Predicate and its philosophy & sybolic logic& sets

This is my post philosophy of predicate and The users responded to me with symbolic logic and set theory that not been made sense to me in the second half of the post.


philsosphy of predicate:

Predicate -----the part of a sentence which makes a statement about / in order to deal with the subject

Predicate----Discourse words, the speaker through the lines to make a subjective narrative to handle and control the noun ----- that is, the noun life lives in these subjective narrative. In English, there are many people and things which live in the statement ----- The noun itself does not say on his own life, their life is decided by the speaker to make a subjective narrative to identify.

For example, in the main body of paintings, its life is entirely interpreted by the painter.

The painting contains a subject of a woman and her life is dealt with in the painting.

So, we can say: The “her smile” is the sunshine in the painting. Or the sunshine of her smile;

[is = belongs to / exists] ------There is her smile the sunshine in the painting.

{[is / exists] the sunshine in the painting} ------is predicate

{Fishes swim}-----There are fishes in swimming.

[swim] is predicate.

Because that statement is a way in which the speaker tackles the fishes.

In , { am always counted on for support} is not predicate of I.

Because that statement is based on I in oneself.


The users responded to me with symbolic logic and set theory that not been made known to me as below.


A predicate is something which applies to an object, or is true of an object, or which an object satisfies. A predicate can apply to one object at a time, in which case it is called a monadic predicate. A predicate applying to two objects at the same time is known as a dyadic predicate.

For example, in the main body of paintings, its life is entirely interpreted by the painter.

The painting contains a subject of a woman and her life is dealt with in the painting.

So, we can say: The “her smile” is the sunshine in the painting. Or the sunshine of her smile;

I guess you must be referring to the Mona Lisa. Her smile is the sunshine in the painting. One is speaking figuratively. One understands by that that the painter has painted a wonderful smile and such a smile is attractive to sight.
Note: Like a painting, a proposition expresses thought. Wittgenstein is a good read on this subject.

[is = belongs to / exists] ------There is her smile the sunshine in the painting.

{[is / exists] the sunshine in the painting} ------is predicate

Her smile is the sunshine in the painting. ‘_is the sunshine in the painting’ is the predicate of the proposition.

Fishes swim}-----There are fishes in swimming.

[swim] is predicate.

Because that statement is a way in which the speaker tackles the fishes.

In ‘Fishes swim’, ‘_swim’ is the predicate and it applies to ‘fishes’. If one wants to write it in symbolic logic( I assumed that this is what you wanted to do by rephrasing each time); There is at least one thing such that it is a fish and it swims.
‘_is a fish’ : F_ ; ‘_swims’ : S_ ;‘F_’ and ‘S_’ are predicates. ‘?(x)’ means there is at least one thing x.
‘Fishes swim’ becomes ?(x)(Fx & Sx). ‘&’ means ‘and’.

In , { am always counted on for support} is not predicate of I. Because that statement is based on I in oneself.

‘_is counted on for_’ is a dyadic predicate, i.e. it applies to two objects at the same time.
am always counted for [support]. The best I can do in symbolic form is thus: For every support, I am counted for support.
For every thing x, if x is a support then I am counted for x.
‘S_’ : _is a support
‘_C_’: is counted on for
‘I’ : a
‘?(x)’ means for every thing x

?(x)(Sx?aCx) means ‘For every thing x, if x is a support then I am counted for x.'

In modern predicate logic, predicates are viewed as sets. An object to which the predicate applies is a member of the set. For monadic predicate, members are single objects. For dyadic predicate, members are ordered pair of objects.
Example:
the monadic predicate ‘_swim’ = {‘shark’, ‘dolphins’...}
the dyadic predicate ‘_is less than_’ = { <2,3>,<3,4>...}