초록

용어보기논문에서 용어와 풀이말을 자동 추출한 결과로, 시범 서비스 중입니다. AI-Helper

Abstract ▼ AI-Helper

In this paper, I attempted to show that 'Sorensen's Sorites' is not a successful argument for the vagueness of 'vague'. There are a lot of debates about it, but the central issue is whether Sorensen's Sorites is just small sorites; whether the vagueness certified by Sorensen's Sorites is just the va...

In this paper, I attempted to show that 'Sorensen's Sorites' is not a successful argument for the vagueness of 'vague'. There are a lot of debates about it, but the central issue is whether Sorensen's Sorites is just small sorites; whether the vagueness certified by Sorensen's Sorites is just the vagueness of 'small'. Deas and Hull thought it was and rejected Sorensen's proof based on his sorites. But their rejection was rebutted by Varzi. The basis of his argument is that the subject of Sorensen's sentences - 'n-small' is vague - is not used but mentioned. I tried to reply on behalf of Deas and Hull and to show that the predicate 'vague' has not any effect on determining the truth value of "'n-small' is vague." Then it can be removed from the sentence. Of course I approve 'vague' is a homological term. What I do not agree with is only Sorensen's argument.

주제어