The Role and Meaning of Predicative and Non-Predicative Definitions in the Search for Information

Borrowings and Adaptations. First of all, the author would like to clarify the meanings of the terms "predicative" and "nonpredicative". As is well known, praedicatum in Late Latin means "what has been said (previously)". In Aristotelian and subsequent forms of traditional logic [8,9,11,12,13,14,15,16] a predicate was understood to be one (the one in which something is said about the subject of speech) of the two terms for the judgment of a subject. In his treatment the author counts as predicative any definition of a subject or object in which something is said about an observable subject or object as it changes. In addition, the author proposes as the sole measure of change the movement of a subject or object with acceleration [5,6,7,17]: if a subject or object is immobile or moves evenly, it cannot be observed and, consequently, cannot be defined predicatively [1]. More: as is well known, Bertrand Russell introduced the notion of a "non-predicative" definition, in which what is to be defined is brought in through its relation to a class of which it is an element. For example: "the set of all sets that are not elements of themselves". It is said that the use of "non-predicative" definitions leads to paradoxes, so they should be dealt with carefully. The author adopts Russell's definition [27,28,29,30,31], but in a new mode: one counts as nonpredicative any definition of a subject or object in which something is said about a subject or object that is unchanging. For example, according to the author there are no closed sets in the world of change a set can strive to be the set of all sets, but no more. The Text. A text is made up of words. But what is a word? First of all, a word is made up of letters, which are, in practice, meaningless if separate. And yet a word, as the joining together of several letters, already, beyond any doubt, has a certain meaning. But the existence of synonymy makes the meaning of words, taken separately, vague and lacking in concreteness and separate words are declared to be non-predicative definitions. For example, the word “red”, taken by itself, can mean anything: beginning with a colour and ending with a pejorative name for a Communist. In order to understand the “true” meaning of a word one must first identify in what minimal lexical construction of speech and in what slang a given word is being used; where: I. A minimal lexical construction of speech is a predicative definition: the articulation of three words, relating to three parts of speech substantives, verbs and adjectives in the context of a sentence. All other parts of speech, with the exception of prepositions and interjections, can be, in some way or other, taken to be substantives, verbs, and adjectives, where: 1. A substantive has the meaning of the abstract Name of certain points of accumulation; 2. A verb defines the abstract Name of an action; 3. An adjective is the abstract Name describing points of accumulation in the process of change. II. A slang is an aggregate of predicative definitions used with a strictly specialized meaning, particular to each and every type of human activity. [2,3,4,22,26,33,36] This triad of non-predicative definitions is indispensable to defining the subjective evaluation of a fact, when faced with the possibility and the need to include the objects and subjects of the fact