more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 8195

[filed under theme 5. Theory of Logic / D. Assumptions for Logic / 1. Bivalence ]

Full Idea

I once wrote that there are three linguistic devices that make it possible for us to frame undecidable statements: quantification over infinity totalities, as expressed by word such as 'never'; the subjunctive conditional form; and the past tense.

Gist of Idea

Undecidable statements result from quantifying over infinites, subjunctive conditionals, and the past tense

Source

Michael Dummett (Truth and the Past [2001], 4)

Book Ref

Dummett,Michael: 'Truth and the Past (Dewey Lectures)' [Columbia 2004], p.69


A Reaction

Dummett now repudiates the third one. Statements containing vague concepts also appear to be undecidable. Personally I have no problems with deciding (to a fair extent) about 'never x', and 'if x were true', and 'it was x'.


The 11 ideas from 'Truth and the Past'

Truth-condition theorists must argue use can only be described by appeal to conditions of truth [Dummett]
The truth-conditions theory must get agreement on a conception of truth [Dummett]
Intuitionists rely on the proof of mathematical statements, not their truth [Dummett]
I no longer think what a statement about the past says is just what can justify it [Dummett]
Verification is not an individual but a collective activity [Dummett]
Undecidable statements result from quantifying over infinites, subjunctive conditionals, and the past tense [Dummett]
Surely there is no exact single grain that brings a heap into existence [Dummett]
A 'Cambridge Change' is like saying 'the landscape changes as you travel east' [Dummett]
Maybe past (which affects us) and future (which we can affect) are both real [Dummett]
The present cannot exist alone as a mere boundary; past and future truths are rendered meaningless [Dummett]
The existence of a universe without sentience or intelligence is an unintelligible fantasy [Dummett]