Idealism and Williams's Semantic Paradox

Bernard Williams's essay ‘Wittgenstein and Idealism’ argues that that the conventionality of language entails the dependence of the truth of sentences and ultimately of corresponding states of affairs as truth‐makers on the existence of thinking subjects. Peter Winch and Colin Lyas try to avoid...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPhilosophical investigations Vol. 27; no. 2; pp. 117 - 128
Main Author Jacquette, Dale
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK and Malden, USA Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.04.2004
Blackwell
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Bernard Williams's essay ‘Wittgenstein and Idealism’ argues that that the conventionality of language entails the dependence of the truth of sentences and ultimately of corresponding states of affairs as truth‐makers on the existence of thinking subjects. Peter Winch and Colin Lyas try to avoid William's paradox by distinguishing between the existence conditions of a sentence and its assertion. The Winch‐Lyas solution is criticized and a stronger Winch‐Lays resistant version of Williams's paradox is proposed. A more satisfactory countercriticism is given, involving an ineliminable modal fallacy occurring in the paradox inference, that arises because of the argument's invalid combination of categorical and counterfactual assumptions and conclusions.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/WNG-S5BP62DF-X
istex:A9D2030D3390AF8870CEF5EA72234642AF5D5ADB
ArticleID:PHIN217
ISSN:0190-0536
1467-9205
DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9205.2004.00217.x