Picture 1 of 1

Stock photo

Quine versus Davidson: Truth, Reference, and Meaning by Gary Kemp (English) Hard - Picture 1 of 1

Quine versus Davidson: Truth, Reference, and Meaning by Gary Kemp (Hardcover, 2012)

The Nile UK Shop (52757)

99.4% positive Feedback

Price:

£63.77

Free postage

Estimated delivery Thu, 24 Jul - Wed, 30 Jul

Returns:

30 days return. Buyer pays for return postage. If you use an eBay delivery label, it will be deducted from your refund amount.

Condition:

New

Quine versus Davidson. A vindication of Quine's view of language. Short Title QUINE VERSUS DAVIDSON. by Gary Kemp. Author Gary Kemp. Illuminates the one of the most significant debates in 20th-century philosophy.

About this product

Product Information

Gary Kemp presents a penetrating investigation of key issues in the philosophy of language, by means of a comparative study of two great figures of late twentieth-century philosophy. So far as language and meaning are concerned, Willard Van Orman Quine and Donald Davidson are usually regarded as birds of a feather. The two disagreed in print on various matters over the years, but fundamentally they seem to be in agreement; most strikingly, Davidson's thought experiment of Radical Interpretation looks to be a more sophisticated, technically polished version of Quinean Radical Translation. Yet Quine's most basic and general philosophical commitment is to his methodological naturalism, which is ultimately incompatible with Davidson's main commitments. In particular, it is impossible to endorse, from Quine's perspective, the roles played by the concepts of truth and reference in Davidson's philosophy of language: Davidson's employment of the concept of truth is from Quine's point of view needlessly adventurous, and his use of the concept of reference cannot be divorced from unscientific 'intuition'. From Davidson's point of view, Quine's position looks needlessly scientistic, and seems blind to the genuine problems of language and meaning. Gary Kemp offers a powerful argument for Quine's position, and in favour of methodological naturalism and its corollary, naturalized epistemology. It is possible to give a consistent and explanatory account of language and meaning without problematic uses of the concepts truth and reference, which in turn makes a strident naturalism much more plausible.