Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T06:38:25.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Science and Vagueness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

A. Cornelius Benjamin*
Affiliation:
University of Chicago

Extract

Many attempts have been made in recent months to throw light on the problem of vagueness. That perfect precision is an ideal not to be attained by any language seems clear. But the obvious fact is that words and sentences in our languages are not so precise as we should like to have them, and we are naturally concerned with finding some sort of device by which vagueness can, in the first place, be detected and measured, and, in the second place, eliminated or reduced to a minimum. I shall not be concerned in what follows with these various special attempts to meet the problem. My task is the somewhat more general one of showing that there are other factors contributing to vagueness, one of which is of particular significance when we leave the realm of ostensively defined symbols and begin to concern ourselves with suppositional symbols, constructs and hypotheses.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 Philosophy of Science, vol. 4, no. 4.

2 Ibid, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 167.

3 Carnap seems to have recognized this factor. Cf. his “Testability and Meaning”, Philosophy of Science, vol. 3, no. 4, section 10.