Os paradoxos da identidade e seu papel como limitadores de uma teoria funcional da linguagem
The Paradox of Analysis and the Antinomy of the Name-Relation are two arguments commonly used to clear up a paradoxical aspect of the interpretation of identity. My aim in this paper is to investigate those paradoxes and their limiting role in the constitution of a semantic theory. I will use as a g...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
2009-12-01
|
| Series: | Princípios |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.principios.cchla.ufrn.br/26P-05-34.pdf |
| Summary: | The Paradox of Analysis and the Antinomy of the Name-Relation are two arguments commonly used to clear up a paradoxical aspect of the interpretation of identity. My aim in this paper is to investigate those paradoxes and their limiting role in the constitution of a semantic theory. I will use as a guide line of this investigation the hypothesis that the difficulties in which all the semantics theories investigated fall are due not to the name-relation thesis, as Carnap will say, but to the compositional character of those theories. The investigation will take place in two stages. The first one will be an investigation on the historical solutions that were presented to avoid those paradoxes. I will try to show that every one of those solutions involves somehow the problem of handling compositionality. I will pay special attention to an unsuccessful attempt of solution known as “The Thesis of Extensionality” defended by Quine, Carnap and even Wittgenstein and Russell, for a while. The second stage will be a critical evaluation of the cause of the paradoxes. My thesis, as I said before, is that the real cause wasn’t the name relation thesis but a philosophical preference for a compositional semantic approach. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0104-8694 1983-2109 |