Advertisement

Troubles Ahead

  • Paweł Grabarczyk
Chapter
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 409)

Abstract

In this chapter I look at the original DTM from a critical perspective. Firstly, I closely analyze the way directives produce meanings of words. Secondly, I look at the consequences of the holistic nature of the DTM. Next, I expand on the pragmatic aspect of the theory and try to imagine how the process of gathering directives should look like. In the following subsection I inspect the reasons and consequences of the non-referential status of the DTM. In Sect. 3.6 I discuss Alfred Tarski’s counterexample which discouraged Ajdukiewicz from developing the theory further. Section 3.7 brings to light some of the non-obvious assumptions on syntax which are present in the DTM. The chapter closes with the examination of the most problematic aspect of the original theory – the fact it was originally restricted only to “closed” and “connected” languages. I explain Ajdukiewicz’s reasons for this restriction and prepare ground for its elimination.

References

  1. Ajdukiewicz, K. (1931/1978). On the meaning of expressions. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  2. Ajdukiewicz, K. (1934/1978). Language and meaning. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  3. Ajdukiewicz, K. (1935/1978). The scientific world-perspective. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  4. Ajdukiewicz, K. (1964/1978). The problem of empiricism and the concept of meaning. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  5. Ajdukiewicz, K. (1995). My philosophical ideas. In V. Sinisi & J. Woleński (Eds.), The heritage of Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz (Poznań studies in the philosophy of sciences and the humanities, Vol. 40). Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  6. Block, N. (1998). Conceptual role semantics. In E. Craig (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy (pp. 242–256). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Buszkowski, W. (2010). O równoznaczności wyrażeń w ujęciu Ajdukiewicza. In J. Grad, J. Sójka, & A. Zaporowski (Eds.), Nauka −Kultura −. Społeczeństwo. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana Profesor Krystynie Zamiarze. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza.Google Scholar
  8. Cappelen, H. (2014). Philosophy without intuition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Carnap, R. (1928). Der Logische Aufbau Der Welt. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  10. Carnap, R. (1934). Logische Syntax der Sprache. Wien: Verlag von Julius Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carnap, R. (1945). The two concepts of probability. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 5(4), 513–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carnap, R. (1950a). Empiricism, semantics, and ontology. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 4, 40–50.Google Scholar
  13. Carnap, R. (1950b). Logical foundations of probability. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Chisholm, R. M. (1957). Perceiving: A philosophical study. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Ciecierski, T., & Wilkin, P. (2009). Sidestepping the holes of holism. In V. A. Munz, K. Puhl, & J. Wang (Eds.), Language and world. Preproceedings of the 32nd International Wittgenstein Symposium (pp. 84–86).Google Scholar
  16. Davidson, D. (1982). Rational animals. Dialectica, 36(4), 317–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dummett, M. (1973). Frege. Philosophy of language. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  18. Dummett, M. (1976). What is a theory of meaning? (II). In Evans & McDowell (Eds.), Truth and meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Fodor, J., & Lepore, E. (1992). Holism. A shopper’s guide. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Frege, G. (1892/1980). On sense and reference. In P. Geach, & M. Black (Eds., and Trans.), Translations from the philosophical writings of Gottlob Frege (3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Geach, P. T. (1957). Mental acts: Their content and their objects. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  22. Gendler, T. S. (2008). Alief and belief. Journal of Philosophy, 105(10), 634–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hanusek, J. (2012a). Argument Tarskiego i teorie znaczenia Kazimierza Ajdukiewicza. Diametros, 32, 160–189.Google Scholar
  24. Hanusek, J. (2012b). On a non-referential theory of meaning for simple names based on Ajdukiewicz’s theory of meaning. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 21, 253–269.Google Scholar
  25. Hodges, W. (2001). Formal features of compositionality. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 10, 7–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jackman, H. (2017). Meaning holism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/meaning-holism/
  27. Jedynak, A. (2003). Ajdukiewicz. Warszawa: Wiedza Powszechna.Google Scholar
  28. Kornblich, H. (2013). Is there room for armchair theorizing in epistemology? In M. C. Haug (Ed.), Philosophical methodology: The armchair or the laboratory? (pp. 195–216). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Machery, E. (2009). Doing without concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Machery, E. (2017). Philosophy within its proper bounds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Maciaszek, J. (2015). Składalność znaczeń w teorii dyrektywalnej. Przegląd Filozoficzny. Nowa Seria., 1(93), 27–47.Google Scholar
  32. Maddy, P. (1988). Believing the axioms I. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 53(2), 481–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maynes, J. (2012). Linguistic intuition and calibration. Linguistics and Philosophy, 35, 443–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nowaczyk, A. (2000). Ajdukiewicza teoria znaczenia z perspektywy lat. Filozofia Nauki, 2(30), 101–113.Google Scholar
  35. Nowaczyk, A. (2015). Jak czytać Ajdukiewicza. Przegląd Filozoficzny. Nowa Seria, 1(93), 9–27.Google Scholar
  36. Olech, A. (2015). Ajdukiewicz and Husserl on the issue of the meaning of expressions. Studia Semiotyczne − English Supplement, XXIV, 130–154.Google Scholar
  37. Pagin, P. (1997). Is compositionality compatible with holism? Mind & Language, 12(1), 11–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peacocke, C. (1997). Holism. In B. Hale & C. Wright (Eds.), A companion to the philosophy of language (pp. 227–247). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  39. Perry, J. (2001). Reference and reflexivity. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  40. Prior, A. (1960). The runabout inference ticket. Analysis, 21, 38–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Putnam, H. (1975). Mind language and reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Quine, W. V. (1950). Identity, ostension, and hypostasis. Journal of Philosophy, 47(22), 621–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Quine, W. V. (1953). Two dogmas of empiricism. In W. V. Quine (Ed.), From a logical point of view (pp. 20–46). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Searle, J. (1978). Literal meaning. Erkenntnis, 1, 207–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sellars, W. (1956). Empiricism and the philosophy of mind. In H. Feigl & M. Scriven (Eds.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. I, pp. 253–329). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  46. Williamson, T. (2009). Reference, inference and the semantics of pejoratives. In J. Almog & P. Leonardi (Eds.), The philosophy of David Kaplan (pp. 137–158). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yablo, S. (1998). Does ontology rest on a mistake? Aristotelian Society Supplementary, 72(1), 229–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LodzIT University of CopenhagenLodzPoland

Personalised recommendations