Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. (1 other version)Précis of vagueness and contradiction. [REVIEW]Roy Sorensen - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (3):678–685.
    Rorty goes on to connect the sorites paradox to analytic philosophy’s long standing concern with the correspondence theory of truth. How do our words hook up with reality? Do our categories map pre-existing contours? The nominalist answers that “facts” are just projections of our forms of speech. Rorty characterizes epistemicism as a hyper-realist backlash. In addition to thinking that our scientific terminology cuts nature at the joint, the epistemicist asserts that even the vague vocabulary of common sense has sharp thresholds.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Epistemicism and Nihilism about Vagueness: What’s the Difference?David Enoch - 2007 - Philosophical Studies 133 (2):285-311.
    In this paper I argue, first, that the only difference between Epistemicism and Nihilism about vagueness is semantic rather than ontological, and second, that once it is clear what the difference between these views is, Nihilism is a much more plausible view of vagueness than Epistemicism. Given the current popularity of certain epistemicist views (most notably, Williamson’s), this result is, I think, of interest.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations