Consider the following philosophical rule of etiquette:

(E) If a paradox is bad for everybody, don't use it to refute your opponents unless you personally have a solution.

I believe Deustch has violated (E). That's bad not only because it's rude, but because it's begging for a tu qoque response. I'll give that here.

Deustch thinks that any structured proposition theory is inconsistent because of the following argument:

Consider a set of propositions w, such that a proposition p is in w just in case the following obtains:

a) for some set of propositions m, p is the proposition that everything in m is true

b) p is not in m

He then asks that you consider the following proposition:

(P) everything in w is true

The argument goes as follows

1) Propositions have constituents

2) (1) -> (3)

3) Those constituents must exist if the proposition exists

4) (P) exists

5) w exists (3&4)

I'll divide the argument up for clarity. Here's to establish that if P is in w, then p is not in w, therefore p cannot be in w:

6) P is in w (assume for reductio)

7) The set of propositions such that P is the proposition that everything in it is true is w

8) P is not in w (6&7, by the conditions under which a proposition is in w)

To establish that P is in w:

9) P is not in w

10) there's a set of propositions such that (a) and (b) hold of (P) (9, w satisfies a and b for P)

11) P is in w (10, conditions under which a proposition is in w)

main argument:

12) P is in w and P is not in w (8, 11)

13) ~(1) (closed reductio)

Deustch contrasts this with the main objection against unstructure proposition theory, which is Soames' objection we saw earlier this term. Soames' objection applies directly to unstructured proposition theorists and nobody else. Deustch can only frame this as the main objection to structure proposition theory if it only applies to them. If it applies to unstructured proposition theory as well, his game is over.

This argument, of course, is a version of russel's paradox. This paradox springs up pretty much any place in which there's some principle of unrestricted composition (things can always combine to make bigger/more complex things). We see this in set theory, mereology, when formulating what properties are, possible worlds, everywhere. As for this particular formulation, the unstructured proposition theorists would deny (1) (of course). However we don't need a premise as strong as (1) to get the paradox going. Consider the same argument except replace premises (1), (2) and (3) with the following:

(1') Propositions are about things

(2') (1') -> (3')

(3') The things propositions are about exist

The argument goes through exactly as before. So the unstructured proposition theorist can't simply deny one. In fact, Deustch takes a different route when resisting the paradox. Here's what Deustch says about this:

"The essential assumption is that if a and b are distinct objects, then the propositions having them as constituents differ.[15] This is not true of possible worlds semantics, since e.g. the propositions expressed by "Jones wears a hat or he doesn't" and "Smith wears a hat or he doesn't" will express the same proposition whether or not Smith and Jones are identical.[16]"

This can be seen as a rather convoluted rejection of (7). Just because (P) is 'about' w over here, doesn't mean it's 'about' w over there. However, if one is going to be wishy-washy with aboutness facts, then plausibly propositions aren't (intrinsically) about anything (perhaps they're about something relative to a mode of presentation or something). This leads to a denial of (1'). This is already biting the bullet big time, but I can make things worse. Consider just talking about sentences, not propositions. Let (P) just be the sentence, not the proposition expressed. Let w be a set of sentences, m be a set of sentences etc. Replaces (1'), (2'), (3') and (4) with:

(1'') Proper names have referents

(2'') (1') -> (3')

(3'') If S is a well-formed sentence of non-fiction, the referents of all the proper names in S exist.

(4) (P) is well-formed sentence of non-fiction

With the proper modifications in the rest of the argument (just chanings 'proposition' to 'sentence' in each case) the argument goes through. Again, the denial of modified (7) would pretty quickly lead to the denial of (1''). Alternately the unstructured proposition theorist could deny (4), or (2''). However, the denial of these is a hefty cost.

A proponent of structured proposition theory may deny (2) (meinongianism, gappy proposition theory), or they could deny (4). For dealing with the modified arguments, they have similar options as the unstructured proposition theorist. These would also be costs, but the costs would be comparable to the costs of unstructured proposition theory.

## Friday, December 5, 2008

Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

## 39 comments:

鴛鴦吧成人,免費視訊,交友戀愛小站,尼克成人,383成人,成人漫畫,八國聯軍成人,正妹視訊,一葉晴貼圖片區,免費交友,080視訊聊天室,成人圖片,a片貼圖,080視訊聊天室,豆豆聊天室13 15歲,情色貼圖,色聊天室,情色貼圖,免費視訊,情色漫畫,哈啦聊天室,丁字褲美女影片,正妹計時器,666成人光,成人視訊,104 貼圖區,85cc成人片觀看,視訊,視訊做愛,0204貼圖區,嘟嘟成人網,正妹相簿,只有貼圖片區,正妹桌面,38ga成人,正妹空姐寫真,美女交友,ccn正妹牆,正妹找樂子,台灣美女寫真貼圖區,

85cc成人片嘟嘟成人網情色貼圖交友覓戀會館色情小說聊天室ut成人漫畫小高聊天室情色視訊聊天室成人文學漫畫貼圖情色交友戀愛小站熊貓貼圖成人文章正妹交友104速配網美女遊戲成人遊戲巨乳

成人圖庫,口交技巧,成人18,自慰方法,Fleshlight,情色自拍貼圖,成人情色貼圖,少婦自拍,一夜情聊天,本土av,色情av,av圖片,色情聊天,成人情色網,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,080視訊聊天室icandy,情色少女貼圖,免費視 訊聊天網,av女優18,免費線上視訊fm358,avdvd免費AV女優,女優王國,做愛,無碼影片,情色交友

不能記住往事的，人注定要重蹈覆轍。 ..................................................

thank u........................................

Happy New Year~..................................................

弱者等待時機，強者製造時機..................................................

nice job! waiting for your new artical. ........................................

你的部落格很棒,我期待更新喔........................................

Well done!........................................

Nothing comes from nothing.......................................................

愛情不是慈善事業，不能隨便施捨。...............................................................

我們不是因為快樂而歌唱，而是唱歌使我們快樂........................................

No one knows the weight of anothers burden. ......................................................

要持續更新下去喲!!期待~~........................................

弱者等待時機，強者製造時機........................................

人有兩眼一舌，是為了觀察倍於說話的緣故。..................................................................

你不能左右天氣，但你可以改變心情.............................................................

看看blog放鬆一下，工作累死了.................................................................

一定要保持最佳狀況呦，加油!!!期待你發表的新文章！.................................................................

欣賞是一種美德~回應是最大的支持^^.................................................................

向著星球長驅直進的人，反比踟躕在峽路上的人，更容易達到目的。............................................................

人生是故事的創造與遺忘。............................................................

Share and share alike.............................................................

留言支持你~希望能看到更好的作品 ..................................................................

人生是一連串的課程，必須活過才能明白。......................................................

用心經營的blog~^^ 加油！..................................................................

要保持更新呦，加油!!!期待你的新文章!!!.......................................................

認真的看完~~幫你推一下............................................................

美麗的事物是永恆的快樂，它的可愛日有增加，不會消逝而去................................................

成熟，就是有能力適應生活中的模糊。............................................................

愛，拆開來是心和受兩個字。用心去接受對方的一切，用心去愛對方的所有。......................................................................

所有的資產，在不被諒解時，都成了負債..................................................................

Learning makes a good man better and ill man worse.............................................................

你不能左右天氣，但你可以改變心情.................................................................

困難的不在於新概念，而在於逃避舊有的概念。......................................................................

良言一句三冬暖，惡語傷人六月寒。................. ................................................

祝大家都平平安安健健康康！............................................................

short lived, or rather delayed, philosophy

Post a Comment