Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Willard Van Orman Quine
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

What Cannot Be Deconstructed? Truth

100%
Kozak P.
Studia Philosophiae Christianae
|
2022
|
vol. 58
|
issue 2
129-136
EN
In this paper, I discuss the interpretation of the method of deconstruction in David J. Gunkel’s Deconstruction (MIT Press 2021). I focus on the relationship between deconstruction and truth. I hold that the concept of truth is indispensable for deconstruction since truth introduces correctness conditions for the deconstructive method. However, I claim that truth, being essential and primitive for deconstruction, is fundamentally inaccessible for being analyzed by the latter.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Oblicza matematycznego quasi-empiryzmu

100%
Wójtowicz K.
Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce
|
2009
|
issue 44
61-83
PL
The received view concerning mathematics is the one, that mathematics is a priori, and that mathematical knowledge develops via 'intelektuelle Anschauung' rather than by analyzing empirical data. Mathematical proofs seems to be immune to empirical refutation, and in particular the development of mathematics does not in any way resemble the development of e.g. physics. On the other hand, it is quite clear, that mathematics play a fundamental role in science, and it is often considered to be rather just a useful tool, which provides a language and a conceptual system allowing to express statements concerning empirical world. Such views stress the dependence of mathematics upon physics. In the article, the author presents two quite different aspects of this problem: the ontological and the methodological aspects. According to Quine, our argumentation in favor of mathematical realism should be based on the analysis of ontological commitment of empirical theories. There is no other compelling argument for mathematical realism. According to Lakatos, mathematical knowledge develops in a way similar to empirical science: it is fallible, and the proper model to describe it is the model of proofs and refutations. In the article the author describes and contrast these two points of view.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Austin i Quine o rozróżnieniu analityczne / syntetyczne?

75%
Wawrzyniak J.
ARGUMENT: Biannual Philosophical Journal
|
2014
|
vol. 4
|
issue 2
299-314
EN
Both John Langshaw Austin and Willard Van Orman Quine were critical of the traditional division of propositions into the two categories: analytic and synthetic. Their criticism has, however, a different character. Quine questions the usefulness of the notion of analyticity, whereas Austin does not accept the view that every proposition should be considered either analytic or synthetic. According to Quine, we have to abandon the notion of analyticity because we cannot define it in a satisfactory way. Quine’s criticism is based on his conviction that the very notion of meaning is suspicious from the scientific point of view. This general outlook is supported by arguments the point of which is to show that we cannot avoid an indeterminacy of translation. Austin criticises the distinction for different reasons. According to him, it is not the notion of meaning which is suspicious, but a certain model of this notion — a model which is based on false analogies. In my text, I compare these two approaches and point out that they have different metaphilosophical sources. The main difference lies in the fact that, according to Austin, statements about linguistic meaning usually have a descriptive character, whereas Quine claims that linguistic meanings are theoretical entities. In the last part of my article, I discuss the thesis of indeterminacy of translation and assess its credibility, as it plays a key role in Quine’s criticism of the notion of meaning.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Inżynieria pojęciowa a metoda eksplikacji

71%
Kosecki A.
Roczniki Filozoficzne
|
2022
|
vol. 70
|
issue 3
251-272
EN
Herman Cappelen in his book Fixing language (2018) proposed a project within conceptual engineering according to which what we revise in concepts is their intension and extension. He undertook a polemic with the ideas in concept engineering according to which we appeal to functions and purposes when revising. In the first part of this paper I describe the aforementioned discussion. In doing so, I refer to Amie Thomasson’s article “A Pragmatic Method for Normative Conceptual Work” (2020). Next, I attempt to defend positions that refer to functions and purposes in conceptual revision. For this purpose, I refer to Michael Prinzing’s article „The Revisionist’s Rubic: Conceptual Engineering and Discontinuity Objection” (2018). In the second part of the article, I intend to describe the method of explication as one of the methods by which we perform conceptual revision. I turn my attention to the explication used by Quine. He proposes to focus when explicating on what function a concept serves.
PL
Herman Cappelen w książce Fixing language (2018) zaproponował projekt w ramach inżynierii pojęciowej, w myśl którego to, co rewidujemy w pojęciach, to ich intensja i ekstensja. Podjął on polemikę z koncepcjami w inżynierii pojęciowej, zgodnie z którymi przy rewizji odwołujemy się do funkcji i celów. W pierwszej części artykułu opisuję wspomnianą dyskusję. W realizacji tego zamiaru korzystam z odwołań do artykułu Amie Thomasson „A Pragmatic Method for Normative Conceptual Work” (2020). Następnie podejmuję próbę obrony stanowisk odwołujących się przy rewizji pojęciowej do funkcji i celów. W tym celu odnoszę się do artykułu Michaela Prinzinga „The Revisionist’s Rubic: Conceptual Engineering and Discontinuity Objection” (2018). W drugiej części artykułu opisuję metodę eksplikacji jako jedną z metod, za której pomocą dokonuje się rewizji pojęciowej. Zwracam uwagę na eksplikacje stosowaną przez Quine’a, który proponuje skupić się przy eksplikacji na funkcjach, jakie pełnią pojęcia.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Józefa Życińskiego zmagania z językiem o Bogu

63%
Heller M.
Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce
|
2022
|
issue 72
109-125
EN
In the two-volume work Theism and the Analytical Philosophy (1985; 1988a) Joseph Życiński took up the challenge of renewing Christian metaphysics so that it could appear as a full-fledged partner in the dialogue with other streams of contemporary philosophy. This renewal should use two sources: the methodological principles of analytic philosophy, especially its philosophy of language, and certain elements of Whitehead’s process philosophy. This study presents a critical reconstruction of Życiński’s arguments contained in the first two chapters of (1985), which are devoted to the problem of language. Main results of this part of Życiński’s work are negative, that is, they refute the arguments and interpretations of those analytical philosophers who show the meaninglessness of the theistic language or try to assimilate it to other standard languages, depriving it of a reference to the transcendent reality. How can a positive part of the Życiński program be developed? It seems that only by formulating specific problems in the field of philosophy of God, or even theology, and choosing the right linguistic tools to drill down on a given problem and seek its solution. This is in line with Wittgenstein’s concept of language games. Życiński tries to do this in (1988a). Życiński turned out to be a precursor of nowadays increasingly developing analytical theology.
6

Indistinctness and Disunion

63%
Hogrebe W.
Dialogue and Universalism
|
2016
|
issue 3
183-192
EN
In the paper the concept of indistinctness is examined. In the author’s view, indis-tinctness is present in all the aspects of the world. The problem of indistinctness is ap-prehended in four steps, namely, by 1. claiming and proving that the world of indis-tinctness and vagueness enhances our creative intelligence; 2. examining who and when discovered the advantages of indistinctness; 3. maintaining that precision is usually of advantage, but not always; 4. proving the misery of reductionistic programmes.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.