Quine and the Inscrutibility of Languages
International Studies in Philosophy 24 (1):33-46 (1992)
Abstract
Because 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 inscrutableAuthor's Profile
ISBN(s)
0270-5664
DOI
10.5840/intstudphil19922413
My notes
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.
Analytics
Added to PP
2011-12-02
Downloads
31 (#379,739)
6 months
1 (#455,463)
2011-12-02
Downloads
31 (#379,739)
6 months
1 (#455,463)
Historical graph of downloads