[lit-ideas] read word and object
- From: Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 09:03:07 +0000
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Julie Krueger
Sent: 18 March 2013 10:53 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
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<mailto: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<http://www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html>
======= Please find our Email Disclaimer here-->:
http://www.ukzn.ac.za/disclaimer =======
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] read word and object - Adriano Palma
