Southern Journal of Philosophy 43 (3):395-413 (2005)
|Abstract||Quine’s thesis of the indeterminacy of translation has puzzled the philosophical community for several decades. It is unquestionably among the best known and most disputed theses in contemporary philosophy. Quine’s classical argument for the indeterminacy thesis, in his seminal work Word and Object, has even been described by Putnam as “what may well be the most fascinating and the most discussed philosophical argument since Kant’s Transcendental Deduction of the Categories” (Putnam, 1975a: p. 159).|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Patrick Wilson (1965). Quine on Translation. Inquiry 8 (1-4):198 – 211.
Ian McDiarmid (2008). Underdetermination and Meaning Indeterminacy: What is the Difference? Erkenntnis 69 (3):279 - 293.
Christopher R. Hitchcock (1992). Discussion. Journal of Philosophical Research 17:215-223.
Itay Shani (2005). Intension and Representation: Quine's Indeterminacy Thesis Revisited. Philosophical Psychology 18 (4):415 – 440.
H. G. Callaway (2003). The Esoteric Quine? Belief Attribution and the Significance of the Indeterminacy Thesis in Quine’s Kant Lectures. In H. G. Callaway (ed.), W.V. Quine, Wissenschaft und Empfindung. Frommann-Holzboog.
Günter Abel (1994). Indeterminacy and Interpretation. Inquiry 37 (4):403 – 419.
Jay F. Rosenberg (1967). Synonymy and the Epistemology of Linguistics. Inquiry 10 (1-4):405-420.
Peter Pagin (2008). Indeterminacy and the Analytic/Synthetic Distinctions: A Survey. Synthese 164 (1):1 - 18.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads58 ( #16,906 of 549,694 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,337 of 549,694 )
How can I increase my downloads?