference-count":16,"publisher":"Cambridge University Press (CUP)","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,31]],"date-time":"2021-08-31T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1630368000000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["cambridge.org"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["The Review of Symbolic Logic"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2023,3]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>Can conjunctive propositions be identical without their conjuncts being identical? Can universally quantified propositions be identical without their instances being identical? On a common conception of propositions, on which they inherit the logical structure of the sentences which express them, the answer is negative both times. Here, it will be shown that such a negative answer to both questions is inconsistent, assuming a standard type-theoretic formalization of theorizing about propositions. The result is not specific to conjunction and universal quantification, but applies to any binary operator and propositional quantifier. It is also shown that the result essentially arises out of giving a negative answer to both questions, as each negative answer is consistent by itself.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1017\/s175502032100040x","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,31]],"date-time":"2021-08-31T08:36:00Z","timestamp":1630398960000},"page":"188-209","update-policy":"http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1017\/policypage","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["OPERANDS AND INSTANCES"],"prefix":"10.1017","volume":"16","author":[{"given":"PETER","family":"FRITZ","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]}],"member":"56","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,31]]},"reference":[{"key":"S175502032100040X_r2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2307\/2026308"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/analys\/36.4.182"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r4","first-page":"513","article-title":"Russell\u2019s theory of identity of propositions","volume":"21","author":"Church","year":"1984","journal-title":"Philosophia Naturalis"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r11","first-page":"78","article-title":"Problems arising in the formalization of intensional logic","volume":"1","author":"Myhill","year":"1958","journal-title":"Logique et Analyse"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2307\/2185430"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r7","unstructured":"[7] Fritz, P. (n.d.). Ground and grain. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, forthcoming."},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r12","volume-title":"The Principles of Mathematics","author":"Russell","year":"1903"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"209","DOI":"10.1002\/tht3.427","article-title":"Impredicativity and paradox","volume":"8","author":"Uzquiano","year":"2019","journal-title":"Thought"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10992-015-9375-5"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.5840\/monist19776037"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r8","unstructured":"[8] Fritz, P. , Lederman, H. , & Uzquiano, G. (n.d.). Closed structure. Journal of Philosophical Logic, forthcoming."},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r3","volume-title":"A Subject with No Object","author":"Burgess","year":"1997"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/phpe.12079"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1755-2567.1970.tb00432.x"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/acprof:oso\/9780198244288.001.0001"},{"key":"S175502032100040X_r9","unstructured":"[9] Goodman, J. (n.d.). Grounding generalizations. Unpublished."}],"container-title":["The Review of Symbolic Logic"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/services\/aop-cambridge-core\/content\/view\/S175502032100040X","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,2,8]],"date-time":"2023-02-08T10:05:11Z","timestamp":1675850711000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/product\/identifier\/S175502032100040X\/type\/journal_article"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,31]]},"references-count":16,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2023,3]]}},"alternative-id":["S175502032100040X"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/s175502032100040x","relation":{},"ISSN":["1755-0203","1755-0211"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1755-0203","type":"print"},{"value":"1755-0211","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,8,31]]},"assertion":[{"value":"\u00a9 The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Association for Symbolic Logic","name":"copyright","label":"Copyright","group":{"name":"copyright_and_licensing","label":"Copyright and Licensing"}},{"value":"This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.","name":"license","label":"License","group":{"name":"copyright_and_licensing","label":"Copyright and Licensing"}},{"value":"This content has been made available to all.","name":"free","label":"Free to read"}]}}