International Studies in Philosophy 24 (1):33-46 (1992)
AbstractBecause there is no formal procedure for determining to which language a given expression belongs, it is impossible to limit indeterminacy and inscrutability "at home" by appealing to the principle of ontological relativity. Not only is it impossible to ostend a unique language to which a particular expression would belong, it is impossible even to determine rigorously the boundaries which separate one language from another. Languages are themselves inscrutable
Similar books and articles
What is Quine's view of truth?Donald Davidson - 1994 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 37 (4):437 – 440.
Quine on translation.Patrick Wilson - 1965 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 8 (1-4):198 – 211.
Quine and Davidson: Two naturalized epistemologists.Roger F. Gibson - 1994 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 37 (4):449 – 463.
Harvard 1940–1941: Tarski, Carnap and Quine on a finitistic language of mathematics for science.Paolo Mancosu - 2005 - History and Philosophy of Logic 26 (4):327-357.
The Esoteric Quine? Belief Attribution and the Significance of the Indeterminacy Thesis in Quine’s Kant Lectures.H. G. Callaway - 2003 - In W.V. Quine, Wissenschaft und Empfindung. Frommann-Holzboog.
Quine and pragmatism.Heikki J. Koskinen & Sami Pihlström - 2006 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 42 (3):309-346.
3. Cats, Dogs, and so on.John P. Burgess - 2008 - In Dean W. Zimmerman (ed.), Oxford Studies in Metaphysics. Oxford University Press. pp. 4--56.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads