And further it seems clear that no adding of inorganic signs can make the proposition live. And the conclusion which one draws from this is that what must be added to the dead signs in order to make a live proposition is something immaterial, with properties different from all mere signs.
After this I inquired in general into what is essential I to the truth and certainty of a proposition; for since I had discovered one which I knew to be true, I thought that I must likewise be able to discover the ground of this certitude.
If it is correct to say the general proposition is a shorthand for a logical product or sum, as it is in some cases, then the class of things named in the product or sum is defined in the grammar, not by properties.
Where a general proposition is a shorthand for a product, deduction of the special proposition fa from (x)fx is straightforward.
Russell's notation assumes that for every general proposition there are names which can be given in answer to the question "Which ones?" (in contrast to, "What sort?").
If an atomic proposition is one which does not contain and, or, or apparent variables, then it might be said that it is not possible to distinguish atomic from molecular propositions.
Whether a proposition is atomic, i.
The question whether such a seemingly atomic proposition as "It rains" is molecular, that it is, say, a logical product, is like asking whether there is a hidden contradiction when there is no method of answering the question.
Having a means of analysing a proposition is like having a method for finding out whether there is a 6 in the product 25 x 25, or like having a rule which allows one to see whether a proposition is tautologous.
In teaching a child language by pointing to things and pronouncing the words for them, where does the use of a proposition start?