In defense of true higher-order vagueness
Stewart Shapiro recently argued that there is no higher-order vagueness. More specifically, his thesis is: (ST) 'So-called second-order vagueness in 'F' is nothing but first-order vagueness in the phrase 'competent speaker of English' or 'competent user of "F"...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2011
|
| _version_ | 1797056646064635904 |
|---|---|
| author | Bobzien, S |
| author_facet | Bobzien, S |
| author_sort | Bobzien, S |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Stewart Shapiro recently argued that there is no higher-order vagueness. More specifically, his thesis is: (ST) 'So-called second-order vagueness in 'F' is nothing but first-order vagueness in the phrase 'competent speaker of English' or 'competent user of "F"'. Shapiro bases (ST) on a description of the phenomenon of higher-order vagueness and two accounts of 'borderline case' and provides several arguments in its support. We present the phenomenon (as Shapiro describes it) and the accounts; then discuss Shapiro's arguments, arguing that none is compelling. Lastly, we introduce the account of vagueness Shapiro would have obtained had he retained compositionality and show that it entails true higher-order. © 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-06T19:25:32Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:1b92ac19-9a79-4fe0-a137-ff4f055d5de3 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-06T19:25:32Z |
| publishDate | 2011 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:1b92ac19-9a79-4fe0-a137-ff4f055d5de32022-03-26T11:01:08ZIn defense of true higher-order vaguenessJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:1b92ac19-9a79-4fe0-a137-ff4f055d5de3EnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2011Bobzien, SStewart Shapiro recently argued that there is no higher-order vagueness. More specifically, his thesis is: (ST) 'So-called second-order vagueness in 'F' is nothing but first-order vagueness in the phrase 'competent speaker of English' or 'competent user of "F"'. Shapiro bases (ST) on a description of the phenomenon of higher-order vagueness and two accounts of 'borderline case' and provides several arguments in its support. We present the phenomenon (as Shapiro describes it) and the accounts; then discuss Shapiro's arguments, arguing that none is compelling. Lastly, we introduce the account of vagueness Shapiro would have obtained had he retained compositionality and show that it entails true higher-order. © 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. |
| spellingShingle | Bobzien, S In defense of true higher-order vagueness |
| title | In defense of true higher-order vagueness |
| title_full | In defense of true higher-order vagueness |
| title_fullStr | In defense of true higher-order vagueness |
| title_full_unstemmed | In defense of true higher-order vagueness |
| title_short | In defense of true higher-order vagueness |
| title_sort | in defense of true higher order vagueness |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT bobziens indefenseoftruehigherordervagueness |