[hist-analytic] The Two Color Problem, Putnam, and the Synthetic A Priori

Bruce Aune aune at philos.umass.edu
Wed Nov 4 14:48:45 EST 2009


I am surprised by Roger's objection.  There is nothing wrong with my  
definition of "x the determinate color of x at t = A." Roger says I  
first have to give a definition for "x has A at t," but this doesn't  
need defining; it just means that the individual x has the property A  
at a time t.  There are certainly problems about the notion of a  
property (I taken them up in my chapter 4), but the idea of a thing  
having a property at a time is so basic to philosophy that even  
nominalists need to have a way of making sense of it.  Roger's other  
objection--that prior to giving the definition I gave we need to know  
(P) that whenever x has A at t and B at t, A = B--overlooks the fact  
that P does not follow from my definition, which is merely a  
terminological convenience.  (P) is really a consequence of the  
principle DD.  That principle has the status of a meaning postulate  
for "determinate color."  I take up the notion of a meaning postulate  
in chapter 3.  When I discuss the color example in chapter 2 I say  
that I will be making sense of analyticity in the chapter to come.

Bruce




More information about the hist-analytic mailing list