Abstract

In this paper I question Penelas' claim that the debate on the model-theoretic argument -proposed by Putnam and rejected by causal theorists such as Devitt- has reached the stage of a methodological impasse: the semantic issue cannot be settled until a wider issue concerning the methodology of the philosophical research is itself settled. My thesis is that both Putnam and Devitt has known the debate to be not merely semantic but mainly methodological ali along. Moreover, I try to make the further point that the argumentative strategy chosen by Putnam has a circularity problem.