Numbers and Propositions: Reply to Melia

Analysis 52 (4):253-256 (1992)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Is the way we use propositions to individuate beliefs and other intentional states analogous to the way we use numbers to measure weights and other physical magnitudes? In an earlier paper [2], I argued that there is an important disanalogy. One and the same weight can be 'related to' different numbers under different units of measurement. Moreover, the choice of a unit of measurement is arbitrary,in the sense that which way we choose doesn't affect the weight attributed to the object. But it makes little sense to say that one and the same belief can be related to different propositions: different proposition means different belief. So there is no analogous arbitrary choice.

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-09-11

Downloads
683 (#23,283)

6 months
88 (#47,472)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tim Crane
Central European University

Citations of this work

Benacerraf’s revenge.Ben Caplan & Chris Tillman - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 166 (S1):111-129.
Chalmers and Semantics.Panu Raatikainen - 2021 - Theoria 87 (5):1193-1221.
Towards a Fictionalist Philosophy of Mathematics.Robert Knowles - 2015 - Dissertation, University of Manchester

Add more citations

References found in this work

The thought: A logical inquiry.Gottlob Frege - 1956 - Mind 65 (259):289-311.

Add more references