No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Professor Quine, Pegasus, and Dr. Cartwright
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 March 2022
Extract
In a recent issue of this journal Dr. Cartwright attempted to defend some views of Professor Quine's by arguing that my criticism [5] of these views was based on “serious misunderstandings of Quine,” “confusions,” and “mistakes.” I shall here attempt to show that in spite of Dr. Cartwright's vigorous characterizations my criticism of Quine was well founded and neither confused nor mistaken. First, I shall briefly discuss the notion of an ideal language.
- Type
- Discussion
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1957, The Williams & Wilkins Company
Footnotes
∗
A reply to [4].
References
1. Bergmann, Gustav, Metaphysics of Logical Positivism, Longmans Green, New York, 1955.Google Scholar
2. Bergmann, Gustav, “Intentionality,” in Semantica, (Archivio di Filosofia, 1955), pp. 176–206.Google Scholar
3. Bergmann, Gustav, “Particularity and the New Nominalism,” Methodos, 1954, pp. 131–147.Google Scholar
4. Cartwright, Richard L., “Comments on Dr. Hochberg's Paper,” Philosophy of Science, vol. 23, no. 3, July, 1956, pp. 260–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Hochbero, Herbert, “The Ontological Operator,” Philosophy of Science, vol. 23, no. 3, July, 1956, pp. 250–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Hochbero, Herbert, “On Pegasizing,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, to appear.Google Scholar
7. Russell, Bertrand and Whitehead, Alfred N., Principia Mathematica, second edition, vol. 1, Cambridge, 1950.Google Scholar
8. Russell, Bertrand, “The Philosophy of Logical Atomism,” Monist, vol. xxviii, no. 4, October, 1918, pp. 495–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Russell, Bertrand, “The Philosophy of Logical Atomism,” Monist, vol. xxix, nos. 1, 2, 3, 1919, pp. 32–68, 190–222, 345–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Russell, Bertrand, Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy, eighth impression, London, 1953.Google Scholar