Hope this is the right forum for this. I am reading a seminal "mathematical biophysics" paper from 1943 by MucCulloch and Pitts, and I got into a little bit of a rabbit hole trying to understand this equation in old-style logical notation. 
This is the equation in question: 
By following this link, I think I got most of it figured out, and I'm assuming x’) means "predecessor of x", and so the equation should be read as something like "The property S(P) holds for t if and only if P holds for Kx and t is the predecessor of x? But what does Kx mean? Doesn't this equation fulfill the definition if Kx were just replaced by x in the definition?
Thanks for any guidance on this!
As you can see in the References, R.Carnap (1938) is :
Language II is Carnap's versione of W&R's Principia theory of types.
The K-operators correspond to the bounded and unbounded $\mu$-operator.
The definitional axiom (it is a contextual definition) for the bounded one is (in slightly modernized symbols) :
Thus, $(Kx)y[F(x)]$ reads : "$\text {the least (natural) number } x \text { less-equal to } y \text { such that } F$".
In the same way, $(Kx)[F(x)]$ reads: "$\text {the least (natural) number } x \text { such that } F$".
If so, the expression:
where $S$ is a functor that applies to properties, reads: