Note on analyticity and the definability of "bachelor"
AbstractThose who have a brief against the analytic-synthetic distinction raise problems for what seem to supporters of the distinction to be some of the clearest cases. That bachelors are unmarried seems to many to be analytically true. But to hold this seems to imply that there is a definition of "bachelor" that includes being unmarried. But critics of the analytic-synthetic distinction, such as Jerry Fodor, deny that there are true definitions (reportive, not stipulative). So there can be no definition of "bachelor". And many have noted that defining "bachelor" is not as easy as appears at first blush.
Similar books and articles
Analyticity Again.Jerry Fodor & Ernie Lepore - 2006 - In Michael Devitt & Richard Hanley (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Language. Blackwell. pp. 19--114.
Analyticity.George Bealer - 1998 - In Edward Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge. pp. 234-9.
From a Phono-Logical Point of View: Neutralizing Quine’s Argument Against Analyticity.Reese M. Heitner - 2006 - Synthese 150 (1):15-39.
Truth in Virtue of Meaning: A Defence of the Analytic/Synthetic Distinction.Gillian Russell - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
The analytic and the synthetic as linguistic topics.Sylvain Auroux - 1985 - Topoi 4 (2):193-199.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Contextual Vocabulary Acquisition: from Algorithm to Curriculum.Michael W. Kibby & William J. Rapaport - 2014 - In Adriano Palma (ed.), Castañeda and His Guises: Essays on the Work of Hector-Neri Castañeda. De Gruyter. pp. 107-150.
References found in this work
No references found.