Does Semantic Relationism Solve Frege's Puzzle?

Journal of Philosophical Logic 46 (1):97-118 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In a series of recent works, Kit Fine, 605–631, 2003, 2007) has sketched a novel solution to Frege’s puzzle. Radically departing from previous solutions, Fine argues that Frege’s puzzle forces us to reject compositionality. In this paper we first provide an explicit formalization of the relational semantics for first-order logic suggested, but only briefly sketched, by Fine. We then show why the relational semantics alone is technically inadequate, forcing Fine to enrich the syntax with a coordination schema. Given this enrichment, we argue, that that the semantics is compositional. We then examine the deep consequences of this result for Fine’s proposed solution to Frege’s puzzle. We argue that Fine has mis-diagnosed his own solution–his attempted solution does not deny compositionality. The correct characterization of Fine’s solution fits him more comfortably among familiar solutions to the puzzle.

Similar books and articles

In Defense of Formal Relationism.Richard G. Heck - 2014 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 3 (3):243-250.
Semantic relationism, belief reports and contradiction.Paolo Bonardi - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 166 (2):273-284.
The Semantic Relationistic Approach to Generalized Fregean Puzzles.M. A. Minghui - 2012 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 7 (3):404-421.
A Closer Look at Manifest Consequence.Max Weiss - 2014 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (2-3):471-498.
Can Frege pose Frege's puzzle?Stavroula Glezakos - 2009 - In Joseph Almog & Paolo Leonardi (eds.), The Philosophy of David Kaplan. Oxford University Press. pp. 202.
A pragmatic solution to Ostertag’s puzzle.Philip Atkins - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 163 (2):359-365.
Searle on proper names.Michael McKinsey - 1971 - Philosophical Review 80 (2):220-229.
Frege’s Distinction Between Sense and Reference.Gideon Makin - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (2):147-163.
Recurrence.Nathan Salmon - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 159 (3):407-441.
Troubles with Direct Reference.Pierre Baumann - 2012 - Fenomenologia. Diálogos Possíveis Campinas: Alínea/Goiânia: Editora da Puc Goiás 93:33-51.
Frege puzzles?Joseph Almog - 2008 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (6):549 - 574.
A solution to Frege's puzzle.George Bealer - 1993 - Philosophical Perspectives 7:17-60.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-01-07

Downloads
958 (#13,082)

6 months
110 (#29,815)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Bryan Pickel
University of Glasgow
Brian Rabern
University of Edinburgh

Citations of this work

The Antinomy of the Variable: A Tarskian Resolution.Bryan Pickel & Brian Rabern - 2016 - Journal of Philosophy 113 (3):137-170.
Relational approaches to Frege's puzzle.Aidan Gray - 2017 - Philosophy Compass 12 (10):e12429.
Frege’s puzzle is about identity after all.Elmar Unnsteinsson - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 99 (3):628-643.
Cognitive Significance.Aidan Gray - 2021 - In Stephen Biggs & Heimir Geirsson (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Linguistic Reference. New York, NY, USA:
Frege’s Puzzle and Semantic Relationism.Surajit Barua - 2019 - Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research 36 (1):197-210.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Meaning and Necessity: A Study in Semantics and Modal Logic.Rudolf Carnap - 1947 - Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.
Frege’s Puzzle (2nd edition).Nathan U. Salmon - 1986 - Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview Publishing Company.
Meaning and Necessity: A Study in Semantics and Modal Logic.Rudolf Carnap - 1947 - Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.
Uber Sinn und Bedeutung.Gottlob Frege - 1892 - Zeitschrift für Philosophie Und Philosophische Kritik 100 (1):25-50.
A puzzle about belief.Saul A. Kripke - 1979 - In A. Margalit (ed.), Meaning and Use. Reidel. pp. 239--83.

View all 33 references / Add more references