Noûs 37 (1):113–132 (2003)
|Abstract||The purpose of this paper is to present a thought experiment and argument that spells trouble for “radical” deflationism concerning meaning and truth such as that advocated by the staunch nominalist Hartry Field. The thought experiment does not sit well with any view that limits a truth predicate to sentences understood by a given speaker or to sentences in (or translatable into) a given language, unless that language is universal. The scenario in question concerns sentences that are not understood but are known to be logical consequences of known and understood sentences. Ultimately, the issue turns on the notion of logical consequence that is available to various versions of deflationism.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Christopher Gauker (2005). Semantics for Deflationists. In JC Beall & Bradley Armour-Garb (eds.), Deflationism and Paradox. Oxford University Press.
Ryan Christensen (2011). Theories and Theories of Truth. Metaphysica 12 (1):31-43.
Wang Lu (2008). Theories of Meaning. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (1):83-98.
Scott Soames (2008). Why Propositions Cannot Be Sets of Truth-Supporting Circumstances. Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (3).
By Nic Damnjanovic (2005). Deflationism and the Success Argument. Philosophical Quarterly 55 (218):53–67.
Kari Middleton (2007). The Inconsistency of Deflationary Truth and Davidsonian Meaning. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:99-103.
Richard Heck (2005). Truth and Disquotation. Synthese 142 (3):317--352.
Richard G. Heck Jr (2004). Truth and Disquotation. Synthese 142 (3):317 - 352.
Jim Edwards (2007). Response to Hoeltje: Davidson Vindicated? Mind 116 (461):131-141.
Lionel Shapiro (2011). Deflating Logical Consequence. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (243):320-342.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads65 ( #13,922 of 548,972 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,222 of 548,972 )
How can I increase my downloads?