more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Quine says if ∃x□(x>7) makes sense, then for which object x is the condition rendered true? Specify it as '9' and it is apparently rendered true, specify it as 'the number of planets' and it is apparently rendered false.
Gist of Idea
Whether a modal claim is true depends on how the object is described
Source
report of Willard Quine (Three Grades of Modal Involvement [1953]) by Kit Fine - Quine on Quantifying In p.105
Book Ref
Fine,Kit: 'Modality and Tense' [OUP 2005], p.105
A Reaction
This is normally characterised as Quine saying that only de dicto involvement is possible, and not de re involvement. Or that that all essences are nominal, and cannot be real.
| 12219 | Whether a modal claim is true depends on how the object is described [Quine, by Fine,K] |
| 10921 | Necessity can attach to statement-names, to statements, and to open sentences [Quine] |
| 10922 | Objects are the values of variables, so a referentially opaque context cannot be quantified into [Quine] |
| 10923 | Aristotelian essentialism says a thing has some necessary and some non-necessary properties [Quine] |
| 10924 | Necessity is in the way in which we say things, and not things themselves [Quine] |