Shallow Analysis and the Slingshot Argument

dc.contributor.authorBaumgartner, Michael
dc.date.accessioned2011-05-23T10:01:21Zdeu
dc.date.available2011-05-23T10:01:21Zdeu
dc.date.issued2010deu
dc.description.abstractAccording to the standard opinions in the literature, blocking the unacceptable consequences of the notorious slingshot argument requires imposing constraints on the metaphysics of facts or on theories of definite descriptions (or class abstracts). This paper argues that both of these well-known strategies to rebut the slingshot overshoot the mark. The slingshot, first and foremost, raises the question as to the adequate logical formalization of statements about facts, i.e. of factual contexts. It will be shown that a rigorous application of Quine’s maxim of shallow analysis to formalizations of factual contexts paves the way for an account of formalizing such contexts which blocks the slingshot without ramifications for theories of facts or definite descriptions.eng
dc.description.versionpublished
dc.identifier.citationPubl. in: Journal of Philosophical Logic, 39 (2010), 5, pp. 531-556deu
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10992-010-9131-9
dc.identifier.urihttp://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/13370
dc.language.isoengdeu
dc.legacy.dateIssued2011-05-23deu
dc.rightsterms-of-usedeu
dc.rights.urihttps://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/deu
dc.subjectSlingshot argumentdeu
dc.subjectLogical formalizationdeu
dc.subjectShallow analysisdeu
dc.subjectFactual contextsdeu
dc.subject.ddc100deu
dc.titleShallow Analysis and the Slingshot Argumenteng
dc.typeJOURNAL_ARTICLEdeu
dspace.entity.typePublication
kops.citation.bibtex
@article{Baumgartner2010Shall-13370,
  year={2010},
  doi={10.1007/s10992-010-9131-9},
  title={Shallow Analysis and the Slingshot Argument},
  number={5},
  volume={39},
  journal={Journal of Philosophical Logic},
  pages={531--556},
  author={Baumgartner, Michael}
}
kops.citation.iso690BAUMGARTNER, Michael, 2010. Shallow Analysis and the Slingshot Argument. In: Journal of Philosophical Logic. 2010, 39(5), pp. 531-556. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s10992-010-9131-9deu
kops.citation.iso690BAUMGARTNER, Michael, 2010. Shallow Analysis and the Slingshot Argument. In: Journal of Philosophical Logic. 2010, 39(5), pp. 531-556. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s10992-010-9131-9eng
kops.citation.rdf
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/13370">
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dc:contributor>Baumgartner, Michael</dc:contributor>
    <dc:creator>Baumgartner, Michael</dc:creator>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-05-23T10:01:21Z</dcterms:available>
    <dcterms:bibliographicCitation>Publ. in: Journal of Philosophical Logic, 39 (2010), 5, pp. 531-556</dcterms:bibliographicCitation>
    <dcterms:title>Shallow Analysis and the Slingshot Argument</dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">According to the standard opinions in the literature, blocking the unacceptable consequences of the notorious slingshot argument requires imposing constraints on the metaphysics of facts or on theories of definite descriptions (or class abstracts). This paper argues that both of these well-known strategies to rebut the slingshot overshoot the mark. The slingshot, first and foremost, raises the question as to the adequate logical formalization of statements about facts, i.e. of factual contexts. It will be shown that a rigorous application of Quine’s maxim of shallow analysis to formalizations of factual contexts paves the way for an account of formalizing such contexts which blocks the slingshot without ramifications for theories of facts or definite descriptions.</dcterms:abstract>
    <dcterms:issued>2010</dcterms:issued>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/13370"/>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2011-05-23T10:01:21Z</dc:date>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/>
    <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
kops.flag.knbibliographytrue
kops.identifier.nbnurn:nbn:de:bsz:352-133707deu
kops.sourcefieldJournal of Philosophical Logic. 2010, <b>39</b>(5), pp. 531-556. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s10992-010-9131-9deu
kops.sourcefield.plainJournal of Philosophical Logic. 2010, 39(5), pp. 531-556. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s10992-010-9131-9deu
kops.sourcefield.plainJournal of Philosophical Logic. 2010, 39(5), pp. 531-556. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s10992-010-9131-9eng
kops.submitter.emailmichael.baumgartner@uni-konstanz.dedeu
relation.isAuthorOfPublication5b3ad291-3311-4421-a2e2-6962cb01a552
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery5b3ad291-3311-4421-a2e2-6962cb01a552
source.bibliographicInfo.fromPage531
source.bibliographicInfo.issue5
source.bibliographicInfo.toPage556
source.bibliographicInfo.volume39
source.periodicalTitleJournal of Philosophical Logic

Dateien

Lizenzbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
Name:
license.txt
Größe:
1.92 KB
Format:
Plain Text
Beschreibung:
license.txt
license.txtGröße: 1.92 KBDownloads: 0