Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Author Item Excerpt Meta data

Books on Amazon
Avr I 113
Belief/Meaning/FieldVsReductionism: (VsReductive Griceans): it is circular, to want to explain the semantic properties by believe. (This also says the reductionism.) - Field like Grice: one can explain believe without reference to the sentence. - Solution: what makes a symbol a symbol for Caesar is the role in my learning. - Field: then there can be no inner language without a public language. SchifferVsField: no problem: Grice (intention based semantics, IBS) does not need to assume that propositional attitudes have been acquired before the public language. - Both goes hand in hand - only there is no logical dependence between them (and to competence). - Armstrong: both are logically connected. ((s) This is stronger than Schiffer's thesis.).
Horwich I 481
Language/Truth-Definition/Field/Soames: when truth is defined non-semantically (i.e., speaker-independent, i.e. non-physical), language becomes an abstract object. - It has its characteristics essentially. - With other properties, it would be a different language - that is, it could not have been shown that the expressions could have denoted anything else. - Then it is still contingent on language, which language a person speaks. - But the semantic properties (truth, reference, applying) are not contingent.

Fie I
H. Field
Realism, Mathematics and Modality Oxford New York 1989

Fie II
H. Field
Truth and the Absence of Fact Oxford New York 2001

H. Field
Science without numbers Princeton New Jersey 1980

Hor I
P. Horwich (Ed.)
Theories of Truth Aldershot 1994

> Counter arguments against Field
> Counter arguments in relation to Language

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-22