You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Fafner

Comments

You are talking here about the distinction between sentence token and sentence type, and I don't see why this should contradict what I said (that they...
July 05, 2017 at 21:28
Then what else could it be...? Fine, but this is not the same as saying that they have a semantics like sentences. Obviously yes, his whole Language o...
July 05, 2017 at 21:10
And by the way, there are even more extreme views than what I've described. There's something called "minimalist semantics" (advocated by Herman Cappe...
July 05, 2017 at 21:07
The first reason is that Travis' original argument is concerned with sentences, not propositions, so I couldn't use something else instead when presen...
July 05, 2017 at 20:40
Let me put it this way. From the Travis/Wittgenstein point of view the relevant rule is that the sentence "the leaves are green" apply only whenever t...
July 05, 2017 at 19:25
No he doesn't, he just says that rules are not enough for meaning, or better - that applying a rule is always a matter of excising a special sort of c...
July 05, 2017 at 18:19
First I think the argument is neutral on the issue of externalism, semantic or otherwise. And you are correct that the 'traditional' view doesn't comp...
July 05, 2017 at 17:55
There's a neat argument by Charles Travis that I think illustrates quite well what was meant by Wittgenstein when he said "meaning is use", and it als...
July 05, 2017 at 17:08
But 'interpretation' is not always a subjective thing, in fact the case of language is precisely where interpretation is not subjective in most cases....
July 05, 2017 at 13:09
But there's no such thing as a theory of types, and there could be no "syntax errors" in a language (because every sentence in language can be potenti...
July 05, 2017 at 10:19
Here's the correct formulation of the paradox based on the Stanford article cited by Meta. Fitch's argument proves that if one assumes that all truths...
July 04, 2017 at 23:03
We are not on the same page (you don't get my arguments), so let's leave it here.
June 24, 2017 at 15:47
But you don't have to be a defletionist about truth even if you reject correspondence; one can still maintain that truth is an important and substanti...
June 24, 2017 at 12:54
Yes, but this is not a 'metaphysical' explanation of truth. When you say that proposition P is true iff such and such is the case, then you simply rep...
June 24, 2017 at 12:39
Sure, but this argument is interesting because it shows that the correspondence theorist gets into trouble even if we grant him that past events can s...
June 24, 2017 at 12:20
Here's another objection to correspondence, that I read in Frank Ramsey's "Facts and Propositions". The key idea is that mere physical entities in the...
June 24, 2017 at 12:05
That's a good suggestion, but strictly speaking "Trump being the POTUS" is not itself an entity but a fact, i.e., something which depends on a descrip...
June 24, 2017 at 11:13
You don't really need counterfactuals or statements about the past to demonstrate that the correspondence theory doesn't work (there's a lot of philos...
June 23, 2017 at 22:53
Says the guy who can't follow a simple argument.
June 23, 2017 at 21:21
And...?
June 23, 2017 at 21:17
The issue of testimony doesn't change my point. Because for me to know (1) there must've been some scientists who did all the right experiments that c...
June 23, 2017 at 20:00
OK - but then, they are synonymous by virtue of which meaning? The meaning that you yourself stipulated for the signs, or the meaning they generally h...
June 23, 2017 at 19:48
He need not to be a witness to the crime, but he must know that a general rule of the form "if such and such evidence exist in the crime scene then pr...
June 23, 2017 at 19:25
But you said earlier that synonymy is not sameness of meaning, so you can't appeal to semantics here. If A and B are identical, it means that there is...
June 23, 2017 at 19:15
There's a thing called 'the principle of charity', which says that you ought to try interpret other people's words in the most plausible or charitable...
June 23, 2017 at 18:59
It doesn't matter if this is not the same sign in this context. If "A=B" means something like "whenever the sign 'A' occurs you can interchange it wit...
June 23, 2017 at 18:51
Which is precisely what I said...
June 23, 2017 at 18:48
Yes as I said - unless you assume in advance that you must be right about everything. Whatever floats your boat.
June 23, 2017 at 18:46
Because no one is infallible, and you can learn a great deal by talking and trying to persuade other people. Unless of course you assume in advance th...
June 23, 2017 at 18:35
A=A is not a correct analysis of A, because it is not an analysis of anything, but a pointless repetition of the same sign.
June 23, 2017 at 18:31
If you want to persuade other people (and not just talk with yourself), then you ought to care about what they think and believe in, and attempt to pr...
June 23, 2017 at 18:28
It doesn't change my point. Synonymy is a trivial thing however you understand it - it doesn't prove anything if you substitute one word for another (...
June 23, 2017 at 18:22
But you can't say that meaning is synonymous with causality, because that will make your claim vacuous (then you will be saying in effect that causali...
June 23, 2017 at 18:06
Are you asking me? It's not my theory. Ask the op.
June 23, 2017 at 17:31
No, because I don't accept the casual analysis. I'm saying that if you define representation in casual terms, then you are in trouble (but the same ar...
June 23, 2017 at 17:30
I use the terms interchangeably so it doesn't matter.
June 23, 2017 at 17:25
"objecting based on ..." simply means that you are using something as a premise in your argument, and since it is true (and you seem to accept it) tha...
June 23, 2017 at 17:24
Because to know empirically that the wind causes the paper to move you must first be able to observe the wind, and being able to observe the wind mean...
June 23, 2017 at 17:18
But I just quoted you where you contradict what you just said "The objection can't be that you can't know that without observing the correlation betwe...
June 23, 2017 at 16:58
I don't see how it is relevant to your objection. You wrote: But the mere fact that the theory analyzes meaning in casual terms doesn't mean that you ...
June 23, 2017 at 16:47
What theory?
June 23, 2017 at 15:15
Yeah I meant something like that. Of course in actual science there are many complications when it comes to determining that two phenomena are causall...
June 23, 2017 at 15:05
This is because causes cannot be inferred apriori from their effects, but only established by empirical observation (as Hume has thought us). So if a ...
June 23, 2017 at 14:30
We ignore it because you don't understand the view that you try to attack, and therefore your arguments simply don't make any sense. The 'use' concept...
June 23, 2017 at 14:18
Meaning cannot be a causal relation. If X means Y because Y causes X (X being some mental state in our heads, or whatever you like), then you can't kn...
June 23, 2017 at 14:10
Actually I don't think that he ever did, he just changed his method of logical analysis (and his views on what it means to do a logical analysis). (I ...
June 22, 2017 at 23:48
I don't think that it really matter that much (philosophically at least), and it's not clear exactly what 'concepts' are to begin with... Maybe this i...
June 22, 2017 at 23:30
Well it depends on what sorts of creatures we are talking about (and there is a sense of 'perceiving' which is not conceptual), but why shouldn't we s...
June 22, 2017 at 23:17
Not quite. When it is 'decided' that this and that would count as 'a length of an object' then it's not merely a claim about the society (though it ce...
June 22, 2017 at 23:11
Where did I link concepts to linguistic competence? I brought up this whole topic about the standard meter to illustrate how something which is not li...
June 22, 2017 at 23:00