Token-Reflexivity and Repetition

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The classical rule of Repetition says that if you take any sentence as a premise, and repeat it as a conclusion, you have a valid argument. It's a very basic rule of logic, and many other rules depend on the guarantee that repeating a sentence, or really, any expression, guarantees sameness of referent, or semantic value. However, Repetition fails for token-reflexive expressions. In this paper, I offer three ways that one might replace Repetition, and still keep an interesting notion of validity. Each is a fine way to go for certain purposes, but I argue that one in particular is to be preferred by the semanticist who thinks that there are token-reflexive expressions in natural languages.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
RADTAR
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-06-13
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
.Williamson, Timothy
Frege's Puzzle.Forbes, Graeme & Salmon, Nathan

View all 32 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2018-06-13

Total views
130 ( #23,975 of 43,842 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
47 ( #15,614 of 43,842 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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