[hist-analytic] Peter Vranas:Re: Carnap and Grice and Absolutism
baynesrb at yahoo.com
Mon Mar 1 13:37:38 EST 2010
Sorry for my nonparticipation in this interest discussion.
I'm approaching completion of my work on the book and then
I can return.
However, I thought something worth mentioning. A young
philosopher out of U. of Wis. anticipated a point I was
making in connection with R. M. Hare on deontic logic.
I went to look at his main paper and it is so involved
I had no time to spend a couple of weeks looking at it
JUSST THEN. But it is a very good paper.
It's by Peter Vranas. the URL is:
The title is:
NEW FOUNDATIONS FOR IMPERATIVE LOGIC II:
PURE IMPERATIVE INFERENCE*
Anyway, he's a gifted philospher whose work deserves
--- On Mon, 3/1/10, Roger Bishop Jones <rbj at rbjones.com> wrote:
> From: Roger Bishop Jones <rbj at rbjones.com>
> Subject: Re: Carnap and Grice and Absolutism
> To: hist-analytic at simplelists.co.uk
> Date: Monday, March 1, 2010, 12:04 PM
> Here's an observation I forgot to
> make earlier:
> On Friday 26 Feb 2010 00:48, Jlsperanza at aol.com
> >I enjoyed your opinion that Carnap would have joined in
> >game of 'deontics'.
> I should mention that the rules I talked about in this
> connection were rules giving the meanings of moral terms,
> (these would be L-rules, as well as rules to capture any
> moral principles (M-rules?) which are not then analytic).
> The effect of this is that if Carnap did accept this
> application of his scientific method outside its intended
> sphere of operation, he would be able to engage in moral
> reasoning as a utilitarian (for example) as well as
> indulging in deontics.
> Strictly speaking, according to his delimitation of scope
> would only be able to affirm the L-truths thus arising, and
> the M-truths (supposing we call them that) he would have to
> confine himself to the observation that they are M-truths
> the relevant languages. (He has to step up into the
> metalanguage). The situation parallels that in the
> physicalistic language.
> However, I confess that this is highly speculative.
> I am extrapolating his methods into application areas he
> not entertain, and imagining that he could be persuaded
> this is a reasonable application of his analytic methods.
> I would be surprised if he could not have been persuaded
> that there is more logic in moral discourse than is
> consistent with its interpretation as no more than
> expressions of emotion.
More information about the hist-analytic