[quickphilosophy] Re: Fodor on Concepts IV: Circularity + Peacocke

  • From: wittrsl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • To: quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 17:57:33 -0000

If it's any consolation, I think that section is difficult too, Ron.

I mean, do you understand his argument to the effect that defining logical 
constants via the form of statements (i.e., presumably, via truth-tables) is 
somehow circular?  I didn't get that.  I take it that he's claiming that 
grasping the requisite forms requires understanding the concepts they're 
supposed to explain (like AND or OR or NOT) but I don't see why he thinks 
that's so.  I see that the notion of TRUTH is required, but not those of the 
logical constants.


Other related posts: