Page 50 - Studio International - May 1971

distinguished from linguistic expressions (or can introduce a structural descriptive name of unit relation swanning around independent of its
whatever) in a theory. that constant (of 'the theory' which supports being part of (i.e. theorized about) the context it
One quasi-ontologist, W.V.O. Quine, holds naturalism); generally, one can also say that you is said to be, i.e. Theories of Ethics. This is
out a notion (his) of a unit relation as an have a series of terms which range over the plainly silly. The declaration is a unity; the 'unit
ontological paradigm. (What this relation expression of the 'theory' which supports relation' etc. are in that unity.
amounts to is an answer to the problem how, `naturalism'. And one of those terms designates There is no ontological commitment to a unit
when one wants to consider things (entities) in a (on the basis of (a particular) analyticity) an relation referred to. Neither is there any to any
given order and yet consider 'them' as one.) The expression of the naturalist theory and language individual or congeries of them, or to any
normal operation as with entities, in the sense where that (those) former term(s) is equivalent ontologically provisional set. One is talking
that one is committed to them (ontologically), to what is the structural descriptive name of the about the 'expressions' which `go into' a
entails that this be a non-provisional or riveted latter, and where in place of the former one theory, ordered in some way. One does not
commitment. The point is that one is all right puts an individual constant, and in place of the either have to say that one has an illusion of
here with a provisional ontology, and one's structural descriptive name of the 'expression', `reference'— one has a way of speaking.
ontologically provisional unit relation here (in its structural descriptive name. Hence a term Because the 'expressions' do refer a priori to
respect of Theories of Ethics etc.) is somewhat which can range over the terms of the 'object' or the 'individuals', one is only one remove from
odd. `naturalistic' theory (specifically, the language in the 'individuals'. But one is two removes from
The presupposition is then, that one can which it is formulated) designates on a basis of them when one talks quasi-syntactically of an
have a theory of ontologically provisional sets analyticity the quasi-syntactic individual up for ontologically provisional set. The ontologically
for some first-order theoretical (and language the count, if and only if that term(s) (the one provisional set is one 'individual', the expression
(presumably adequate)) context. One can also ranging over the expressions of the naturalistic/ which refers, a priori, to it is another, and, in the
presuppose a 'semantics', or, rather pseudo- theory/language) is equivalent to the individual end, the 'ordering' on some 'theoretical' basis (of
semantics for this context (theoretical) based on constant which designates, on the same basis, the unit relation) is another. These are all
`reference' (i.e. denotation) with notions of the quasi-syntactic individual (i.e. that former ontological, and non-naturalistic, 'provisions'.
`analyticity' explicitly sorted-out. One can bring term (or terms) is equivalent to the structural One cannot say one's 'object of "reference"' is a
in ontologically provisional set 'designation', and descriptive name of that individual constant, unit relation; the order is sunk in the context
then ontologically provisional set 'designation' etc.). which includes the declaration that the
on an a priori basis. What one then says is that Now, what one would get from this is a sort `expression' is' it. One could, for example,
an 'expression' (given) designates an of 'notation' for Theories of Ethics—when placed think of the ordered pair (unit relation)
ontologically provisional set if and only if that in the appropriate context—and a concatentation obtained by concatenating the quasi-syntactic or
given expression, of theory, is a non-relational of two 'terms' (or more) which range over the nominal 'individual' and the ontologically
predicational constant. And that (given) `object' theory's (theories') expressions (i.e. the provisional set as actually having an
expression denotes a given 'variable' where that theory which allows a naturalistic point of view `individual' as its first-order constituent. But
variable is a sentential function of the whole is observational (`historical')). And also that this is wrong, because when one says that that
theory/language (and it is the only free variable). there are expressions such that one's terms (of unit relation is Theories of Ethics, one is talking
And designation based on 'analyticity' is assured the `metatheory' (art theory)) which range over quasi-syntactically. In actual fact one would be
by a given expression by those conditions being the expressions of the 'naturalistic' theory here talking about expressions of the 'object'
satisfied, and a supplementary one that that designate, on a basis of a-priority, both the theory (language) which designate them a
expression is equivalent to an expresssion in nominal individuals required, and that others priori intead.
whose place one puts the structural descriptive designate, on the same basis, requisite In the context where one has the declaration
name of the abstract (ontologically provisional ontologically provisional sets. And the result of as a part it can be said that one is no more
set). concatenating the former terms is equivalent, a committed than to say that he talks about an
The specific notation used (here) to 'refer', priori, to no sentence not containing the quasi- `ontologically provisional (quasi) individual', an
that is, instantiate a naturalistic point of view in syntactic individual, where one puts for it an `ontologically provisional, ontologically
respect to the ontologically provisional set, is of individual constant. provisional (quasi) set', and an 'ontologically
material consequence. One has to take the Now this, in its place, is not a definition, it is provisional (quasi) ontologically provisional unit
structural descriptive name (one selects) of that merely a framework, or is schematic. This relation of that (those) "ontologically provisional
`set' as just that name of the abstract schematic arrangement will have to designate an individual"' with that ontologically provisional
"'ontologically" "provisional" "set"'. The infinite number of contextual definitions, one (quasi), ontologically provisional set.
designation based on 'analyticity' here is for each specific choice of the 'individual Theories of Ethics can now sustain a sort of
syntactically, not semantically, founded. There- constant' (nominal 'individual') or of the 'epoché'.
fore the ontologically provisional set 'referred ontologically provisional set, which together One area in which one might well need a
to' in the definiendum of the definition of form a unit relation. Given this then, you have to change is in the context where someone wants
`designates on the basis of analyticity' is quasi- allow each instance of the schema as providing a to make a distinction between 'observational'
syntactic. The relation is not therefore found in sort of 'definition' (of use). At least one would, in (that sort of history) and theoretical predicates.
a theory of 'meaning' or 'intension' but rather the final analysis, have a schema which could be One might want Theories of Ethics to be thought
within a theory of 'reference' (that which responsive to (historical) hermeneutical change. of solely in terms of the former. Accordingly
supports the naturalistic point of view). The Supposing that one of the quasi-syntactic one would have to restrict one's theoretical
relation that is in the theory of intension is one individuals is a member of the appropriate discourse on Theories of Ethics—i.e. one's
accessible through the semantical rules which ontologically provisional set—in a historical way, expressions for it. Now introducing Theories of
are used to formulate the theory. not just an a priori way (i.e. is historical); then a Ethics this way satisfies most of the model
Another useful notion is that of a 'designation' concatenation of the nominal individual and the desiderata. The point about the 'thing' as
based on analyticity of 'individuals'. Here also ontologically provisional set is Theories of `ethical' makes it more than just a semantic
one has quasi-syntactic 'individuals', where one Ethics (according to the `definition'). But this is mechanism; the problem is what to make of the
has non-analysed (not necessarily non- a bit odd; it suggests that the subjects of the unit `pieces of paper'. The above is addressed to this
analysable) individual constants and one wants relation in question are, respectively, the quasi- problem with the intention of avoiding the
to affirm that that constant 'designates on a syntactic individual and the ontologically gratuitous celebration of semantic (i.e. Russell's)
basis of analyticity' a nominal individual. One provisional set. This also suggests that one has a paradox. q
232