mc gee - truth vagueness and paradox

8/3/2019 MC GEE - Truth Vagueness and Paradox

1/123


2/123


3/123


4/123

Vll1 PREFACE

what strikes us most prominently is tha! we can use thc notion 01 truth in orderto endorse or to deny a statement or ser of statemcnts without being requiredactualIy to repeat the statements; it is enough that we be ahle to nalTle thestatements. Thus, if 1 say

Every ex cathedra pronouncement 01' the Pope is true.1 have endorsed a1l of the ex cathedra pronouncemenrs of (he Pope. J havc, in asense, asserted rhe conjunction of al1 the Pope's ex cathedra pronouncements.Wlthout employing thc noton of tnJth, 1 could not do this, for 1 surely cannorrepear a11 of the Pope's pronouncemcnts. Using the norion of truth in the ordnaryway, we are able, lO etlect, ro pmduce (he conjuncrion or the disjuncton of aoarbltrary namcd set of sentences. Enabling us to do this is essental ro thenonphJ!osophical uscfulness of the ordinary notion of truth, aod if our scentifically reconstructcd notion of truth is to continue to perform the useful work thatOUT .ordmary notion performs, then it, too, must enable us in effeet to formconJunctlOns and dis junctions of named sets 01' sentenees. A l ~ h o u g h t h i ~ requirement by no means umquely determines our new theory of truth, it reIls us a greatde a) about what rhe new theory ought to look lile.Here 1 would like to develop a specific proposal for a way of thinking abouttrurh WhlCh wrll 1 hope h 1 .. ' . ' reserve tose oglcal 1'eatures which make our presentnotlOn of rruth so slllgularly usef l .. ' . u as a practJcal means for conveying informati onyet aVOld rhe contradictions th t ak '. . a m e our present norion of rruth so singularlyunsultable as a vehlcle for th . 1 ., , eoretlca undersrandlOg. The specific proposal is rotreat true as a vague term 1 d ' .. o not SUppose that lO ordlllary usage 'true' isslmply a vague tem like orher vague terrns 'True'" d' ' . 1many of the char t ", " lP. or lllary usage, dlSp ayst JI' ac ensrlCS typlcal ofv ague terms, but it displays other characteris-les a ltS Own notably the .I propenslty to paradox. The propasal here is that we:? a:e OUr OrdlOary usage of 'true ' by a sciemificaJly respectable usage that treatsrue S ~ n : P l y as a vague predicate Jike other vague predicates This reforrncdusage o true' wIIl, 1 shall cla1m be s' t" 'f ' bo .' " 'understandng f rh . ' a 1S actor)' eh as a busls tnr u thcoreticalo e connecrlOn between la d hfor accomplishing th nguage an t e world and as a meansour . e practIca], nonphilosophicaJ work now abJy per form ed byna] ve usage.We shall develop rule f ' fand show iliat thcse 1 s o bllllerence goveming the reformed usage of 'true'we employed th ru es ~ n a e us to employ the refoffilCd usage in jusr the wayse n3Jve usage to sImular , ' . . .sets of sentences Th d ' . conJunctlOn and dlsJunction of narncd. e para oxes anse Jt wIll be d f .of these rules of i n f e r e ' ' argue , rom the llllsapplicationTh l ' . nce 10 natural bur fallacious wayse u tlmate alm of rhis ende . .but rdo not attempt anythin av obr IS to develop a theory of truth for Engbsh,1 g so am ItlOUS here He 1 k' .anguages doing work th t . r' . re wor entlfely Wlth formalfor English. The plan' ta dS pre l m m ~ to the development of a theory of truthIS o eVlse techmques th t bla ena e us to develop a theory

PREFACE IX

of trurh for a formal Janguage : i within ,L itself, then to see Ir these sametechl1lques will not enable us ro develop a theory of trurh for Engllsh wlthmEnglish itself We are employing WJttgenstein's method ol' language games,practicing our phlosophlcal moves in a slmplified settlng before trying rhem outon English.The big phtlosophical cause this book aims uJtimately to promote IS the unity01 SClence. The dominant opinion has JI thar the bar antnomy proves that it isncver posslbJc ro clevclop a successful theory of truth for a language wlthlO thelanguage Itself; instead, one must clcveJop the theory of truth for a language : iwithlll a rnctalanguage that is richer than y; in expressivc power. ThJS implesIhat, sincc we have no rnetalanguage richer than English, we cannot develop atheory 01" truth for English, or for any naturallanguage. We can develop theoriesof tnHh for various fragJTIcnts of a natural language; fur exampJe wc can developa theory (Jf truth for the fragrIlent of lhe language thar we use when we talk aboulchernistry. But we cannot extend rhe theory ro encompass Ihe language wc usewhen we talk about language. We can develop a unified zooJogy that takesaccounl of aJI (he anirnals, and a unificd astronorny that takes account ol' all thelhe heavenly bodics. But we cannot, accordlOg to the dominant VICW, develop aunlfied linguisics Ihat takes accoun( of al! natural languages; we cannot evendcvelop a linguisric Iheory rhar takes account of he entlrety of any particularnatural language. UnlIkc natural phenomena, human languages lie mysteriouslybeyond the reach of scientific inqUlry.By provicling an altemative to rhe dominant vew, this work airns to encouragethe prospects far a unified science rhat trears nature and language as parts of aunited whole. 1 hope to prom ate the outlaok that human language lS a product ofhuman culture and human culture is part of the natural order, not inherently elthermore mysterious or less intelhgible rhan the planetary orbltSThis hook started out, several revisions ago. as my doctoral dissertatJOn forthe Logic and Methodology of SClence program ar rhe University of CalIforniaat Bcrkclcy. Bcrkeley is nor only a fun place to vlsit, it is an excellent place togo to graduate sehool, and 1 owe a great de al to the faculty there and to my felJowstudents.My dlsserta(ion adviser was Charles Chihara, who spent a great deal of timeand effort helping me with this project. His lOsights have proven invaluable;wilhout his help, this book could nor ha ve been wntten.Jack SjJver has given me a tremendous amount of help. He was very generouswith his time and ideas, and his extraordlllary combinaton of mathematical andphiJosophlcal ablllries have made his assistance nvaluableLet me express my thanks to three orher members of rhe faculty, EmestAdams, George Myro, and Bruce Vermazen, and to two of my fellow students,Shaughan Lavine and Sreven YabJo.Since Jeaving BerkeJey, 1 have been at rhe Unversty af Arizona. 1 used a


5/123


6/123


7/123


8/123


9/123


10/123


11/123


12/123


13/123


14/123


15/123


16/123


17/123


18/123


19/123


20/123


21/123


22/123


23/123


24/123


25/123


26/123


27/123


28/123


29/123


30/123


31/123


32/123


33/123


34/123


35/123


36/123


37/123


38/123


39/123


40/123


41/123


42/123


43/123


44/123


45/123


46/123


47/123


48/123


49/123


50/123


51/123


52/123


53/123


54/123


55/123


56/123


57/123


58/123


59/123


60/123


61/123


62/123


63/123


64/123


65/123


66/123


67/123


68/123


69/123


70/123


71/123


72/123


73/123


74/123


75/123


76/123


77/123


78/123


79/123


80/123


81/123


82/123


83/123


84/123


85/123


86/123


87/123


88/123


89/123


90/123


91/123


92/123


93/123


94/123


95/123


96/123


97/123


98/123


99/123


100/123


101/123


102/123


103/123


104/123


105/123


106/123


107/123


108/123


109/123


110/123


111/123


112/123


113/123


114/123


115/123


116/123


117/123


118/123


119/123


120/123


121/123


122/123


123/123

mc gee - truth vagueness and paradox

Documents