Philosophy of Language

Philosophy of Language - PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE Some topics...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–8. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
PHILOSOPHY OF  LANGUAGE Some topics and historical issues of the 20 th   century
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
LINGUISTIC PHILOSOPHY VS.  THE PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE The philosophy of language is concerned with  certain philosophical questions concerning  language. Linguistic philosophy is a movement in  philosophy that attempts to solve or dissolve  certain philosophical problems by analyzing  language in various ways. 
Background image of page 2
CENTRAL QUESTIONS IN THE  PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE What is the nature of meaning? In virtue of what does language relate to the  world? What is the relation between truth, language,  and the world? What are the atomic units of meaning, and how  do they relate to form compound units of  meaning?
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
FREGE’S PUZZLE The meaning of ‘a’ and ‘b’ is exhausted by what  they refer to. ‘a = b’ is true. ‘a = a’ is knowable  a priori. ‘a = b’ is not knowable  a priori. How can all of the claims above be true?  
Background image of page 4
FREGE’S THEORY OF SENSE AND  REFERENCE All terms have two components of meaning. The sense of an expression is its mode of  presentation. The referent of an expression is what it refers to in  the world. While ‘The morning star’ and ‘The evening star’  differ in their mode of presentation, they refer to the  same thing in the world. 
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
THE PROBLEM OF BELIEF  CONTEXTS Lois believes that Clark Kent cannot fly. If a = b, then ‘a’ is substitutable for ‘b’ in a  context C, without changing the truth-value of  the sentence S in which C occurs. Clark Kent = Superman. So, Lois believes that Superman cannot fly. Question: How can we explain the invalidity of  the inference?
Background image of page 6
CONTEXTS I Direct context: sentence is  not  embedded in a  propositional attitude. Superman can fly. Indirect context: sentence is embedded in a 
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 8
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 22

Philosophy of Language - PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE Some topics...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 8. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online