Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Greimann, Dirk
Data de Publicação: 2021
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Manuscrito (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8667171
Resumo: In his logical foundation of arithmetic, Frege faced the problem that the semantic interpretation of his system does not determine the reference of the abstract terms completely. The contextual definition of number, for instance, does not decide whether the number 5 is identical to Julius Caesar. In a late writing, Quine claimed that the indeterminacy of reference established by Frege’s Caesar problem is a special case of the indeterminacy established by his proxy-function argument. The present paper aims to show that Frege’s Caesar problem does not really support the conclusions that Quine draws from the proxy-function argument. On the contrary, it reveals that Quine’s argument is a non sequitur: it does not establish that there are alternative interpretations of our terms that are equally correct, but only that these terms are ambiguous. The latter kind of referential indeterminacy implies that almost all sentences of our overall theory of the world are either false or neither true nor false, because they contain definite descriptions whose uniqueness presupposition is not fulfilled. The proxy-function argument must therefore be regarded as a reductio ad absurdum of Quine’s behaviorist premise that the reference of terms is determined only by our linguistic behavior.
id UNICAMP-17_9f7040b05005cca1cb65aba24520a394
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8667171
network_acronym_str UNICAMP-17
network_name_str Manuscrito (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problemQuine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problemQuine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problemQuineFregeProblema de CésarFunção proxyQuineFregeProblema de CésarFunción de proxyQuineFregeCaesar problemProxy functionIn his logical foundation of arithmetic, Frege faced the problem that the semantic interpretation of his system does not determine the reference of the abstract terms completely. The contextual definition of number, for instance, does not decide whether the number 5 is identical to Julius Caesar. In a late writing, Quine claimed that the indeterminacy of reference established by Frege’s Caesar problem is a special case of the indeterminacy established by his proxy-function argument. The present paper aims to show that Frege’s Caesar problem does not really support the conclusions that Quine draws from the proxy-function argument. On the contrary, it reveals that Quine’s argument is a non sequitur: it does not establish that there are alternative interpretations of our terms that are equally correct, but only that these terms are ambiguous. The latter kind of referential indeterminacy implies that almost all sentences of our overall theory of the world are either false or neither true nor false, because they contain definite descriptions whose uniqueness presupposition is not fulfilled. The proxy-function argument must therefore be regarded as a reductio ad absurdum of Quine’s behaviorist premise that the reference of terms is determined only by our linguistic behavior.In his logical foundation of arithmetic, Frege faced the problem that the semantic interpretation of his system does not determine the reference of the abstract terms completely. The contextual definition of number, for instance, does not decide whether the number 5 is identical to Julius Caesar. In a late writing, Quine claimed that the indeterminacy of reference established by Frege’s Caesar problem is a special case of the indeterminacy established by his proxy-function argument. The present paper aims to show that Frege’s Caesar problem does not really support the conclusions that Quine draws from the proxy-function argument. On the contrary, it reveals that Quine’s argument is a non sequitur: it does not establish that there are alternative interpretations of our terms that are equally correct, but only that these terms are ambiguous. The latter kind of referential indeterminacy implies that almost all sentences of our overall theory of the world are either false or neither true nor false, because they contain definite descriptions whose uniqueness presupposition is not fulfilled. The proxy-function argument must therefore be regarded as a reductio ad absurdum of Quine’s behaviorist premise that the reference of terms is determined only by our linguistic behavior.In his logical foundation of arithmetic, Frege faced the problem that the semantic interpretation of his system does not determine the reference of the abstract terms completely. The contextual definition of number, for instance, does not decide whether the number 5 is identical to Julius Caesar. In a late writing, Quine claimed that the indeterminacy of reference established by Frege’s Caesar problem is a special case of the indeterminacy established by his proxy-function argument. The present paper aims to show that Frege’s Caesar problem does not really support the conclusions that Quine draws from the proxy-function argument. On the contrary, it reveals that Quine’s argument is a non sequitur: it does not establish that there are alternative interpretations of our terms that are equally correct, but only that these terms are ambiguous. The latter kind of referential indeterminacy implies that almost all sentences of our overall theory of the world are either false or neither true nor false, because they contain definite descriptions whose uniqueness presupposition is not fulfilled. The proxy-function argument must therefore be regarded as a reductio ad absurdum of Quine’s behaviorist premise that the reference of terms is determined only by our linguistic behavior.Universidade Estadual de Campinas2021-09-30info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionTextoTextoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8667171Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia; v. 44 n. 3 (2021): jul./set.; 70-108Manuscrito: International Journal of Philosophy; Vol. 44 No. 3 (2021): jul./set.; 70-108Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofía; Vol. 44 Núm. 3 (2021): jul./set.; 70-1082317-630Xreponame:Manuscrito (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMPenghttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8667171/27378Brazil; ContemporaryBrasil; ContemporáneoBrasil; ContemporâneoCopyright (c) 2021 Dirk Greimannhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGreimann, Dirk 2022-04-27T17:16:35Zoai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8667171Revistahttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscritoPUBhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/oaimwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br2317-630X0100-6045opendoar:2022-04-27T17:16:35Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
title Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
spellingShingle Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
Greimann, Dirk
Quine
Frege
Problema de César
Função proxy
Quine
Frege
Problema de César
Función de proxy
Quine
Frege
Caesar problem
Proxy function
title_short Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
title_full Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
title_fullStr Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
title_full_unstemmed Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
title_sort Quine’s proxy-function argument for the indeterminacy of reference and frege’s caesar problem
author Greimann, Dirk
author_facet Greimann, Dirk
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Greimann, Dirk
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Quine
Frege
Problema de César
Função proxy
Quine
Frege
Problema de César
Función de proxy
Quine
Frege
Caesar problem
Proxy function
topic Quine
Frege
Problema de César
Função proxy
Quine
Frege
Problema de César
Función de proxy
Quine
Frege
Caesar problem
Proxy function
description In his logical foundation of arithmetic, Frege faced the problem that the semantic interpretation of his system does not determine the reference of the abstract terms completely. The contextual definition of number, for instance, does not decide whether the number 5 is identical to Julius Caesar. In a late writing, Quine claimed that the indeterminacy of reference established by Frege’s Caesar problem is a special case of the indeterminacy established by his proxy-function argument. The present paper aims to show that Frege’s Caesar problem does not really support the conclusions that Quine draws from the proxy-function argument. On the contrary, it reveals that Quine’s argument is a non sequitur: it does not establish that there are alternative interpretations of our terms that are equally correct, but only that these terms are ambiguous. The latter kind of referential indeterminacy implies that almost all sentences of our overall theory of the world are either false or neither true nor false, because they contain definite descriptions whose uniqueness presupposition is not fulfilled. The proxy-function argument must therefore be regarded as a reductio ad absurdum of Quine’s behaviorist premise that the reference of terms is determined only by our linguistic behavior.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-09-30
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Texto
Texto
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8667171
url https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8667171
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8667171/27378
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Dirk Greimann
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Dirk Greimann
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv Brazil; Contemporary
Brasil; Contemporáneo
Brasil; Contemporâneo
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia; v. 44 n. 3 (2021): jul./set.; 70-108
Manuscrito: International Journal of Philosophy; Vol. 44 No. 3 (2021): jul./set.; 70-108
Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofía; Vol. 44 Núm. 3 (2021): jul./set.; 70-108
2317-630X
reponame:Manuscrito (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron:UNICAMP
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron_str UNICAMP
institution UNICAMP
reponame_str Manuscrito (Online)
collection Manuscrito (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv mwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br
_version_ 1800216568057036800