Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Metaphysics and epistemology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Metaphysics and epistemology
Davidson's "The Folly of Trying to Define Truth"
Davidson’s argument against the possibility of defining truth draws upon the work of Tarski. However, Tarski’s assumption that the semantic conception of truth holds only for formal languages which are not semantically closed is not as plausible as it seems to be since it can be shown that this would result in the impossibility of formulating a theory of truth, because the epistemological presuppositions of formal semantics undermine any theory of representation of reality in which our cognitions can be true or false representations. Yet Davidson concludes that "there cannot be a definition of ‘For all languages L, and all sentences s in L, s is true in L if and only if . . . s . . . L’." I am challenging Davidson by introducing into his above scheme my own definition of truth — "For all languages L, and all sentences s in L, s is true in L if and only if we prove s in L" — and then showing how to prove this definition philosophically.
I. Introduction: Can we define truth?
Davidson argues for "the folly of trying to define truth" and claims that Tarski's "accomplishment was accompanied by a proof that truth cannot (given various plausible assumptions) be defined in general" (Davidson, 1996:269). Tarski's plausible assumptions are that his "semantic conception of truth" can be formulated only for formal languages which are not semantically closed. But these assumptions are not so plausible as they seem since it can be shown that if we accept them it is impossible to formulate a theory of truth because the epistemological presuppositions of formal semantics undermine any theory of representation of reality in which our cognitions can be true or false representations (Nesher, 1996). Yet Davidson concludes from Tarski's theory of truth that "there cannot be definition of `For all languages L, and all sentences s in L, s is true in L if and only if ... s ... L'."
I would like to start by challenging Davidson about his claim for the impossibility of defining truth and to introduce into his above scheme my own definition of truth; then I will show how to prove this definition philosophically:
[1] `For all languages L, and all sentences s in L, s is true in L if and only if we prove s in L'.
We can see immediately that the plausible assumptions of Tarski's "semantic conception of truth" for semantically formal languages do not hold in my definition of truth since I define truth in the same language in which it is used.
Knowledge, its source and truthfulness have been under question for a long time. People have always wondered what exactly constitutes facts and if there are any defining laws that can be attributed to all knowledge or information available in the world. Many philosophers speculated on how information can be interpreted according to its falsity or truthfulness, but have not come to definite conclusions. Edmund Gettier has provided one of the key pieces in understanding and trying to figure out what knowledge really is.
Did you know that you happen to be surrounded by invasive species? These species are animals that come into areas they do not belong in. The articles, “Invaders among Us,” and “Invader Alert,” show this. They harm the environment, cost tons of money in damage and extermination, and they have to be prevented.
Afgan, Naim H. "Sustainable Nuclear Energy Dilemma." Thermal Science 17.2 (2013): 305-321. Academic Search Premier. Web. 25 Feb. 2014.
Saul Kripke and W.V. Quine argue that there are no facts about meaning. Perhaps their strongest argument for their rejection of this claim is through their accounts that facts are determinate by rules and that meaning is lost within translation. Kripke depends on facts about rules for his skeptical solution for Wittgenstein’s account that every course of action is made in accord with a rule. Quine basis his argument on the use of translation; he claims that there are no facts about meaning because there is no correct translation of one sentence into another. In this paper, I will argue that in the accounts of both Kripke and Quine, Kripke provides us with a substitution which makes us a little less worrisome about falling completely into skepticism than that of Quine’s account, I will then provide a possible resolution that can assist in dissolving Quine’s perturbing skepticism.
Gustave Flaubert, an accomplished French writer of the mid-1800s, innovated realist ideals in his well-known piece Madame Bovary in 1856. Steeped in deep character development, his novel incorporates symbolism within several major individuals. Throughout the novel, Flaubert relates diverse character traits within Emma Bovary, clothing her in multiple personalities. In times of transition, Flaubert reflects Emma’s emotional state by relating multiple social classes to her situation. Her emotional state, socially or emotionally, hinges on the different class stages of her life.
Office of Technology Assessment. United States. Congress. (1993, September). Harmful non-indigenous species in the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. (OTA-F-565) (Y 3.T 22/2:2 H 22/993)
Each section of this article will be explained in my own words, with the exception of some of the symbolic logic. Russell's own words are indicated by speech marks.
In his book, The Language of Thought, Jerry Fodor claims that i) Wittgenstein’s private language argument is not in fact against Fodor’s theory, and ii) Wittgenstein’s private language argument “isn’t really any good” (70). In this paper I hope to show that Fodor’s second claim is patently false. In aid of this I will consider Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations (243-363), Jerry Fodor's The Language of Thought (55-97), as well as Anthony Kenny’s Wittgenstein (178-202). First I shall summarize Wittgenstein’s argument; then I will examine Fodor’s response and explain why it is fallacious. In my view, Fodor is wrong because he takes Wittgenstein to be a verificationist, and also because he makes a false analogy between people and computers.
4. thought- shown in what is said when proving a point is enunciating a general truth
Invasive species is a problem in today's world in everything from land,to sea and even in your backyard. This problem has been going on for some time now and making the ecosystem fall out of balance. One might not even know how to help. Invasive species create ecological and economic problems,but the average person can eliminate these problems.
Invasive species aren’t all bad some can help the environment and not ruin the environment. An invasive species is a plant,fungus,or an animal species that is not native to a specific location. In this essay I will argue that humans should not take action regarding invasive species because some of these species can be very beneficial such as the Japanese White-Eye.
To become a journalist one must be ready for late nights, irregular hours, and heartbreak. Being a journalist isn’t easy. So much can happen in a few seconds, and it’s almost like watching a soap opera. Many people think that being a journalist involves writing a small story and interviewing one or two people, but that’s not the case. Journalists have staggering deadlines to meet and at any time could be thrown into the most dangerous situations. It sounds like a hectic lifestyle, but the fact that they get to travel all over the world and meet so many different people makes it all worth the while.
Bamboo is the green material of the future, or is it? Bamboo is the largest member of the grass family. It is one of the fastest growing “woody” plants in the world. There are different types of bamboo, but on of the most used is called the giant bamboo plant. It can grow in most places in the world excluding those areas of extreme cold or extreme dryness (Bamboo Grove). It is a very useful material for many different animals such as building for humans, or eating for the pandas. It is the main food source for the pandas that live in areas of the world such as Chengdu China. Bamboo is very helpful for humans too.
Grice was the first to distinguish between “what is said” and “what is meant” in the 1950’s. Grice’s theory presents the notion of implicature, the conveyed meaning of the speaker (Grice 1975:
In the opening section of the Investigations, Wittgenstein gave a simple statement as ‘a particular picture of the essence of human language’. The individual words of language name objects sentences are combinations of such names. In this picture of language we find the roots of the following idea: Every word has a meaning. This meaning is correlated with the word. It is the object for which the word stands (PI 1). It means there is a relationship between words and objects through language. We might say that in the case of word and object it is one of meaning- the meaning of a word being ‘the object for which the word stands’. The meaning seems to depend, rather, on the meanings of the words making up the sentence.