TERM 
BURIDAN DEFINITION 
COMMENT 
QUANTONICS' EXEGESES 
attribute 
e.g., color of an object (esp. whiteness) 
p. 8. 
classical reality is about objective attributes; quantum
reality is about subjective interrelationships; for 'definitions'
and descriptions of classical visàvis quantum realities
see our QELR of reality
 Doug  27Mar2006. 
categorematic 
words having signification outside the mind 
p. 7. 

categorical 
one type of proposition 
p. 12. 

complex 
dragon, white horse 
p. 9. 
: Complexity visàvis simplicity.
Compare classical complexity and simplicity

: Compleihty
visàvis
sihmplihcihty.
C¤mparæ quantum
compleihty
amd sihmplihcihty 

Sihmplihcihty

Compleihty 
flux

phase

changæ

stabilihty

n¤n zær¤
h

zær¤ h

æv¤luti¤n

ihmmutabilihty

ihncludæd~mihddle

excludædmihddle

sub_{q}jæctihvæ

objæctihvæ

qualihtatihvæ

quantihtatihvæ

sælfreferæntsælfræcursihve

¤thærreferænt¤thærræcursihve

umcærtainty

cærtainty

* 
* 
etc. 
etc. 
Also see genericity and juxtapose classical notions and quantum
memeos of genericity
visàvis specificity.

concept(s) 
thoughts or ideas 
p. 7. 
classical reality definitions use PlatonicAristotelian concepts
and ideas; quantum reality descriptions use Dawkinsian memes
and memeos 
conjunctive 
p and q counts as true if both p and q are true;
false otherwise 
p. 19. 
classical conjunctions assume, suppose, and presume
an Aristotelian excludedmiddle twixt p and q which we script
as dichon(p,
q); quantum comjunctions desnouer nature's physial included~middlings
which we script as quanton(p,q)
See our Quantonics' Breakthroughs: included~middle.
See our How to Become a Student of Quantonics: included~middle.

consistency 
a proposition's truth value recurs regardless
of selected context
(Reviewer note: Clearly, classical consistency, as demanded
by both Buridan and Hughes is unobtainable. For any proposition,
there exist both an infinity of contexts obtaining falsity, and
an infinity of contexts obtaining truth.) 
Introduction, pp. 133. 
classical consistency says, "always states the
truth"
quantum comsistency says, "always changes."

context 
proposition(s) establish(es) context in a convention
(Reviewer note: Here we see the edict of one context.
Clearly this is contrived and artificial, not real. This edict
belies an (false) assumption of substantial reality composing
unchanging, observable, separable, isolable, individuistic objects.
Such a reality, we know now, does not exist. Both Hughes and
Buridan implicitly admit multiple contexts, though, by suggesting
that:
* different propositions in the same convention, or
* the same proposition in different conventions, or
* different propositions in different conventions
all define various contexts.)

pp. 67,14. 
See comtext. 
contextual consistency 
Buridan and Hughes insist that assessment of truth requires
contextual consistency; any assessment manifesting contextual
inconsistency must be false, e.g., "...a necessary condition
of a proposition being true...it should be contextually consistent,
i.e., that it should not (either by itself, or in conjunction
with any other true proposition) entail anything false."
P. 19.
(Reviewer note: Clearly, classical consistency, as
demanded by both Buridan and Hughes is unobtainable. We may only
conclude given their insistence on consistency, that all propositions
are by necessity, by edict, false.)

pp. 1920. 
classical contextual consistency requires that
reality be stoppable
and hold still conveniently for dialectical
analysis
quantum comtextual comsistency understands that reality
is unstoppable and relentlessly
changes and evolves

convention 
the setting for any proposition or propositions; includes
generally accepted loci, chronology, sentients, form, language,
semantics, etc.
(Reviewer note: Both Hughes and Buridan implicitly
indoctrinate a nongeneral convention: Earthlocationherecentrism,
anthropocentrism, nowcentrism, epistemiccentrism, stereotypiccentrism,
archetypeabsurditycentrism, etc.)

pp. 67, 14. 
Attic
dialectic is the convention assumed by Buridan and
Hughes here: linguistically, logically, philosophically,
scientifically, and socially. Dialectic is 'common,' however,
it is non general. Dialectic is a "tragedy of commons"
sense convention. 
copula 
syncategorematic intransitive verb + quantity 
p. 12. 
All of Buridan's and Hughes' copula assume Aristotle's sillygisms are
valid. 
correspondence TCs 
Iprop (subject & predicate stand for same
thing),
Aprop (subject stands for something  predicate stands for everything
subject stands for),
Eprop (negation of Iprop),
Oprop (negation of Aprop);
extensible to singular and indefinite 
p. 1718. 

disjunctive 
p or q counts as true if one of p and q is true; false otherwise 
p. 19. 
Ideal, radically formal, mechanical, analytic
'di' sjunctions are impossible in quantum reality. Why? Quantum
reality is flux and flux are quantum likelihood omnistributionings
which included~middle compenetrate, entangle, cohere, tunnel,
coobsfect, and superpose one another in perpetual motion and
perpetual change. 
empty 
a sufficient condition for the falsity of an affirmative
proposition whose subject is empty 
p. 18. 
See empty. 
entailment 
"Suppose we take any proposition, and suppose
we give it the name 'A;' then the conjunction of the original
proposition and a proposition asserting that A exists entails
a proposition asserting that A is true...principle...of...truth
entailment." 
p. 22. 
Classical entailment is causal,
bivalent (EOOO (EitherOneOrOther) "true or false"
twovalued), 11 correspondent (linearly,
objectively, unitemporally dependent), assumes significate and
its signification "hold still," are classically stable,
etc. See state. See
dichon.
Quantum entailment evolves
with quantum reality's absolute
omni~comtextual
(holographic)
change, thus quantum~entailment
issi enthymemetic,
and omnitemporal. Quantum
entailment issi omnivalent,
absolutely dynamic PVRC (Perpetual Variable Rate Change), EIMA
(Everywhere~Included~Middle~Associativity),
and thus quantum~holographic, etc. See quanton.
Classical "truth
entailment" is 'impossible'
in quantum~reality! All quantum~truthings are agents of
their own change and perpetually~evolve quantally.
Doug  16Jan2010.

exists 
a proposition's truth or falsity may be proven
given the proposition stands for a material or objective entity,
i.e., the proposition, if it exists, stands for substance or
something substantial; existence of a proposition may be a function
of time 
p. 6. 

exists not 
a proposition's truth or falsity may not be
proven if the proposition stands for something which does not
exist 
p. 6, and e.g., p. 24. 

false 
a proposition may be assessed false via any of the following:
 contextual inconsistency
 self contradiction
 empty subject
 contradiction
 fails truth conditions
 fails supposition
 fails entailment
 fails all p forms

Introduction, pp. 133. 
 contextual inconsistency
 quantum reality does not hold still therefore contextual
consistency is impossible in quantum reality
 self contradiction
 A = A contradicts itself from Planck moment to Planck moment
in quantum reality; classically then if we adhered this 'rule'
we would have to conclude that "reality is false"
 empty subject
 quantum vacuum flux belies classical emptiness
 contradiction
 fails truth conditions
 fails supposition
 classical supposition requires arbitrary analytic stoppability
and holdstillability; quantum reality is non analytic, non
stoppable, and non holdstillable
 fails entailment
 classical entailment harbors essence of classical induction;
quantum reality harbors induction only as a classical apparency;
quantum entailment if there is such a meme is a metameme similar
provability as a metameme of proof
 fails all p forms
 classical stand for assumes reality is objective and stable
 classical negation assumes reality is objective and stable
 quantum reality is absolutely animate and unstoppable, and
quantum reality issi
quantum~positive
while asserting negation
is subjective

four p forms 
A, E, I, and O; f(subject), f(predicate) 
p. 12. 

hypothetical 
one type of proposition
(tense, can, must, impossible, and, or, if, when) 
p. 12. 

indefinite 
lack quantity, explicitly of subject or predicate 
p. 12. 

language 
conventional written or spoken signs 
p. 7. 

linguistic 
one of two kinds of propositions vis—vis mental 
p. 11. 

material 
one type of supposition (e.g., water has five
letters) 
p. 16. 

mental 
one of two kinds of propositions vis—vis linguistic 
p. 11. 

object 
things that exist in past present or future 
p. 8. 

paradox 
proof that a proposition is false proves the same proposition
is true 
p. 2, and 24. 

paradox not 
proof that a proposition is true proves the same proposition
is false 
p. 2, and 24. 

predicate 
second categorematic term in a propositional
form 
p. 12. 

proposition 
p = f(t); must be asserted; p = f(c); conventional
meaning except by agreement 
p. 6. 

selfreferential 
Selfreferential (SR) propositions require the
extra requirement of contextual consistency; SR propositions
that are contextually inconsistent are false 
p. 19. 

selfreferential proposition 
a proposition whose truth value may be different
from its truth value were it nonselfreferential; may be contextually
inconsistent while its own truth conditions are met 
p. 19. 

selfreferential proposition (non) 
nonselfreferential a proposition whose truth value is consistent
when its truth conditions are satisfied
NSR propositions do not require the additional condition of
contextual consistency to assess truth value; the correspondence
truth conditions are adequate

p. 19. 

signification 
either within the mind or outside the mind 
p. 7. 
Classical eitheror here exhibits SOM's
dialectical wall. See EOOO. 
significative/personal 
one type of supposition 
p. 16. 

simple 
horse, white 
p. 9. 

singular 
designates one individual of subject or predicate 
p. 12. 

subject 
1st categorematic term in a propositional form 
p. 12. 

supposition 
from supponit pro > stands for; f(c) 
p. 14. 
Students of Quantonics should also see Latin putare. 
syncategorematic 
words which complexify categorematic words 
pp. 78. 

true 
a proposition may be assessed true via all of the following:
 contextual consistency
 self consistency
 nonempty subject
 consistency
 satisfies truth conditions
 satisfies suppositions
 satisfies entailments
 satisfies any p form


 contextual consistency
 self consistency
 nonempty subject
 consistency
 satisfies truth conditions
 satisfies suppositions
 satisfies entailments
 satisfies any p form

truthcondition(s), TCs 
See A, E, I, O, and see correspondence defined
above. 
pp. 12, 1718. 
Classical dialectical, analytic, stateic, 1 to 1 correspondence
is simply impossible in quantum reality.
Animate quantum~monitoring issi quantum~possible, however.
We can then infer that animate, ensemble,
but always both
inconsistent and incomplete, QLOs
are ~achievable.

type of proposition 
categorical or hypothetical 
p. 12. 

type of supposition 
significative/personal or material 
p. 17. 

ultimate significate 
the end thing, outside the mind, signified (may
be mental or physical, p. 8) 
p. 7. 

words 
signify concepts 
p. 7. 
