The Gruesome Truth About Semantic Dispositionalism

IF 0.3 3区 文学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Adam C. Podlaskowski
{"title":"The Gruesome Truth About Semantic Dispositionalism","authors":"Adam C. Podlaskowski","doi":"10.1007/s12136-022-00517-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The resemblance is plain to see between Kripke’s Wittgenstein introducing bizarre rules such as <i>quaddition</i> (in illustrating the <i>sceptical paradox</i> against theories of meaning) and Goodman’s introducing the equally bizarre <i>grue</i> (in generating the <i>new riddle of induction</i>). But the two sorts of bizarre cases also differ in interesting respects. For those familiar with Goodman’s case, this similarity sparks a strong temptation to enlist to the meaning sceptic’s cause key elements of Goodman’s new riddle, which are missing from Kripke’s case. In this essay, I characterize a natural way of doing just this, which targets dispositionalist solutions to the sceptical paradox. I also show that, despite initial appearances, this new objection to dispositionalism (the symmetry problem) is not nearly as worrisome as originally thought. The solution offered on behalf of semantic dispositionalists does require a trade-off, though, from the severe form of indeterminacy advanced by the meaning sceptic to a much milder thesis.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44390,"journal":{"name":"Acta Analytica-International Periodical for Philosophy in the Analytical Tradition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Analytica-International Periodical for Philosophy in the Analytical Tradition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12136-022-00517-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The resemblance is plain to see between Kripke’s Wittgenstein introducing bizarre rules such as quaddition (in illustrating the sceptical paradox against theories of meaning) and Goodman’s introducing the equally bizarre grue (in generating the new riddle of induction). But the two sorts of bizarre cases also differ in interesting respects. For those familiar with Goodman’s case, this similarity sparks a strong temptation to enlist to the meaning sceptic’s cause key elements of Goodman’s new riddle, which are missing from Kripke’s case. In this essay, I characterize a natural way of doing just this, which targets dispositionalist solutions to the sceptical paradox. I also show that, despite initial appearances, this new objection to dispositionalism (the symmetry problem) is not nearly as worrisome as originally thought. The solution offered on behalf of semantic dispositionalists does require a trade-off, though, from the severe form of indeterminacy advanced by the meaning sceptic to a much milder thesis.

关于语义倾向论的可怕真相
克里普克的维特根斯坦(Wittgenstein)引入了奇怪的规则,如四加法(在说明反对意义理论的怀疑悖论时),而古德曼(Goodman)引入了同样奇怪的规则(在产生新的归纳法之谜时),两者之间的相似之处显而易见。但这两种奇怪的案例在一些有趣的方面也有所不同。对于那些熟悉古德曼案件的人来说,这种相似性激发了一种强烈的诱惑,让他们把古德曼新谜题的关键因素归结为意义怀疑论者的原因,而这些因素在克里普克的案件中是缺失的。在这篇文章中,我描述了这样做的一种自然方式,它针对怀疑悖论的配置主义解决方案。我还指出,尽管最初出现了这样的现象,但这种反对气质论的新观点(对称问题)并不像最初想象的那样令人担忧。然而,代表语义定位论者提出的解决方案确实需要权衡取舍,从意义怀疑论者提出的严重形式的不确定性到一个温和得多的论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Acta Analytica is an international journal for philosophy in the analytical tradition covering a variety of philosophical topics including philosophical logic, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of science and philosophy of mind. Special attention is devoted to cognitive science. The journal aims to promote a rigorous, argument-based approach in philosophy. Acta Analytica is a peer reviewed journal, published quarterly, with authors from all over the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信