more on this theme     |     more from this thinker

Single Idea 10322

[filed under theme 5. Theory of Logic / F. Referring in Logic / 1. Naming / d. Singular terms ]

Full Idea

If we lack any general, language-neutral characterization of singular terms, must not a parallel linguistic relativity infect the objects which are to be thought of as their non-linguistic correlates?

Gist of Idea

If singular terms can't be language-neutral, then we face a relativity about their objects

Source

Bob Hale (Abstract Objects [1987], Ch.2.III)

Book Ref

Hale,Bob: 'Abstract Objects' [Blackwell 1987], p.41

A Reaction

Hale thinks he can answer this, but I would have thought that this problem dooms the linguistic approach from the start. There needs to be more imagination about how very different a language could be, while still qualifying as a language.

The 23 ideas from 'Abstract Objects'

10308 Questions about objects are questions about certain non-vacuous singular terms [Hale]
10310 Objections to Frege: abstracta are unknowable, non-independent, unstatable, unindividuated [Hale]
10307 The modern Fregean use of the term 'object' is much broader than the ordinary usage [Hale]
10312 Often the same singular term does not ensure reliable inference [Hale]
10313 Plenty of clear examples have singular terms with no ontological commitment [Hale]
10314 An expression is a genuine singular term if it resists elimination by paraphrase [Hale]
10316 We should decide whether singular terms are genuine by their usage [Hale]
10318 Realists take universals to be the referrents of both adjectives and of nouns [Hale]
10315 We can't believe in a 'whereabouts' because we ask 'what kind of object is it?' [Hale]
10321 We sometimes apply identity without having a real criterion [Hale]
10322 If singular terms can't be language-neutral, then we face a relativity about their objects [Hale]
10511 It is doubtful if one entity, a universal, can be picked out by both predicates and abstract nouns [Hale]
10513 Many abstract objects, such as chess, seem non-spatial, but are not atemporal [Hale]
10514 If the mental is non-spatial but temporal, then it must be classified as abstract [Hale]
10512 The abstract/concrete distinction is based on what is perceivable, causal and located [Hale]
10517 Colours and points seem to be both concrete and abstract [Hale]
10518 Shapes and directions are of something, but games and musical compositions are not [Hale]
10523 Being abstract is based on a relation between things which are spatially separated [Hale]
10522 The relations featured in criteria of identity are always equivalence relations [Hale]
10519 The abstract/concrete distinction is in the relations in the identity-criteria of object-names [Hale]
10520 Token-letters and token-words are concrete objects, type-letters and type-words abstract [Hale]
10524 There is a hierarchy of abstraction, based on steps taken by equivalence relations [Hale]
10521 If F can't have location, there is no problem of things having F in different locations [Hale]