Horwich

Is truth objective or relative? What exists independently of our minds? This book is about these two questions. The essays in its pages variously defend and critique answers to each, grapple over the proper methodology for addressing them, and wonder whether either question is worth pursuing. In so doing, they carry on a long and esteemed tradition - for our two questions are among the oldest of philosophical issues, and have vexed almost every major philosopher, from Plato, to Kant to Wittgenstein. Fifteen eminent contributors bring fresh perspectives, renewed energy and original answers to debates which have been the focus of a tremendous amount of interest in the last three decades both within philosophy and the culture at large.

Paul Horwich presents a bold new interpretation of Wittgenstein's later work. He argues that it is Wittgenstein's radically anti-theoretical metaphilosophy - and not his identification of the meaning of a word with its use - that underpins his discussions of specific issues concerning language, the mind, mathematics, knowledge, art, and religion.

Philosophical thinking about truth has revolved around two key questions. First, what is the nature of truth? Second, why should we value it? It has proven difficult to answer both questions at once. Some theories analyse truth in terms of goodness. Truth is a specific kind of goodness for beliefs. They have an easy explanation of truth's value, but they obscure the connection between truth and how things are. What does belief have to do with whether it's true that there is water on Mars? Other theories treat truth as a descriptive feature: a claim is true when things are as it says they are. Such theories face a version of G. E. Moore's open question problem. How could a claim's purely descriptive features make it good or right to believe? The problem of truth's value is the problem of reconciling a good theory of what truth is with a good theory of why truth is valuable. This is the first monograph focused on solving it for theories that construe truth in the purely descriptive way. Drawing on minimal assumptions about truth's nature, it proposes a virtue-theoretic understanding of truth's value. The attitude of valuing truth is a morally laudable character trait. That is, it's a virtue. But its virtuousness doesn't stem from the nature of truth. It arises because, in manifesting the trait, we promote the overall good. A good society needs to members who value truth over falsehood and ignorance, for themselves and for others.

This book aims to provide a solution to the semantic paradoxes. It argues for a unified solution to the paradoxes generated by our concepts of denotation, predicate extension, and truth. The solution makes two main claims. The first is that our semantic expressions 'denotes', 'extension' and 'true' are context-sensitive. The second, inspired by a brief, tantalizing remark of Gödel's, is that these expressions are significant everywhere except for certain singularities, in analogy with division by zero. A formal theory of singularities is presented and applied to a wide variety of versions of the definability paradoxes, Russell's paradox, and the Liar paradox. Keith Simmons argues that the singularity theory satisfies the following desiderata: it recognizes that the proper setting of the semantic paradoxes is natural language, not regimented formal languages; it minimizes any revision to our semantic concepts; it respects as far as possible Tarski's intuition that natural languages are universal; it responds adequately to the threat of revenge paradoxes; and it preserves classical logic and semantics. Simmons draws out the consequences of the singularity theory for deflationary views of our semantic concepts, and concludes that if we accept the singularity theory, we must reject deflationism.