Affiliation:
1. Université de Genève & University of California, pbonardi1@gmail.com
Abstract
In his article “Opacity” (1986), David Kaplan propounded a counterexample to the thesis, defended by Quine and known as Quine’s Theorem, that establishes the illegitimacy of quantifying from outside into a position not open to substitution. He ingeniously built his counterexample using Quine’s own philosophical material and novel devices, arc quotes and $entences. The present article offers detailed analysis and critical discussion of Kaplan’s counterexample and proposes a reasonable reformulation of Quine’s Theorem that bypasses both this counterexample and another, in the author’s opinion, more persuasive counterexample, also discussed in this paper and somehow implicit in “Opacity”, which involves Russellian propositions instead of the Quinean apparatus.
Reference30 articles.
1. Opacity and the Double Life of Singular Propositions;Journal of Applied Logic,2012
2. Socratizing;American Philosophical Quarterly,2011
3. The Problem of De Re Modality.;Themes from Kaplan,1989
4. Quine on Quantifying In,1990
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