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.
236 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by ngoclong19
8 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by thenevernow
445 Comments - Last post 33 minutes ago by thenevernow
5 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by CR7CAMIAO
1,742 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by sfkng
20 Comments - Last post 10 hours ago by anditsung
9 Comments - Last post 12 hours ago by Foxhack
141 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by NoYeti
78 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by BlackbeardXIII
763 Comments - Last post 30 minutes ago by Bum8ara5h
4 Comments - Last post 52 minutes ago by vlbastos
129 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by NoYeti
168 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by CptWest
225 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by ngoclong19
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.