________________
104
J. L. Shaw
propositions like fall tame tigers 'exist' and 'some tame tigers do not exist are meaningless, 'exist' is not a predicate.
According to Moorel the proposition "some tame tigers do not exist which means the same as 'there are tame tigers which do not exist has no meaning. If 'some tame tigers do not exist is meaningless, then "all tame tigers exist' is also meaningless. For ‘all tame tigers exist' is equivelent to the conjunctive proposition "some tame tigers exist and there is no tame tiger which does not exist has no meaning, its denial 'there is no tame tiger which does not exist has no meaning. Since the latter expression is one of the conjucts of the expanded proposition 'all tame tigers exist', the conjuctive proposition as a whole has no meaning. From this observation it is concluded that exists' or 'do not exists' does not behave in the same manner as the predicate 'growl' or 'do not growl' does.
5. According to another argument if 'exists' is a predicate, then there are certain inferences which would be valid. Russell says:
If you say that "Men exist, and Socrates is a man, therefore Socrates exists", that is exactly the same sort of fallacy as it would be if you said "Men are numerous, Socrates is a man, therefore Socrates is numerous".2 Since such inferences are not valid, 'exists' is not a predicate.
We have listed five arguments in favour of the view that exists' is not a pradicate. All these arguments are based on a certain conception of a pradicate. The implicit or explicit presupposition of all these arguments is that if 'exists' is a predicate, then it must be predicates like 'red', 'hard', 'growl' etc. We must be able to form propositions or inferences of the type which can be formed with predicates like 'red', 'growl' etc. Since we cannot form the same type of propositions or inferences with 'exists', it is not a predicate.
B. Let us now consider the arguments for 'exists' being a predicate.
1. The view that 'exists is a predicate is associated with the supporters of ontological arguments. From the concept of perfect being existence has been deduced. The argument of Descartes. is based on the view that the proposition 'God exists' and the proposition "Three angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles' are of the same form. Gassendi pointed out that existence is not a property of God or of anything.
Against this objection Descartes point out that existence is a property in the broad sense, in the sense in which it is "equivalent to any attribute or anything which may be predicated of a thing"! Here Descartes' intention
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
