Author:
Rattan Gurpreet,Durand Marion
Abstract
AbstractMates’s Puzzle has flown below many philosophers’ radar, despite its relations to both Frege’s Puzzle and the Paradox of Analysis. We explain the relations amongst these puzzles on the way to arguing that Mates’s Puzzle suggests a generalization of Frege’s Puzzle, and of the sense-reference distinction itself, in the form of hierarchy of senses. We explain how Mates’s Puzzle and the hierarchy, to different degrees, illuminate each other, and how their connection is missed in the literature. However, we argue that the potential of Mates’s Puzzle to illuminate the hierarchy is yet to be fully actualised. We suggest that in order to do better, we need to formulate Mates’s Puzzle as a puzzle in the philosophy of thought and not as puzzle in the philosophy of language. What is needed, to which the present paper is a precursor, is an account of the cognitive significance of higher-order senses.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Social Sciences,Philosophy
Reference62 articles.
1. Baron, C. (2015). Generalized concept generators. In C. Hammerly, & B. Prickett (eds.), Proceedings of the 46th annual meeting of the north east Linguistics Society. GLSA: Amherst
2. Beaney, M. (1996). Conceptions of analysis in early analytic philosophy. Acta Analytica, 15, 97–115.
3. Boisvert, D. R., & Lubbers, C. M. (2003). Frege’s commitment to an infinite hierarchy of senses. Philosophical Papers, 32(1), 31–64.
4. Burge, T. (1978). Belief and synonymy. The Journal of Philosophy, 75(3), 119–138.
5. Burge, T. (1986). Intellectual norms and foundations of mind. The Journal of Philosophy, 83(12), 697.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Attribution and Explanation in Relativism;The Philosophical Quarterly;2023-05-29