Abstract
Two important Fregean ideas appear to conflict. The first is that a thought can be decomposed in different ways, and the second is that a thought is constituted by the senses of its constituents. This paper is a defense of Dummett’s suggestion of a way to reconcile between those two theses through the claim that although the same thought can be structured in different ways by different sentences; one of the structures is privileged. My defense focuses on the charge raised by Levine (Ratio (new series), XIX, 43–63, 2006) that Dummett’s claim about the privileged structure of a thought conflicts with the Slingshot argument. I show that this charge is misconceived; a careful examination of the Slingshot argument’s methodology reveals that Dummett’s claim does not conflict with it.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 161-168 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | Acta Analytica |
Volume | 32 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 1 Jun 2017 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Philosophy