Formal analyticity

Philosophical Studies 175 (11):2791-2811 (2018)

Authors
Zeynep Soysal
University of Rochester
Abstract
In this paper, I introduce and defend a notion of analyticity for formal languages. I first uncover a crucial flaw in Timothy Williamson’s famous argument template against analyticity, when it is applied to sentences of formal mathematical languages. Williamson’s argument targets the popular idea that a necessary condition for analyticity is that whoever understands an analytic sentence assents to it. Williamson argues that for any given candidate analytic sentence, there can be people who understand that sentence and yet who fail to assent to it. I argue that, on the most natural understanding of the notion of assent when it is applied to sentences of formal mathematical languages, Williamson’s argument fails. Formal analyticity is the notion of analyticity that is based on this natural understanding of assent. I go on to develop the notion of formal analyticity and defend the claim that there are formally analytic sentences and rules of inference. I conclude by showing the potential payoffs of recognizing formal analyticity.
Keywords Analyticity  Formal Languages  Linguistic Understanding
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2019
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11098-017-0982-6
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 40,000
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

The Philosophy of Philosophy.Timothy Williamson - 2007 - Philosophical Studies 145 (3):455-464.
Mind, Language and Reality.H. Putnam - 1975 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 39 (2):361-362.
Analyticity Reconsidered.Paul Artin Boghossian - 1996 - Noûs 30 (3):360-391.
Blind Reasoning.Paul Boghossian - 2003 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 77 (1):225–248.
The Logic of Paradox.Graham Priest - 1979 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 8 (1):219 - 241.

View all 27 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Boghossian on Analyticity.E. Margolis & S. Laurence - 2001 - Analysis 61 (4):293-302.
Analyticity and Modality.Artur Karimov - 2014 - Dialogue and Universalism 24 (3):89-93.
Quine's "Strictly Vegetarian" Analyticity.Lieven Decock - 2017 - The Monist 100 (2):288-310.
Analyticity, Meaning and Paradox.Gillian Kay Russell - 2004 - Dissertation, Princeton University
An a Posteriori Conception of Analyticity?Åsa Maria Wikforss - 2003 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 66 (1):119-139.
Analyticity.Cory Juhl & Eric Loomis - 2009 - Routledge.
Analyticity Reconsidered.Paul Artin Boghossian - 1996 - Noûs 30 (3):360-391.
Are There Understanding-Assent Links?Åsa Wikforss - 2009 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 5.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-09-20

Total views
89 ( #83,672 of 2,236,147 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
33 ( #18,232 of 2,236,147 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature