Philosophy of Language Seminar 1: Sense and Reference

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Kaplan’s Theory of Indexicals
Advertisements

Albert Gatt LIN1180 – Semantics Lecture 10. Part 1 (from last week) Theories of presupposition: the semantics- pragmatics interface.
1 6 The Sense/Reference Distinction Revisited. 2 Sense qua Identifying Descriptions See Donnellan, 1970 “Speaking of Nothing” and Kripke, 1972 Naming.
Is there a rational basis for the belief in God..
Ethics and Philosophy Period 2 - Project Welcome to our to PhiloEthics! Introductory Game Stand up and find a partner(someone you don’t know) Talk.
Lecture 1 Introduction: Linguistic Theory and Theories
Test Taking Tips How to help yourself with multiple choice and short answer questions for reading selections A. Caldwell.
KNOWLEDGE What is it? How does it differ from belief? What is the relationship between knowledge and truth? These are the concerns of epistemology How.
MIDTERM EXAMINATION THE MIDTERM EXAMINATION WILL BE ON FRIDAY, MAY 2, IN THIS CLASSROOM, STARTING AT 1:00 P.M. BRING A BLUE BOOK. THE EXAM WILL COVER:
Philosophy Review Terms/People/Ideas we’ve studied.
Entity Theories of Meaning. Meaning Talk Theory should make sense of meaning talk Theory should make sense of meaning talk What sorts of things do we.
Philosophy and Logic The Process of Correct Reasoning.
PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE Some topics and historical issues of the 20 th century.
AQA Religious Philosophical & Ethical Studies
Philosophy of Religion
Black Belt Advocacy , Report Writing
Religious language: cognitive or non-cognitive?
The Causal-Historical Theory
乌海市第十中学 贾春花.
Word of the Day hypothetical- adj.
Frege: Kaiser’s chariot is drawn by four horses
A brief recap of the different branches
Particulars and Properties. Lecture four: Tropes.
Michael Lacewing Mackie’s error theory Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Philosophy and History of Mathematics
Introduction to Linguistics
Philosophy of Truth A Mr. C Production.
Philosophy of Mathematics 1: Geometry
Empiricism.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 14 Minds and Bodies #3 (Jackson)
Essay writing Politics and Society.
Philosophy of Language Seminar 3: Definite Descriptions (2)
Philosophy of Language Seminar 2: Definite Descriptions (1)
Metaphysics Seminar 8: Modality (1)
Philosophy 1010 Class #8 Title: Introduction to Philosophy
Metaphysics Seminar 7: Ontology (4)
Remember these terms? Analytic/ synthetic A priori/ a posteriori
Understanding the rhetorical situation
Recap Key-Terms Cognitivism Non-Cognitivism Realism Anti-Realism
What can you remember about Intuitionism?
Did King Harold die at the battle of Hastings?
(Or as I like to say, “What’s your point?”)
Daniel W. Blackmon Theory of Knowledge Coral Gables Senior High
On your whiteboard (1): 1. What is innate knowledge? 2. What were Plato’s arguments for innate knowledge? 3. Was he right? Explain your answer.
Recap Questions What is interactionism?
Anselm & Aquinas December 23, 2005.
Recap Normative Ethics
SQA RUAE Advice.
Recap of Aristotle So Far…
Block Class Writing Review
What were the 3 arguments Hume gave against moral realism?
What were the 3 arguments Hume gave against moral realism?
True or False: Materialism and physicalism mean the same thing.
RHETORICAL ANALYSIS.
What is good / bad about this answer?
The Scientific Revolution.
EPM: Chs X & XI Pete Mandik Chairman, Department of Philosophy
Is murder wrong? A: What is murder? B: What is the law on murder in the UK? A: Do you think murder is wrong? B: Do you think murder is wrong? ‘Garment.
Introduction to Semantics
The Philosophy of Hegel
Final Day Wittgenstein.
Writing to Express an Opinion
Recap – NO NOTES! What key ideas / terms / arguments can you remember from the two theories we’ve covered so far: Direct Realism Indirect Realism.
Induction and deduction
Chapter 4 Technology and Social Change
Explore the weaknesses of the ontological argument. (8 marks)
Identifying Author’s Purpose and Perspective World Lit DD
Epistemology – The study of knowledge
Is There a God? This presentation is intended to give a visual description of my viewpoint on God’s existence. This presentation presents historical philosophers.
Henry Taylor Philosophy of Language Seminar 7: Externalist theories of mental content. Henry Taylor
Presentation transcript:

Philosophy of Language Seminar 1: Sense and Reference Henry Taylor j.h.taylor.1@bham.ac.uk

Philosophy of Language Core textbook: William Lycan Philosophy of Language: A contemporary introduction Many of the papers are available online, but if you want to buy an anthology, buy: Readings in the Philosophy of Language. Edited by Peter Ludlow (MIT Press).

Why study philosophy of language? 1) Language is one of the most important features of the world. It allows societies to function. It can produce immense harm: cause whole nations to go to war, propagate hatred of a particular group, etc. Many believe that it is what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom. It is intimately bound up with other philosophically important faculties: thought, belief, knowledge.

Why study philosophy of language? 2) Its place in the history of philosophy, and contemporary philosophy. By the mid 19th century, many were becoming disillusioned with the way philosophy was going.

Why study philosophy of language? Specifically, many were upset with the ‘German Idealist’ tradition. They followed and reacted to Kant, and included Hegel, Fichte, Schelling. Many considered this to be a woefully misguided tradition: making philosophy hideously obscure, arcane and mired in unclarity, cross talking, and a lack of rigour.

In 1879, Gottlob Frege published the Begriffsschift. This was a work that set out a system of logic similar to what we still use today. Frege began to use this system to help understand language.

Why study philosophy of language? Many (Russell, Moore) saw this system as a way to save philosophy from what they felt it had become. This movement caused a split in philosophy: between the ‘analytic’ and ‘continental’ schools, which still very much exists today. Analytic philosophers pride themselves on rigour, clarity, care and precision. This grew out of Frege and his followers’ work on language and logic.

Why study philosophy of language? So, many of the ideas we will look at in this course are the very foundational ideas of the whole of analytic philosophy. The texts we will be looking at: ‘on sense and reference’, ‘on denoting’, ‘Naming and Necessity’, ‘Two dogmas of empiricism’, ‘meaning and reference’, ‘individualism and the mental’ are the most important texts in the history of analytic philosophy.

Why study philosophy of language? In studying philosophy, you will be expected to know a lot of this stuff. You need to understand philosophy of language to understand contemporary philosophy.

A brief look ahead We will be looking at these classic texts and ideas. Topics: Meaning. How we talk about non-existent things. How words relate to the world. How meanings relate to the society we live in.

A brief look ahead hate speech Pornography

A brief look ahead We’re also going to look at the interface of philosophy and linguistics, and philosophy and psychology. Noam Chomsky: Language acquisition in infancy Language as what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom. Universal Grammar

The course We will have a mini-lecture (including question/answer sessions). Then we will have discussion for the second half. Each week will have one or two set readings, which must be done for the discussion.

Frege’s Puzzle Start with a question: How do names get their meaning? Simple answer: They mean whatever they refer to, whatever they ‘pick out’. So ‘Julius Caesar’ just means the man himself: Julius Caesar. The meaning of the name is given by its referent. This view is associated with John Stuart Mill.

Terminology The referent of a name is what the name ‘picks out’. So the referent of the name ’Noam Chomsky’ is the man himself: Chomsky.

Frege’s Puzzle Some names are different but pick out (refer to) the same thing. Co-referential names. Examples: ’The morning star’ and ‘The evening star’ ‘Mark Twain’ and ‘Samuel Clemens’ ‘Eric Blair’ and ‘George Orwell’

Frege’s Puzzle Take ‘the morning star’ and ’the evening star’. Both of them refer to the same thing (the planet Venus).

Frege’s Puzzle Consider two claims: 1) The morning star is the morning star 2) The morning star is the evening star. Both are true.

Frege’s Puzzle 1) Both names refer to the same thing. 2) So, if the meaning of a name just is its reference, then the two statements should both mean the same thing. 3) Clearly, they do not mean the same thing.

Frege’s Puzzle Why think that they clearly mean different things? ‘a=a and a=b are sentences of obviously different cognitive significance: “a=a” is valid a priori… whereas sentences of the form “a=b” often contain very valuable extensions of our knowledge” He’s saying the names ‘a’ and ‘b’ must mean different things because some statements of their sameness are a priori (true just by the meanings of the words) whilst others require empirical discovery.

Frege’s Puzzle Another reason to think they don’t mean the same thing: ‘Anita knows that George Orwell wrote 1984’ might be true, but ‘Anita knows that Eric Blair wrote 1984’ might be false. So ‘George Orwell’ must mean something different from ‘Eric Blair’. So we have two reasons to think they mean different things.

Frege’s Puzzle 1) Both names refer to the same thing. 2) So, if the meaning of a name just is its reference, then the two statements should both mean the same thing. 3) Clearly, they do not mean the same thing. 4) Therefore, the meaning of a name is not just its reference. Questions/comments?

Frege’s Puzzle Frege accepted this argument: the meaning of a name is not just its referent. His solution to the puzzles: the two names have the same referent (bedeutung) but they differ in sense (sinn).

Sense and reference Sense (Sinn): It captures the cognitive significance of the name. Cognitive significance? That’s like how the name functions in the beliefs of people who use the name. For example, ‘Eric Blair’ and ‘George Orwell’ might mean different things to a speaker. Someone might think that ’George Orwell is the guy who wrote 1984.’ And they might think ‘Eric Blair is the guy born in 1903, who was a policeman in Burma, whose great grandfather was Charles Blair’

Sense and reference This is a difference in sense: in what the language user associates with the thing that the name refers to. Same with morning star: ‘It’s the star that appears in the morning’ And the evening star: ‘It’s the star that appears in the evening’ Again, different senses.

Sense and reference ‘Eric Blair’ and ‘George Orwell’ both pick out the same thing: they have the same referent. ‘The morning star’ and ’the evening star’ are the same. Same reference, different senses.

Sense and reference Frege’s view: sense and reference both contribute to the meaning of a name. So if words differ in their sense, then they differ in meaning. That explains Frege’s puzzles.

Questions?

Sense and reference How do sense and reference interact? Sense determines reference. So suppose someone uses the name ‘George Orwell’ and associates it with the sense ‘the guy who wrote 1984.’ Then that sense picks out whoever it is that wrote 1984. Suppose that she also uses the name ‘Eric Blair’, and associates it with the sense ‘the guy born in 1903, who was a policeman in Burma, whose great grandfather was Charles Blair’ Then that sense picks out whoever it is that did all that.

Sense and reference As it happens, the guy who wrote 1984 is the guy who was born in 1903, who was a policeman in Burma, whose great grandfather was Charles Blair. Both senses pick out the same thing: that’s why they have the same reference.

Sense and reference So names can have the same reference, but differ in sense. They can also differ in both sense and reference: ‘The evening star’ and ‘George Orwell’ And they can be the same in sense and reference: ‘George Orwell’ and ‘George Orwell’ But they can’t be the same in sense and different in reference. WHY?

Sense and reference So far, senses do two things: 1) Explain the cognitive significance of a name. 2) Fix the name’s reference.

Questions/comments about this theory

Sense and reference Senses are public. Different people can share the same sense. Whilst one person can use the name ‘George Orwell’ and associate the sense ‘the guy who wrote 1984’ with it, someone else could use the name ‘George Orwell’ and associate the very same sense with it.

Sense and reference

Sense and reference The public nature of senses is important. It means that two speakers can use a name and both share the same sense and reference with it. So, on this view, the meanings of words are public things. This goes some way toward explaining how meanings can be shared, and how communication is possible.

Sense and reference So now senses do three things: 1) Explain the cognitive significance of a name 2) Explain how reference is fixed 3) Explain the public nature of meanings. They do one more thing….

Sense and reference Frege also tried to explain how words combine to form whole thoughts (Gedanke). The name ‘George Orwell’ is only a constituent of a whole thought, like ‘George Orwell was the greatest novelist of the 20th century’. Put simply, language is combinatorial: you can combine different words in an infinity of different ways.

Sense and reference So, you have names like ‘George Orwell’, which combine to make sentences like ‘George Orwell is the greatest novelist of the 20th century’. Frege thinks that the senses of the individual words in the sentence gives the sentence as a whole its own sense. This sense he calls the thought, (Gedanke).

Sense and reference So thoughts are the senses of whole sentences. Remember that senses determine reference. What is the reference of ‘George Orwell is the greatest novelist of the 20th century’? Ideas?

Sense and reference The thought refers to the truth (if it’s true) or the false (if it’s false). So ‘The Eiffel Tower is in Paris’ is a sentence that expresses a thought that refers to the truth. ‘The Eiffel Tower is in Rome’ is a sentence that expresses a thought that refers to the false.

Sense and reference: summary Need to keep track of all the moving pieces: 1) Names 2) Senses (Sinn) 3) Reference (Bedeutung) 4) Sentences 5) Thoughts (Gedanke) 6) Truth and Falsity.

Sense and reference So now senses do four things: 1) Explain the cognitive significance of a name 2) Explain how reference is fixed 3) Explain the public nature of meanings. 4) Explain how words combine to form whole thoughts.

Discussion 1) What do we think of Frege’s puzzles? Can a ‘meaning is reference’ theorist get round them? 2) What exactly are senses? Do you feel like you have a good grasp of them? 3) What do you make of the idea that senses are public? 4) What do you think of Frege’s theory as a whole?