Graduate studies at Western
Erkenntnis 46 (1):33-47 (1997)
|Abstract||Logical structure may explain the necessity and a priori knowability of such truths as that if A is red then A is either red or green. But this explanation cannot be extended to sentences that, while necessary and knowable a priori, do not wear the appropriate logical structure on their sleeves – sentences like ''''if A is a point and A is red, then A is not green,'''' or ''''if A is a sphere, then A is not a cube.'''' The real origin of these sentences'' necessity and a priori knowability is a relationship between the meanings of their component atomic sentences – a relationship which cannot be systematically reduced to logical structure by translating those atomic sentences into any kind of ''''ideal'''' language. Moreover, this kind of relationship is one to which any atomic sentences are susceptible if they have a classifying, or comparison-implying, content. Arguably, then, all atomic sentences are capable of being related to others in ways that are necessary and knowable a priori.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Gordon Prescott Barnes (2007). Necessity and Apriority. Philosophical Studies 132 (3):495 - 523.
John M. Vickers (2001). Logic, Probability, and Coherence. Philosophy of Science 68 (1):95-110.
Kevin Mulligan, Peter Simons & Barry Smith (1984). Truth-Makers. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 44 (3):287 - 321.
Richard Swinburne (2010). In Defence of Logical Nominalism: Reply to Leftow. Religious Studies 46 (3):311-330.
Wang Lu (2008). Theories of Meaning. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (1):83-98.
R. G. Swinburne (1975). Analyticity, Necessity and Apriority. Mind 84 (334):225-243.
John MacFarlane, Logical Constants. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #155,025 of 740,452 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,453 of 740,452 )
How can I increase my downloads?