NDLI: Van Inwagen and the Quine-Putnam indispensability argument

Please wait, while we are loading the content...

Van Inwagen and the Quine-Putnam indispensability argument

Content Provider	Springer Nature Link
Author	Stokes, Mitchell O.
Copyright Year	2007
Abstract	In this paper I do two things: (1) I support the claim that there is still some confusion about just what the Quine-Putnam indispensability argument is and the way it employs Quinean meta-ontology and (2) I try to dispel some of this confusion by presenting the argument in a way which reveals its important meta-ontological features, and include these features explicitly as premises. As a means to these ends, I compare Peter van Inwagen’s argument for the existence of properties with Putnam’s presentation of the indispensability argument. Van Inwagen’s argument is a classic exercise in Quinean meta-ontology and yet he claims – despite his argument’s conspicuous similarities to the Quine-Putnam argument – that his own has a substantially different form. I argue, however, that there is no such difference between these two arguments even at a very high level of specificity; I show that there is a detailed generic indispensability argument that captures the single form of both. The arguments are identical in every way except for the kind of objects they argue for – an irrelevant difference for my purposes. Furthermore, Putnam’s and van Inwagen’s presentations make an assumption that is often mistakenly taken to be an important feature of the Quine-Putnam argument. Yet this assumption is only the implicit backdrop against which the argument is typically presented. This last point is brought into sharper relief by the fact that van Inwagen’s list of the four nominalistic responses to his argument is too short. His list is missing an important – and historically popular – fifth option.
Starting Page	439
Ending Page	453
Page Count	15
File Format	PDF
ISSN	01650106
Journal	Erkenntnis
Volume Number	67
Issue Number	3
e-ISSN	15728420
Language	English
Publisher	Springer Netherlands
Publisher Date	2007-07-07
Publisher Place	Dordrecht
Access Restriction	One Nation One Subscription (ONOS)
Subject Keyword	Indispensability Quine Putnam Van Inwagen Ontology Meta-ontology Mathematics Properties Logic Ethics Epistemology Philosophy
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Philosophy Logic

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Quine, Putnam, and the ‘Quine–Putnam’ Indispensability Argument

On Knockdown Arguments

In Memoriam: Willard Van Orman Quine

Mathematics, Indispensability And Scientific Progress

Tollensing van Inwagen

Contrastive Empiricism and Indispensability

Quine and Logical Truth

Putnam and Constructibility

More on Putnam’s models: a reply to Belloti

Van Inwagen and the Quine-Putnam indispensability argument

Similar Documents

Quine, Putnam, and the ‘Quine–Putnam’ Indispensability Argument

On Knockdown Arguments

In Memoriam: Willard Van Orman Quine

Mathematics, Indispensability And Scientific Progress

Tollensing van Inwagen

Contrastive Empiricism and Indispensability

Quine and Logical Truth

Putnam and Constructibility

More on Putnam’s models: a reply to Belloti

Van Inwagen and the Quine-Putnam indispensability argument