Advertisement

Synthese

, Volume 142, Issue 3, pp 317–352 | Cite as

TRUTH AND DISQUOTATION

  • Richard G. HeckJr.
Article

Abstract

Hartry Field has suggested that we should adopt at least a methodological deflationism: “[W]e should assume full-fledged deflationism as a working hypothesis. That way, if full-fledged deflationism should turn out to be inadequate, we will at least have a clearer sense than we now have of just where it is that inflationist assumptions ... are needed”. I argue here that we do not need to be methodological deflationists. More pre-cisely, I argue that we have no need for a disquotational truth-predicate; that the word ‘true’, in ordinary language, is not a disquotational truth-predicate; and that it is not at all clear that it is even possible to introduce a disquotational truth-predicate into ordinary language. If so, then we have no clear sense how it is even possible to be a methodological deflationist. My goal here is not to convince a committed deflationist to abandon his or her position. My goal, rather, is to argue, contrary to what many seem to think, that reflection on the apparently trivial character of T-sentences should not incline us to deflationism.

Keywords

Ordinary Language Clear Sense Trivial Character 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Azzouni, Jody: 2001, ‘Truth Via Anaphorically Unrestricted Quantifiers’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 30, 329–354.Google Scholar
  2. Bach, Kent: 2000, ‘Quantification, Qualification and Context: A Reply to Stanley and Szabo’, Mind and Language 15, 262–283.Google Scholar
  3. Davidson, Donald: 1984, ‘On Saying That’, in his Inquiries Into Truth and Interpretation, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 93–108.Google Scholar
  4. Donnellan, Keith: 1977, ‘The Contingent A Priori and Rigid Designators’, Midwest Studies in Philosophy 2, 12–27.Google Scholar
  5. Dummett, Michael: 1991a, ‘Frege’s Myth of the Third Realm’, in his Frege and Other Philosophers, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 249–262.Google Scholar
  6. Dummett, Michael: 1991b, The Logical Basis of Metaphysics, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.Google Scholar
  7. Field, Hartry: 1986, ‘The Deflationary Conception of Truth’, in G. MacDonald and C. Wright (eds.), Fact, Science, and Morality, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 55–117.Google Scholar
  8. Field, Hartry: 1994, ‘Deflationist Views of Meaning and Content’, Mind 103, 249–285.Google Scholar
  9. Field, Hartry: 2001, Truth and the Absence of Fact, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  10. Fiengo, Robert and Robert May: 1996, ‘Interpreted Logical Forms: A Critique’, Rivista di Linguistica 8, 349–374.Google Scholar
  11. Grover, Dorothy, Joseph Camp, and Nuel Belnap: 1975, ‘A Prosentential Theory of Truth’, Philosophical Studies 27, 73–125.Google Scholar
  12. Halbach, Volker: 1999, ‘Disquotationalism and Infinite Conjunctions’, Mind 108, 1–22.Google Scholar
  13. Higginbotham, James: 1986, ‘Linguistic Theory and Davidson’s Program in Semantics’, in E. LePore (ed.), Truth and Interpretation: Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 29–48.Google Scholar
  14. Horwich, Paul: 1990, Truth, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  15. Horwich, Paul: 1998, Meaning, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  16. Larson, Richard, and Peter Ludlow: 1993, ‘Interpreted Logical Forms’, Synthese 95, 305–355.Google Scholar
  17. Soames, Scott: 1999, Understanding Truth, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  18. Stanley, Jason, and Zoltan Szabó: 2000, ‘On Quantifier Domain Restriction’, Mind and Language 15, 219–261.Google Scholar
  19. Wiggins, David: 1980, ‘What Would Be a Substantial Theory of Truth?’, in Zaak van Straaten (ed.), Philosophical Subjects, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 189–221.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard G. HeckJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyHarvard University CambridgeU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations