Skip to main content
Log in

Vagueness, tolerance and contextual logic

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 07 May 2010

Abstract

The goal of this paper is a comprehensive analysis of basic reasoning patterns that are characteristic of vague predicates. The analysis leads to rigorous reconstructions of the phenomena within formal systems. Two basic features are dealt with. One is tolerance: the insensitivity of predicates to small changes in the objects of predication (a one-increment of a walking distance is a walking distance). The other is the existence of borderline cases. The paper shows why these should be treated as different, though related phenomena. Tolerance is formally reconstructed within a proposed framework of contextual logic, leading to a solution of the Sorites paradox. Borderline-vagueness is reconstructed using certain modality operators; the set-up provides an analysis of higher order vagueness and a derivation of scales of degrees for the property in question.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

In the following Vagueness Reader refers to the anthology: Vagueness: A Reader, ed. R. Keefe & P. Smith, MIT Press, 1996. Places in articles reprinted in it are referred by page numbers in the book.

  • Cornelius H. (1897) Psychology als Erfahrungswissenshaft. Teubner, Leipzig, p xv + 445

    Google Scholar 

  • Dummett, M. (1975). Wang’s paradox. Synthese, 30, 301–324. (Reprinted in Vagueness Reader).

  • Evans, G. (1978). Can there be vague objects? Analysis, 38, 208. (Reprinted in Vagueness Reader).

  • Fine, K. (1975). Vagueness, truth and logic. Synthese, 30, 265–300. (Reprinted in Vagueness Reader).

  • Gaifman H. (1992) Pointers to truth. The Journal of Philosophy 89: 223–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaifman H. (2000) Pointers to propositions. In: Chapuis A., Gupta A. (eds) Circularity, definition, and truth. Indian Council of Philosophical Research, New Delhi, pp 79–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaifman, H. (September, 2001). Contextual logic and its applications to vagueness. The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 7(3), 241 (Abstracts of Invited Talks of the Annual 2001 Meeting of the ASL).

  • Gaifman H. (2008) Contextual logic with modalities for time and space. Review of Symbolic Logic 1(4): 433–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart H.L.A. (1961) The concept of law. Oxford University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp H. (1981) The paradox of the heap. In: Mönnich U. (eds) Aspects of philosophical logic. Reidel, Dorderecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan D. (1989) Demonstratives. In: Almog J., Perry J., Wettstein H. (eds) Themes from Kaplan. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein E. (1980) The semantics of positive and comparative adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 4: 1–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kofka, K. (1922). Perception: An introduction to the Gestalt-Theorie. Psychological Bulletin, 19, 531–585 (Reprinted in Classics in Psychology, ed. Thorne Shiple, 1961, Philosophical Library).

  • McGee, V., & McLaughlin, B. (1994). Distinctions without a difference. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 33(Supplement), 203–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam H. (1983) Vagueness and alternative logic. Erkenntnis 19: 297–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raffman D. (1994) Vagueness without paradox. The Philosophical Review 103: 41–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B. (1923). Vagueness. Australasian Journal of Philosophy and Psychology, 1, 84–92. (Reprinted in Vagueness Reader).

  • Sainsbury, M. (1990). Concepts without boundaries, an Inaugural Lecture, King’s College, London. (Reprinted in part in the Vagueness Reader).

  • Sorensen R. (1994) A thousand clones. Mind 103: 47–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stumpf C. (1883) Tonepsychology I. Hirzel, Leipzig, p xiv + 427

    Google Scholar 

  • Unger P. (1979a) I do not exist. In: Macdonald G.E. (eds) Perception and identity. MacMillan, London, pp 235–251

    Google Scholar 

  • Unger P. (1979b) There are no ordinary things. Synthese 41: 117–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, T. (1992). Vagueness and ignorance. In Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 66(Suppl), 145–162 (Reprinted in Vagueness Reader).

  • Williamson T. (1994) Vagueness. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson T. (1999) On the Structure of Higher-Ord Vagueness. Mind 103: 127–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, C. (1975). On the coherence of vague predicates. Synthese, 30, 325–365. A shorter version appeared as “Language-mastery and the sorites paradox”. In G. Evans & J. Mcdowell (Eds.), Truth and meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976. (Reprinted in Vagueness Reader).

  • Wright, C. (1994). Epistemic conception of vagueness. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 33(Supplement), 133–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeeman, E. C. (1961). The topology of the brain and visual perception. In Topology of 3-manifolds and related topics, Proceedings of The University of Georgia Institute, Prentice Hall, pp. 240–256.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haim Gaifman.

Additional information

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9746-y

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gaifman, H. Vagueness, tolerance and contextual logic. Synthese 174, 5–46 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9683-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9683-9

Keywords

Navigation