In defense of true higher-order vagueness

Synthese 180 (3):317-335 (2011)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Stewart Shapiro recently argued that there is no higher-order vagueness. More specifically, his thesis is: (ST) ‘So-called second-order vagueness in ‘F’ is nothing but first-order vagueness in the phrase ‘competent speaker of English’ or ‘competent user of “F”’. Shapiro bases (ST) on a description of the phenomenon of higher-order vagueness and two accounts of ‘borderline case’ and provides several arguments in its support. We present the phenomenon (as Shapiro describes it) and the accounts; then discuss Shapiro’s arguments, arguing that none is compelling. Lastly, we introduce the account of vagueness Shapiro would have obtained had he retained compositionality and show that it entails true higher-order vagueness.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
BOBIDO
Revision history
Archival date: 2012-09-30
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Distinctions Without a Difference.McGee, Vann & McLaughlin, Brian

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-12-09

Total views
503 ( #5,351 of 40,684 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
36 ( #16,408 of 40,684 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.