The Identification Criterion for Propositions

Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 98)


Now that we have surveyed the philosophical disciplines where the concept of the proposition plays a role, we must answer a critical question which our method prevented us from asking: what is the criterion of identity, the principle of individuation, for propositions?


Propositional Content Illocutionary Force Abstraction Operator Inconsistent Belief Propositional Identity 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    W. V. O. Quine, Word and Object, Wiley, New York, 1960, p. 200.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Quine, Ibid., p. 200.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. N. Prior, ‘Is the Concept of Referential Opacity Really Necessary?’, Acta Philos. Fennica, 1963, p. 190–191.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    B. Russell, Inquiry into Meaning and Truth, p. 166.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    F. de Saussure, Cours de Linguistique générale, 1915, 3d edn. 1962, p. 160.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Leroy, ‘Le Binarisme, concept moteur de la linguistique’, Mélanges de Linguistique, de philologie et de méthodologie de l’enseignement des langues anciennes, offerts à M. René Fohalle, J. Duculot (éd.), 1969, p. 6.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    N. Goodman, ‘On Likeness of Meaning’, Analysis (1949-50), reprinted in Macdonald M., Philosophy and Analysis, Oxford Blackwell, 1954.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    N. Goodman, ‘On Some Differences about Meaning’, Analysis (1952-53) reprinted in Macdonald, Ibid.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Naess, ‘Synonymity as Revealed by Intuitic’, Philosophical Review 66, (1957) 87–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Pêcheux, Analyse automatique du discours, Dunod, Paris, 1969, p. 30.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Carnap, Meaning and Necessity, Phoenix Books, Chicago, 1956, p. 56.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carnap, Ibid., p. 25.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. N. Whitehead and B. Russell, Principia Mathematica to* 56, Cambridge University Press, 1962, p. 401.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Church, Introduction to Mathematical Logic, Princeton, 1956, p. 25.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    G. E. M. Anscombe, ‘Causality and Extensionality’, Journal of Philosophy (1969) 152.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. Church, ‘Carnap’s Introduction to Semantics’, Philosophical Review 52, (1943) 299.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    W. V. O. Quine, Three Grades of Modal Involvement’ (1953), The Ways of Paradox, Random House (1966), p. 162.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D. Føllesdal, ‘Quine on Modality’, in Synthese 19, (1968) 154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. Føllesdal, p. 180.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    E. J. Lemmon, ‘Sentences, Statements and Propositions’, in B. Williams and A. Montefiore (eds.), in British Analytical Philosophy, Routledge and Kegan, London, 1966, p. 103.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Mleziva, ‘Problem fakt u logicke Semantice’, Theorie a Metoda, 1, (1969) 74.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    W. V. O. Quine, Word and Object, p. 205.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    P. Suppes, ‘Congruence in Meaning’, Presidential address delivered at the Forty- seventh Annual Meeting or the Pacific Division of the American Philosophical Association, 1973, p. 26–27.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    W. V. O. Quine, Word and Object, p. 27.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    W. V. O. Quine, Ibid., p. 206.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    W. V. O. Quine, From a Logical Point of View, 1953, Harper and Row, 1960, p. 63.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    W. V. Quine, ‘Replies’, Synthese (1968) 275.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    I. Young, ‘Rabbits’, Philosophical Studies 23, (1972) 180.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    K. Schick, ‘Indeterminacy of Translation’, Journal of Philosophy 69, (1972) 830.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    W. V. O. Quine, Word and Object, p. 70.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    D. Føllesdal, ‘Indeterminacy of translation and underdetermination of the theory of nature’, Dialéctica 27, (1973) 5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyState University of LiègeBelgium

Personalised recommendations