Repository | Journal | Volume | Articles

(1995) Synthese 105 (1).
InWord and Object W. V. Quine argues that there is no uniquely correct way to assign referents to the terms of a language; any claim about the reference of a term is implicitly relative to a manual of translation. To Rudolf Carnap this must have seemed familiar. BeforeWord and Object was written Carnap had been saying the same thing inMeaning and Necessity: under the assumption of the method of the name-relation, any claim about the reference of a term is implicitly relative to what Carnap calls a “conception of the name-relation.” Yet Carnap is often taken to be a victim of Quine's relativistic notion of reference. Drawing on Carnap's discussion of the name-relation inMeaning and Necessity, it is argued that Carnap's and Quine's views on reference are not so far apart as is usually perceived.
Publication details
DOI: 10.1007/BF01064105
Full citation:
Berge, W. H. (1995). Carnap and translational indeterminacy. Synthese 105 (1), pp. 115-121.
This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.