more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 9766

[filed under theme 1. Philosophy / F. Analytic Philosophy / 6. Logical Analysis ]

Full Idea

My investigation of vagueness began with the question 'What is the correct logic of vagueness?', which led to the further question 'What are the correct truth-conditions for a vague language?', which led to questions of meaning and existence.

Gist of Idea

Study vagueness first by its logic, then by its truth-conditions, and then its metaphysics

Source

Kit Fine (Vagueness, Truth and Logic [1975], Intro)

Book Ref

'Vagueness: a Reader', ed/tr. Keefe,R /Smith,P [MIT 1999], p.119


A Reaction

This is the most perfect embodiment of the strategy of analytical philosophy which I have ever read. It is the strategy invented by Frege in the 'Grundlagen'. Is this still the way to go, or has this pathway slowly sunk into the swamp?


The 11 ideas from 'Vagueness, Truth and Logic'

Study vagueness first by its logic, then by its truth-conditions, and then its metaphysics [Fine,K]
Vagueness is semantic, a deficiency of meaning [Fine,K]
A vague sentence is only true for all ways of making it completely precise [Fine,K]
Logical connectives cease to be truth-functional if vagueness is treated with three values [Fine,K]
Vagueness can be in predicates, names or quantifiers [Fine,K]
Meaning is both actual (determining instances) and potential (possibility of greater precision) [Fine,K]
Logic holding between indefinite sentences is the core of all language [Fine,K]
With the super-truth approach, the classical connectives continue to work [Fine,K]
Borderline cases must be under our control, as capable of greater precision [Fine,K]
Excluded Middle, and classical logic, may fail for vague predicates [Fine,K]
A thing might be vaguely vague, giving us higher-order vagueness [Fine,K]