After some thought, the schema's we assign to words provide the meanings necessary to describe "stuff".
The problem with Davidson's theory of truth is when a word is vague or has multiple meanings. Another issue can be simply shown using the example below.
"I accidentally 93MB of .rar files"
Spotting the issue here demonstrates either changes of language by omission of words, or changing the structuring of language itself.
Comment has been collapsed.
My teacher would give you a cookie along with a reading list of 20 different texts and books, because he's that cool (and cruel at the same time).
Honestly, I had never heard of Davidson before entering this course. And I honestly regret it. :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Nah, 4500 words can't be dished out in a day, deadline's in 26 hours minus sleep. And I'm halfway through my paper anyway, got the rest pretty much mapped out. Just wondering whether people around here have a clue what this question is about ;) (Also I'm doing Linguistics, funnily enough.)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm majoring (doing a BA) in English Studies and Linguistics, 'tis my final year and this term's linguistics module is called "Pragmatics, Meaning and Truth". That's several notches more difficult than what I did last year in Semantics. Never done philosophy so far and I honestly expected something more linguistics-oriented like speech acts, conversation theory and the like, so I'm a bit distraught that my teacher decided to make it a class on Davidson and his antics on truth and meaning.
Comment has been collapsed.
I really hate when classes end up being nothing like I expected from the descriptions. Always end up having a counselor or adviser help me with my schedule so it doesn't happen again. I suppose in your case it would have been unavoidable though.
Comment has been collapsed.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/davidson/#Tru
I wish I could speak from my own knowledge, but I didn't study Davidson in philosophy and I doubt I'll need to take a full logic course.
Comment has been collapsed.
Turns out I'm fussing about so much about compositionality and holism that I don't think if I will even have enough space to include radical interpretation, even though that's probably the 'meatiest' stuff (quoting my teacher there) Davidson has written about.
Comment has been collapsed.
18 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by cowbell
2,894 Comments - Last post 18 minutes ago by MeguminShiro
142 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by Ivannes
1,681 Comments - Last post 47 minutes ago by omegathirteen
1,272 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Vincenzo77
211 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by MeguminShiro
102 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Bin246
843 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by cowbell
92 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by Gxgear
94 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by 666lhdkiller
30,403 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by PyroluxAemilius
393 Comments - Last post 33 minutes ago by zolof
126 Comments - Last post 35 minutes ago by Gigant250
6,898 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by baptism
What does Donald Davidson mean when he says that a theory of truth can do duty to a theory of meaning and what do you think are the principal obstacles to this project?
Discuss. Give me your best shot.
Comment has been collapsed.