Eligibility and inscrutability

Philosophical Review 116 (3):361-399 (2007)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Inscrutability arguments threaten to reduce interpretationist metasemantic theories to absurdity. Can we find some way to block the arguments? A highly influential proposal in this regard is David Lewis’ ‘ eligibility ’ response: some theories are better than others, not because they fit the data better, but because they are framed in terms of more natural properties. The purposes of this paper are to outline the nature of the eligibility proposal, making the case that it is not ad hoc, but instead flows naturally from three independently motivated elements; and to show that severe limitations afflict the proposal. In conclusion, I pick out the element of the eligibility response that is responsible for the limitations: future work in this area should therefore concentrate on amending this aspect of the overall theory
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
WILEAI
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-11-02
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Demonstratives: An Essay on the Semantics, Logic, Metaphysics and Epistemology of Demonstratives and Other Indexicals.David Kaplan - 1989 - In Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard Wettstein (eds.), Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press. pp. 481-563.
Laws and Symmetry.van Fraassen, Bas C.

View all 70 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Against Magnetism.Schwarz, Wolfgang

View all 31 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
416 ( #6,692 of 40,131 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
40 ( #13,572 of 40,131 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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