Philosophy of Language Skill
Master the philosophical study of language: How do words mean? How does reference work? What is truth?
Core Questions
| Question | Issue |
|---|---|
| How do words mean? | Theory of meaning |
| How do names refer? | Reference theory |
| What is truth? | Truth theories |
| What do we do with words? | Speech act theory |
Theories of Meaning
Frege: Sense and Reference
code
FREGEAN SEMANTICS ═════════════════ REFERENCE (Bedeutung) ├── What expression picks out ├── "Venus" refers to Venus └── Compositional: Reference of whole from parts SENSE (Sinn) ├── Mode of presentation ├── Cognitive significance ├── "Morning star" vs. "Evening star" └── Same reference, different sense WHY BOTH? ├── "Hesperus = Phosphorus" is informative ├── "Hesperus = Hesperus" is trivial ├── Same reference, different sense └── Sense determines reference
Russell: Descriptions
The Problem: "The present King of France is bald"
- •No King of France exists
- •What does the sentence mean?
Russell's Analysis:
code
"The F is G" = ∃x(Fx ∧ ∀y(Fy → y=x) ∧ Gx) "There is exactly one F, and it is G" Not a referring expression but a quantified claim False (not meaningless) because no unique F exists
Direct Reference
Kripke's Revolution:
- •Names are rigid designators
- •Refer to same thing in all possible worlds
- •Not abbreviated descriptions
code
KRIPKE'S ARGUMENTS ══════════════════ MODAL ARGUMENT: "Aristotle might not have been a philosopher" ├── Makes sense ├── But "The teacher of Alexander might not have taught Alexander" │ └── Would make Aristotle not Aristotle └── Names ≠ descriptions EPISTEMIC ARGUMENT: We can discover "Hesperus = Phosphorus" ├── A posteriori necessary truth ├── Same thing in all worlds └── But discovered, not known a priori SEMANTIC ARGUMENT: Reference is causal-historical ├── Not by fitting description ├── Baptism + chain of communication └── Name-using practice
Meaning and Use
Wittgenstein: Meaning as Use
Early: Meaning is picturing reality Later: "Meaning is use in a language game"
Language Games:
- •Meaning depends on context, rules, practice
- •No single essence to "meaning"
- •Family resemblance
Private Language Argument:
- •No purely private meanings
- •Rule-following requires community
- •Meaning is public
Speech Act Theory (Austin, Searle)
code
SPEECH ACT THEORY ═════════════════ THREE TYPES OF ACTS: LOCUTIONARY ├── Saying something with meaning └── Uttering words with sense and reference ILLOCUTIONARY ├── What you do in saying it ├── Promising, warning, asserting └── Force of the utterance PERLOCUTIONARY ├── Effect on hearer ├── Persuading, frightening, amusing └── Consequences of saying FELICITY CONDITIONS: ├── Preparatory: Appropriate circumstances ├── Sincerity: Speaker means it ├── Essential: Counts as the act └── Infelicity: Act fails (not false, but unhappy)
Reference and Names
Descriptivist Theory
Frege/Russell: Names = disguised descriptions
- •"Aristotle" = "The teacher of Alexander" (or cluster)
- •Reference determined by satisfying description
Problems (Kripke):
- •Modal: Could have failed to satisfy description
- •Epistemic: Can discover identity
- •Semantic: Reference even with false beliefs
Causal-Historical Theory
Kripke/Putnam:
- •Initial baptism fixes reference
- •Reference transmitted through causal chain
- •Community-based reference
Natural Kind Terms
Putnam's Twin Earth:
code
TWIN EARTH ══════════ Scenario: ├── Twin Earth exactly like Earth ├── Except "water" is XYZ, not H₂O ├── XYZ phenomenally identical to H₂O └── 1750: No one knows difference Question: Does "water" mean the same? Putnam: No! ├── "Water" on Earth refers to H₂O ├── "Water" on Twin Earth refers to XYZ ├── "Meanings ain't in the head" └── Natural kind terms refer to natural kinds
Truth
Correspondence Theory
- •Truth = correspondence to facts
- •"Snow is white" is true iff snow is white
- •Problems: What are facts? What is correspondence?
Coherence Theory
- •Truth = coherence with other beliefs
- •System of beliefs that hangs together
- •Problems: Coherent fictions?
Pragmatic Theory
- •Truth = what works
- •Useful beliefs are true
- •Problems: Useful ≠ true
Deflationism
- •"True" is just a device for endorsement
- •"Snow is white" is true = Snow is white
- •No substantial property
Tarski's Semantic Theory
code
TARSKIAN TRUTH ══════════════ T-SCHEMA: "S" is true iff S EXAMPLE: "Snow is white" is true iff snow is white Requirements: ├── Object language (mentioned) ├── Metalanguage (used) ├── Hierarchy avoids liar paradox └── Truth defined for formal languages
Context and Indexicals
Indexicals
- •"I", "here", "now", "this"
- •Reference depends on context of utterance
- •Kaplan: Character vs. Content
code
KAPLAN'S THEORY ═══════════════ CHARACTER ├── Rule for determining reference ├── "I" = speaker of context └── Constant across contexts CONTENT ├── What's said in context ├── "I am tired" said by me └── Proposition about me
Contextualism
- •Meaning of many expressions context-dependent
- •Not just indexicals
- •"Knows", "tall", "ready"
Key Vocabulary
| Term | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Sense | Mode of presentation |
| Reference | What expression picks out |
| Rigid designator | Same reference in all worlds |
| Indexical | Context-dependent expression |
| Proposition | What is said, content |
| Speech act | Action performed in speaking |
| Illocutionary force | Type of speech act |
| Compositionality | Meaning of whole from parts |
| Use theory | Meaning is use |
| Direct reference | Names refer without sense |
Integration with Repository
Related Skills
- •
analytic-philosophy: Core tradition - •
logic: Formal semantics
Related Themes
- •
thoughts/knowledge/: Language and thought