Use and Meaning

In R. E. Auxier & L. E. Hahn (eds.), The Philosophy of Michael Dummett. Open Court. pp. 531--57 (2007)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Many philosophers have been attracted to the idea that meaning is, in some way or other, determined by useā€”chief among them, perhaps, Michael Dummett. But John McDowell has argued that Dummett, and anyone else who would seek to draw serious philosophical conclusions from this claim, must face a dilemma: Either the use of a sentence is characterized in terms of what it can be used to say, in which case profound philosophical consequences can hardly follow, or it will be impossible to make out the sense in which the use of language is a rational activity. The paper evaluates McDowell's arguments and, in so doing, attempts to offer an initial sketch of how the notion of use might be so understood that the claim that use determines meaning is a substantive one. (I do not take any stand here on whether one should accept that claim.)
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
HECUAM
Upload history
First archival date: 2013-06-13
Latest version: 2 (2020-05-01)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2011-03-07

Total views
443 ( #9,788 of 51,477 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #51,602 of 51,477 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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