|Analytic/synthetic: achieved by decomposition or by composition. In philosophy analytically true = true according to the meaning of the components - synthetic insight = substantial expansion of knowledge._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
Meaning/Quine: not from speaker meaning, not from acceptance of inferences of the speaker - the speaker meaning depends on the worldview from, and thus on an intention regarding what the words should mean - in this it is not possible to distinguish what views the speaker accepts a priori - So there are no analytic sentences - Vs a/s "true through meaning": there is no epistemic criterion for this.
Analyticity/block/Dummett/Devitt/Bilgrami: VsQuine: perhaps "gradual A"? - Fodor/LeporeVs: would presuppose equal meaning instead of equal identity: Problem: in the end everything is "just about": sentences just about express propositions, because "John" refers just about to John - not analytical: e.g. "brown cows are dangerous" - no inference from -cows are dangerous and -brown things are dangerous- "therefore then no compositionality.
Analyticity/analytical/Fodor/Lepore: if meanings are stereotypes, yet none of the individual features is defining - "E.g. the stereotypical brown cow can be dangerous, even though the stereotype dangerous does not match the stereotype brown or the stereotype cow " - hence the distinction analytic/synthetic fails - Important Argument: even if your reject the a/s distinction, it is clear that meanings are never stereotypes!._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.
J. Fodor/E. Lepore
Holism Cambridge USA Oxford UK 1992