不精确量化

Q1 Arts and Humanities

Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society Pub Date : 2019-05-11 DOI:10.1093/arisoc/aoz007

Alexander Roberts

{"title":"不精确量化","authors":"Alexander Roberts","doi":"10.1093/arisoc/aoz007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Following David Lewis (1986), Ted Sider (2001) has famously argued that unrestricted first-order quantification cannot be vague. His argument was intended as a type of reductio: its strategy was to show that the mere hypothesis of unrestricted quantifier vagueness collapses into the claim that unrestricted quantification is precise. However, this short article considers two natural reconstructions of the argument, and shows that each can be resisted. The theme will be that each reconstruction of the argument involves assumptions which advocates of vague quantification have independent reason to reject.","PeriodicalId":35222,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/arisoc/aoz007","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Imprecise Quantification\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Roberts\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/arisoc/aoz007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Following David Lewis (1986), Ted Sider (2001) has famously argued that unrestricted first-order quantification cannot be vague. His argument was intended as a type of reductio: its strategy was to show that the mere hypothesis of unrestricted quantifier vagueness collapses into the claim that unrestricted quantification is precise. However, this short article considers two natural reconstructions of the argument, and shows that each can be resisted. The theme will be that each reconstruction of the argument involves assumptions which advocates of vague quantification have independent reason to reject.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35222,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/arisoc/aoz007\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/arisoc/aoz007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arisoc/aoz007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

继David Lewis（1986）之后，Ted Sider（2001）提出了一个著名的观点，即不受限制的一阶量化不能含糊。他的论点旨在作为一种还原：其策略是表明，仅仅是不受限制的量词模糊性的假设就崩溃为不受限制量化是精确的。然而，这篇短文考虑了这一论点的两种自然重构，并表明每一种都是可以抵制的。主题是，对论点的每一次重构都涉及到模糊量化的倡导者有独立理由拒绝的假设。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Imprecise Quantification

Following David Lewis (1986), Ted Sider (2001) has famously argued that unrestricted first-order quantification cannot be vague. His argument was intended as a type of reductio: its strategy was to show that the mere hypothesis of unrestricted quantifier vagueness collapses into the claim that unrestricted quantification is precise. However, this short article considers two natural reconstructions of the argument, and shows that each can be resisted. The theme will be that each reconstruction of the argument involves assumptions which advocates of vague quantification have independent reason to reject.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society Arts and Humanities-Philosophy

CiteScore

1.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society contains the papers read at the Society"s fortnightly meetings in London throughout the academic year, and short discussion notes on these papers. Papers are drawn from an international base of contributors and discuss issues across a broad range of philosophical traditions, including those which are of greatest current interest.