more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 19042

[filed under theme 7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 10. Vagueness / d. Vagueness as linguistic ]

Full Idea

A term is apt to be vague if it is to be learned by ostension, since its applicability must admit of being judged on the spot and so cannot hinge of fine distinctions laboriously drawn.

Clarification

'Ostension' is by picking out an instance

Gist of Idea

Terms learned by ostension tend to be vague, because that must be quick and unrefined

Source

Willard Quine (What Price Bivalence? [1981], p.32)

Book Ref

Quine,Willard: 'Theories and Things' [Harvard 1981], p.32


A Reaction

[Quine cites C. Wright for this] Presumably precision can steadily increased by repeated ostension. After the first 'dog' it's pretty vague; after hundreds of them we are pretty clear about it. Long observation of borderline 'clouds' could do the same.


The 18 ideas with the same theme [vagueness as indecision about word meanings]:

Vagueness is incomplete definition [Frege, by Koslicki]
Since natural language is not precise it cannot be in the province of logic [Russell, by Keefe/Smith]
Vagueness is only a characteristic of representations, such as language [Russell]
Terms learned by ostension tend to be vague, because that must be quick and unrefined [Quine]
'That is red or orange' might be considered true, even though 'that is red' and 'that is orange' were not [Dummett]
Vague predicates lack application; there are no borderline cases; vague F is not F [Unger, by Keefe/Smith]
Semantic indecision explains vagueness (if we have precisifications to be undecided about) [Lewis]
Vagueness is semantic indecision: we haven't settled quite what our words are meant to express [Lewis]
Whether or not France is hexagonal depends on your standards of precision [Lewis]
Semantic vagueness involves alternative and equal precisifications of the language [Lewis]
Singular terms can be vague, because they can contain predicates, which can be vague [Inwagen]
Vagueness problems arise from applying sharp semantics to vague languages [Forbes,G]
Vagueness is semantic, a deficiency of meaning [Fine,K]
The 'nihilist' view of vagueness says that 'heap' is not a legitimate concept [Williamson]
We can say propositions are bivalent, but vague utterances don't express a proposition [Williamson]
If the vague 'TW is thin' says nothing, what does 'TW is thin if his perfect twin is thin' say? [Williamson]
The vagueness of 'heap' can remain even when the context is fixed [Williamson]
Would a language without vagueness be usable at all? [Read]