Truth, modality, and ontology.
dc.contributor.author | Devlin, John | |
dc.contributor.advisor | Yablo, Stephen | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2016-08-30T17:49:37Z | |
dc.date.available | 2016-08-30T17:49:37Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1999 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:9929809 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/131631 | |
dc.description.abstract | Minimalists about truth think they've hit on something like a job description for a truth predicate: A truth predicate facilitates the expression of certain generalizations, such as Whatever N. said is true that would otherwise require a substitutional quantifier, or an infinite conjunction or disjunction. In the first chapter I argue that even if truth predicates have that function, it would be a mistake to suppose that this is their only role. There is an internal relation between truth and assertion that a minimalist fails to capture. In order to demonstrate this, I show how on a minimalist view commands would end up being among the sorts of things which are apt for truth. In the second chapter, I consider Lewis' well-known argument from paraphrase for the existence of possible worlds. I claim that the argument is only compelling on a certain reading of the presumption in favor of a face value semantics, but that on this reading the conclusion of the argument is incompatible with any standard possible worlds analysis of modal discourse. I go on to consider both whether the presumption in favor of a face value analysis of way talk might be defeated, and if not, how an ontic analysis of modal discourse might be recast in a form consistent with this result. In the third chapter, I consider a paradox involving our first-order modal judgements: It seems consistent to suppose that some things which are not possible still could have been possible if only the world had been different. But this is a view that's hard to square with a plausible semantics for modality. I argue that the problem here is a genuine puzzle about modality and that it requires the introduction of a perspectival semantics for attributions of <italic>de re </italic>modal properties. | |
dc.format.extent | 100 p. | |
dc.language | English | |
dc.language.iso | EN | |
dc.subject | Modality | |
dc.subject | Ontology | |
dc.subject | Truth | |
dc.title | Truth, modality, and ontology. | |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.description.thesisdegreename | PhD | en_US |
dc.description.thesisdegreediscipline | Philosophy | |
dc.description.thesisdegreediscipline | Philosophy, Religion and Theology | |
dc.description.thesisdegreegrantor | University of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/131631/2/9929809.pdf | |
dc.owningcollname | Dissertations and Theses (Ph.D. and Master's) |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.