The Absence of Reference in Hobbes’ Philosophy of Language

Philosophers' Imprint 15 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Against the dominant view in contemporary Hobbes scholarship, I argue that Hobbes’ philosophy of language implicitly denies that linguistic expressions refer to anything. I defend this thesis both textually, in light of what Hobbes actually said, and contextually, in light of Hobbes’ desertion of the vocabulary of suppositio, which was prevalent in semantics leading up to Hobbes. Hobbes explained away the apparent fact of linguistic reference via a reductive analysis: the relation between words and things wholly reduces to a composite of the relation of signification between words and conceptions on the one hand, and the relation of representation between conceptions and things on the other. Intentionality, for Hobbes, accrues to conceptions, not words

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,597

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-08-29

Downloads
115 (#187,430)

6 months
7 (#722,178)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Arash Abizadeh
McGill University

Citations of this work

Hobbes on the function of evaluative speech.Thomas Holden - 2016 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 46 (1):123-144.

Add more citations

References found in this work

On What Matters: Two-Volume Set.Derek Parfit - 2001 - New York: Oxford University Press.
On Denoting.Bertrand Russell - 1905 - Mind 14 (56):479-493.
Naming and necessity.Saul Kripke - 2010 - In Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel (eds.), Arguing about language. New York: Routledge. pp. 431-433.
Naming and Necessity.Saul Kripke - 1980 - Critica 17 (49):69-71.
Meaning.Herbert Paul Grice - 1957 - Philosophical Review 66 (3):377-388.

View all 47 references / Add more references