首页> 外文学位 >ONTOLOGY AND ANALYSIS (RUSSELL, WITTGENSTEIN, CARNAP, QUINE).
【24h】

ONTOLOGY AND ANALYSIS (RUSSELL, WITTGENSTEIN, CARNAP, QUINE).

机译:本体和分析(罗素,维特根斯坦,卡纳普,奎因)。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

"Ontology and Analysis" is more concerned with the question "What is real?" and with what is involved in providing an adequate answer than with what its answer turns out to be. Though I begin with the debate between Russell and Meinong over what to count as real, examination of their disagreement reveals that it hinges on differing conceptions of linguistic analysis. After arguing that Russell's defense of his position is less than conclusive, I take up the notion of an ideal language with the hope that clarity here might help to resolve the issue.; In chapter two I claim that it is possible to construct an ideal language independently of one's ontological predelictions, so that the use of such a language may yield ontological results without begging ontological questions, and I claim that Wittgenstein was engaged in such a project in his Tractatus. I offer an interpretation of the Tractatus intended to support these claims. Chapter three is concerned with some of the more technical aspects of Wittgenstein's view. If Wittgenstein is right, it turns out that the dispute between Russell and Meinong can't really be formulated, much less resolved. Ontological claims are nonsense.; Chapter four addresses Carnap's view of ontological questions. Though I find his criticism of Wittgenstein flawed, I go on to develop the idea that ontological questions are really disguised questions about language. I argue that most contemporary criticism of Carnap fails. In particular, I try to show that Quine's criticisms are unsuccessful.; The final chapter is a critical exposition of Quine's conception of what there is, and of how he arrives at it. Finally, in the concluding remarks, I offer a brief sketch of the view at the end of the journey, as well as a suggestion for further research.
机译:“本体和分析”更关注“什么是真实的”问题。与其提供的答案相比,提供适当答案所涉及的是什么。尽管我从拉塞尔和美浓之间关于什么才算是真实的辩论开始,但对他们的分歧的审查显示,这取决于语言分析的不同概念。在争论了拉塞尔对他的立场的辩护还没有定论之后,我提出了一种理想语言的概念,希望这里的清晰性可以帮助解决问题。在第二章中,我声称可以独立于本体论的预期而构建理想的语言,以便使用这种语言可以产生本体论的结果而无需乞求本体论的问题,并且我主张维特根斯坦(Wittgenstein)参与了他的这样一个项目。 Tractatus。我对旨在支持这些主张的《精神辩解法》进行了解释。第三章涉及维特根斯坦观点的一些技术性方面。如果维特根斯坦是对的,事实证明,拉塞尔与美浓之间的争端无法真正解决,而远不能解决。本体论主张是胡说八道。第四章论述了卡尔纳普关于本体论问题的观点。尽管我发现他对维特根斯坦的批评是有缺陷的,但我继续提出这样一种观点,即本体论问题实际上是关于语言的伪装问题。我认为大多数当代对卡尔纳普的批评都失败了。特别是,我试图证明奎因的批评是不成功的。最后一章是奎因对事物的概念以及他如何到达的概念的批判性论述。最后,在结束语中,我将在旅程结束时简要介绍该观点,并提出进一步研究的建议。

著录项

  • 作者

    HENSLEE, DOUGLAS EDWARD.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of Nebraska - Lincoln.;

  • 授予单位 The University of Nebraska - Lincoln.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1984
  • 页码 150 p.
  • 总页数 150
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 哲学理论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号