[lit-ideas] Re: Try a Logic Problem

  • From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 22:18:04 -0400

Robert Paul wrote:

"That there 'is not and cannot be an answer' to how a correspondence is
possible between statements (sentences, propositions, judgments) and an
alleged 'non-linguistic entity,' viz., in the ordinary language of
detectives, lawyers, various parties to various disputes and
negotiations, a fact,  seems to fly in the face of plain facts, to use
an expression on which philosophers do not hold the copyright.  'You say
that you were in Pittsburgh when Smith was murdered, but this does not
correspond to the facts,' says Inspector Quine."

This is not quite right.  When X says "I was in Pittsburgh when Smith
was murdered" and Inspector Quine says "No, that is not true", the
conflict is not between the sentence provided by X and a fact but what
the sentence proposes to be true and another proposition.  There is
nothing wrong with the sentence and it would be nonsensical for
Inspector Quine to object to the sentence.  Rather, Inspector Quine
objects to what is claimed to be true, some proposed state of affairs.
In addition, what Inspector Quine relies on to rebut X's alibi is
evidence that depends on testimony and witnesses.  In other words, and
it couldn't be otherwise, X is caught out in a false claim by other true
claims.  At no point do we encounter this mythological being, the
'non-linguistic entity', that dances through the dreams of so many
philosophers.

Robert Paul wrote:

"It's strange that people could get along at all before the advent of
metaphysical semantics."

Nah.  Nothing strange about the fact that only the sick need medicine.


Sincerely,

Phil Enns
Toronto, ON


------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: