On sharp boundaries for vague terms

Synthese 138 (2):233 - 245 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The postulation by the “epistemic” theory of vagueness of a cut-off point between heaps and non-heaps has made it seem incredible. Surely, the critics argue, a vague predicate doesn’t divide the universe into a set and its complement. I argue in response that an objection of a similar kind can be leveled against most theories of vagueness. The only two which avoid it are untenable. The objection is less compelling than it initially seems. However, even when this obstacle is removed, the epistemic theory is not yet vindicated.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,518

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
75 (#282,234)

6 months
11 (#370,490)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ruth Weintraub
Tel Aviv University

Citations of this work

Peer disagreement and counter-examples.Ruth Weintraub - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 177 (7):1773-1790.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Vagueness, truth and logic.Kit Fine - 1975 - Synthese 30 (3-4):265-300.
Wang's paradox.Michael Dummett - 1975 - Synthese 30 (3-4):201--32.
Blindspots.Roy Sorensen - 1990 - Mind 99 (393):137-140.
On the coherence of vague predicates.Crispin Wright - 1975 - Synthese 30 (3-4):325--65.
Inconsistent Languages.Matti Eklund - 2002 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (2):251-275.

View all 22 references / Add more references