back to ideas for this text


Single Idea 9369

[from 'Analyticity Reconsidered' by Paul Boghossian, in 12. Knowledge Sources / A. A Priori Knowledge / 4. A Priori as Necessities ]

Full Idea

Isn't it overwhelmingly obvious that 'Either snow is white or it isn't' was true before anyone stipulated a meaning for it, and that it would have been true even if no one had thought about it, or chosen it to be expressed by one of our sentences?

Gist of Idea

'Snow is white or it isn't' is just true, not made true by stipulation

Source

Paul Boghossian (Analyticity Reconsidered [1996], §I)

Book Reference

-: 'Nous' [-], p.4


A Reaction

Boghossian would have to believe in propositions (unexpressed truths) to hold this - which he does. I take the notion of truth to only have relevance when there are minds around. Otherwise the so-called 'truths' are just the facts.