I present a formally explicit statement of Church's celebrated argument against Carnap's analysis of belief and defend it against well-known objections by W.V.O. Quine, R.M. Martin, and Michael Dummett.

The author discusses the argument between alan r white and gilbert ryle concerning whether or not one can talk of the use of a sentence. His contention is that they did not notice that there are two types of 'what for' questions, And therefore white's argument against ryle does not hold. (staff).