Is compositionality an a priori principle?

In M. Wening, E. Machery & G. Schurz (eds.), The Compositionality of Concepts and Meanings: Foundational Issues. Ontos (2005)
When reasons are given for compositionality, the arguments usually purport to establish compositionality in an almost a priori manner. I will rehearse these arguments why one could think that compositionality is a priori true, or almost a priori true, and will find all of them inconclusive. This, in itself, is no reason against compositionality, but a reason to try to establish or defend the principle on other than quasi-a priori grounds.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Communication and Strong Compositionality.Peter Pagin - 2003 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 32 (3):287-322.
Compositionality II: Arguments and Problems.Peter Pagin - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (3):265-282.
Infallibility Naturalized: Reply to Hoffmann.T. Parent - 2013 - Dialectica 67 (3):353-358.
Frege, Contextuality and Compositionality.Theo M. V. Janssen - 2001 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10 (1):115-136.
Added to PP index

Total downloads
341 ( #9,751 of 2,214,617 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #19,740 of 2,214,617 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature