more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
We simply have no intelligible notion of local indeterminacy or of a borderline case.
Gist of Idea
We do not have an intelligible concept of a borderline case
Source
Kit Fine (Vagueness: a global approach [2020], 2)
Book Ref
Fine,Kit: 'Vagueness: a global approach' [OUP 2020], p.24
A Reaction
He mentions cases which are near a borderline, and cases which are hard to decide, but denies that these are intrinsically borderline. If there are borderline cases between red and orange, what are the outer boundaries of the border?
Related Idea
Idea 23544 Local indeterminacy concerns a single object, and global indeterminacy covers a range [Fine,K]
| 23539 | Classical semantics has referents for names, extensions for predicates, and T or F for sentences [Fine,K] |
| 23544 | Local indeterminacy concerns a single object, and global indeterminacy covers a range [Fine,K] |
| 23540 | Conjoining two indefinites by related sentences seems to produce a contradiction [Fine,K] |
| 23542 | Identifying vagueness with ignorance is the common mistake of confusing symptoms with cause [Fine,K] |
| 23541 | Supervaluation can give no answer to 'who is the last bald man' [Fine,K] |
| 23543 | We identify laws with regularities because we mistakenly identify causes with their symptoms [Fine,K] |
| 23545 | We do not have an intelligible concept of a borderline case [Fine,K] |
| 23546 | Standardly vagueness involves borderline cases, and a higher standpoint from which they can be seen [Fine,K] |
| 23548 | Indeterminacy is in conflict with classical logic [Fine,K] |
| 23547 | It seems absurd that there is no identity of any kind between two objects which involve survival [Fine,K] |