Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The Fregean view that vagueness is negligent under-defini... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The Fregean view that vagueness is negligent under-definition is mistaken.

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's family resemblance concepts show that terms like 'game' function successfully without sharp boundaries, demonstrating non-negligent vagueness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a concept performs its classificatory work across all clear cases without failure, the absence of sharp boundaries reflects semantic design, not defect.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Frege's negligence charge presupposes that precision is always the communicative ideal, but Austin's ordinary language philosophy shows context-sensitivity often outperforms precision.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Williamson's epistemic theory establishes that vague predicates have sharp extensions unknowable to us, meaning vagueness is a feature of cognition, not definition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If vagueness tracks genuine cognitive limitations rather than authorial carelessness, the negligence framing misidentifies the phenomenon's source entirely.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Supervaluationists argue that indecision about meaning can be intentional rather than negligent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Speakers rationally defer full semantic commitment in order to refine meanings as new information and interests arise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A practice that is both intentional and functional cannot be correctly characterized as negligent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Related

    A practice that is both intentional and functional cannot be correctly character...Frege's negligence charge presupposes that precision is always the communicative...If a concept performs its classificatory work across all clear cases without fai...If vagueness tracks genuine cognitive limitations rather than authorial careless...
    +4 moreShow less
    Speakers rationally defer full semantic commitment in order to refine meanings a...Supervaluationists argue that indecision about meaning can be intentional rather...Williamson's epistemic theory establishes that vague predicates have sharp exten...Wittgenstein's family resemblance concepts show that terms like 'game' function ...

    Similar

    Evaluative vagueness is a natural and widely accepted phenomenon84%Supervaluationism is a respected theory of vagueness because indecisio...84%The only intelligible account of vagueness locates vagueness in though...82%If vagueness is entirely a feature of thought and language, then the w...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: vagueness
    View source passageHide passage
    The expressivist is poised to explain how supervaluationism developed into the most respected theory of vagueness. Frege portrayed vagueness as negligent under-definition: One haphazardly introduces a necessary condition here, a sufficient condition there, but fails to supply a condition that is both necessary and sufficient. Supervaluationists counter that indecision can be both intentional and functional. Instead of committing ourselves prematurely, we fill in meanings as we go along in light
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit