[lit-ideas] Re: Reductive vs. Reductionist
- From: Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 14:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
I just found that Two Dogmas of Empiricism is downloadable for free on the
Internet, which in my mind constitutes a fairly decisive argument for selecting
it. :)
O.K.
________________________________
From: Julie Krueger <juliereneb@xxxxxxxxx>
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 9:52 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Reductive vs. Reductionist
I did just enough Googling about the above to know that I don't know. If I
only have time to read one book on Quine's positions, what should it be? The
"opaque" and "transparent" context intrigues me as does the notion of rendering
analytic and synthetic as indistinguishable. Does Quine take nominalism a step
further?
Julie Campbell
Julie's Music & Language Studio
1215 W. Worley
Columbia, MO 65203
573-881-6889
http://www.facebook.com/JuliesMusicLanguageStudio
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Donal: Where does Quine point this out?
>
>Donal was inquiring about the old "salva veritate" issue. How many
>letters in the words "bachelor" and "unmarried man," etc.
>
>In "Two Dogmas of Empiricism," Quine argued that analyticity is
>dependent upon notions of meaning. He concluded that strategies for
>meaning depend on notions of synonymy and definition, each of which has
>worries. Some think he demolished the distinction between analytic and
>synthetic statements.
>
>Eric
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>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:
