More on Putnam’s models: a reply to Belloti
- 59 Downloads
In an earlier paper, I claimed that one version of Putnam's model-theoretic argument against realism turned on a subtle, but philosophically significant, mathematical mistake. Recently, Luca Bellotti has criticized my argument for this claim. This paper responds to Bellotti's criticisms.
KeywordsPutnam Model-theoretic argument Löwenheim-Skolem theorem
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bays, T. (2007). Two arguments against realism. Forthcoming in The Philosophical Quarterly.Google Scholar
- Haifman, G. (2004). Non-standard models in a broader perspective. In A. Enayat & R. Kossak (Eds.), Non-standard models of arithmetic and set theory (pp. 1–22). New York: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
- Putnam, H. (1983a). Models and Reality. In Realism and Reason. (pp. 1–25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Putnam, H. (1983). Realism and Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Putnam, H. (1989). Model theory and the `factuality' of semantics. In A. George (Ed.), Reflections on Chomsky (pp. 213–231). Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Velleman, D. (1998). Review of Levin, “Putnam on reference and constructible sets.” Mathematical Reviews, 98c, 1364.Google Scholar