Richard Grandy

Students often study logic on the assumption that it provides a normative guide to reasoning in English. In particular, they are taught to associate connectives like “and” with counterparts in Sentential Logic. English conditionals go over to formulas with → as principal connective. The well-known difficulties that arise from such translation are not emphasized. The result is the conviction that ordinary reasoning is faulty when discordant with the usual representation in standard logic. Psychologists are particularly susceptible to this attitude.

Articles: Smart, "Quine's Philosophy of science"; Harman, "An Introduction to 'Translation and Meaning', Chapter Two of Word and Object"; Stenius, "Beginning with Ordinary Things"; Chomsky, "Quine's Empirical Assumptions"; Hintikka, "Behavioral Criteria of Radical Translation"; Stroud, "Conventionalism and the Indeterminacy of Translation"; Strawson, "Singular Terms and Predication"; Grice, "Vacuous Names"; Geach, "Quine's Syntactical Insights"; Davidson, "On Saying That"; Follesdal, "Quine on Modality"; Sellars, "Some Problems about Belief"; Kaplan, "Quantifying In"; Berry, "Logic with Platonism"; Jensen, "On the Consistency of a Slight (?) Modification in Quine's New Foundations"; Quine, "Replies"; Publications of W. V. Quine

Ockham’s criticisms of earlier theories of universals depend on the fact that they are universals, that the supposed entities are essentially different in kind from particulars. Since modern theories which postulate the existence of senses or propositions as part of a semantic theory make no such claims about those entities it would seem that Ockham’s views are irrelevant to disputes over the value of those semantic theories. That is, for Frege, Church and others the senses or propositions postulated are not claimed to be universal in the traditional medieval sense, but are rather abstract objects which in the theory are treated as particulars exactly on a par with rocks, tables and numbers. However, if one considers Ockham’s positive theory of language it becomes clear that his views are at odds with modern abstract semantic accounts just as much as they were with the traditional universalist semantic accounts.