In the course of the discussion, Professor Quine pinpoints the difficulties involved in translation, brings to light the anomalies and conflicts implicit in our ...

This chapter provides shorter version of the previous chapter and develops some of its themes. It argues that the status of Quine’s arguments against quantifying into modal contexts varies depending upon whether a logical or a metaphysical modality is in question. Various ways of making sense of de re logical modality are distinguished.

Today there appears to be a widespread impression that W. V. Quine's notorious critique of modal logic, based on certain ideas about reference, has been successfully answered. As one writer put it some years ago: “His objections have been dead for a while, even though they have not yet been completely buried.” What is supposed to have killed off the critique? Some would cite the development of a new ‘possible-worlds’ model theory for modal logics in the 1960s; others, the development (...) of new ‘direct’ theories of reference for names in the 1970s.These developments do suggest that Quine's unfriendliness towards any formal logics but the classical and indifference towards theories of reference for any singular terms but variables were unfortunate. (shrink)