Vll1

PREFACE
what strikes us most prominently is tha! we can use thc notion 01 truth in order
to endorse or to deny a statement or ser of statemcnts without being required
actualIy to repeat the statements; it is enough that we be ahle to nalTle the
statements. Thus, if 1 say
Every ex cathedra pronouncement 01' the Pope is true.
1 have endorsed a1l of the ex cathedra pronouncemenrs of (he Pope. J havc, in a
sense, asserted rhe conjunction of al1 the Pope's ex cathedra pronouncements.
Wlthout employing thc noton of tnJth, 1 could not do this, for 1 surely cannor
repear a11 of the Pope's pronouncemcnts. Using the norion of truth in the ordnary
way, we are able, lO etlect, ro pmduce (he conjuncrion or the disjuncton of ao
arbltrary namcd set of sentences. Enabling us to do this is essental ro the
nonphJ!osophical uscfulness of the ordinary notion of truth, aod if our scentifi-
cally reconstructcd notion of truth is to continue to perform the useful work that
OUT .ordmary notion performs, then it, too, must enable us in effeet to form
conJunctlOns and dis junctions of named sets 01' sentenees. require-
ment by no means umquely determines our new theory of truth, it reIls us a great
de a) about what rhe new theory ought to look lile.
Here 1 would like to develop a specific proposal for a way of thinking about
trurh WhlCh wrll 1 hope h 1 .
. '.' preserve tose oglcal 1'eatures which make our present
notlOn of rruth so slllgularly usef l .
.' . u as a practJcal means for conveying information
yet aVOld rhe contradictions th t ak '
. . a m e our present norion of rruth so singularly
unsultable as a vehlcle for th . 1 .
, , eoretlca undersrandlOg. The specific proposal is ro
treat true as a vague term 1 d '.
. o not SUppose that lO ordlllary usage 'true' is
slmply a vague tem like orher vague terrns 'True'" d' ' . 1
many of the char t ", " lP. or lllary usage, dlSp ays
t
JI' ac ensrlCS typlcal ofvague terms, but it displays other characteris-
les a ltS Own notably the .
I propenslty to paradox. The propasal here is that we
:? a:e OUr OrdlOary usage of 'true' by a sciemificaJly respectable usage that treats
rue as a vague predicate Jike other vague predicates This reforrncd
usage o true' wIIl, 1 shall cla1m be s' t" 'f' bo .' " '
understandng f rh .' a 1S actor)' eh as a busls tnr u thcoretical
o e connecrlOn between la d h
for accomplishing th nguage an t e world and as a means
our . e practIca], nonphilosophicaJ work now abJy performed by
na] ve usage.
We shall develop rule f' f
and show iliat thcse 1 s o bllllerence goveming the reformed usage of 'true'
we employed th ru es e us to employ the refoffilCd usage in jusr the ways
e n3Jve usage to sImular ,'. . .
sets of sentences Th d '. e conJunctlOn and dlsJunction of narncd
. e para oxes anse Jt wIll be d f .
of these rules of infere' ' argue , rom the llllsapplication
Th l' . nce 10 natural bur fallacious ways
e u tlmate alm of rhis ende . .
but r do not attempt anythin av
o
b
r
IS to develop a theory of truth for Engbsh,
1
g so am ItlOUS here He 1 k' .
anguages doing work th t . r' . re wor entlfely Wlth formal
for English. The plan' t
a
d
lS
pre to the development of a theory of truth
IS o eVlse techmques th t bl
a ena e us to develop a theory
PREFACE IX
of trurh for a formal Janguage :i within ,L itself, then to see Ir these same
techl1lques will not enable us ro develop a theory of trurh for Engllsh wlthm
English itself We are employing WJttgenstein's method ol' language games,
practicing our phlosophlcal moves in a slmplified settlng before trying rhem out
on English.
The big phtlosophical cause this book aims uJtimately to promote IS the unity
01 SClence. The dominant opinion has JI thar the bar antnomy proves that it is
ncver posslbJc ro clevclop a successful theory of truth for a language wlthlO the
language Itself; instead, one must clcveJop the theory of truth for a language :i
withlll a rnctalanguage that is richer than y; in expressivc power. ThJS imples
Ihat, sincc we have no rnetalanguage richer than English, we cannot develop a
theory 01" truth for English, or for any naturallanguage. We can develop theories
of tnHh for various fragJTIcnts of a natural language; fur exampJe wc can develop
a theory (Jf truth for the fragrIlent of lhe language thar we use when we talk aboul
chernistry. But we cannot extend rhe theory ro encompass Ihe language wc use
when we talk about language. We can develop a unified zooJogy that takes
accounl of aJI (he anirnals, and a unificd astronorny that takes account ol' all the
lhe heavenly bodics. But we cannot, accordlOg to the dominant VICW, develop a
unlfied linguisics Ihat takes accoun( of al! natural languages; we cannot even
dcvelop a linguisric Iheory rhar takes account of he entlrety of any particular
natural language. UnlIkc natural phenomena, human languages lie mysteriously
beyond the reach of scientific inqUlry.
By provicling an altemative to rhe dominant vew, this work airns to encourage
the prospects far a unified science rhat trears nature and language as parts of a
united whole. 1 hope to prom ate the outlaok that human language lS a product of
human culture and human culture is part of the natural order, not inherently elther
more mysterious or less intelhgible rhan the planetary orbltS
This hook started out, several revisions ago. as my doctoral dissertatJOn for
the Logic and Methodology of SClence program ar rhe University of CalIfornia
at Bcrkclcy. Bcrkeley is nor only a fun place to vlsit, it is an excellent place to
go to graduate sehool, and 1 owe a great de al to the faculty there and to my felJow
students.
My dlsserta(ion adviser was Charles Chihara, who spent a great deal of time
and effort helping me with this project. His lOsights have proven invaluable;
wilhout his help, this book could nor ha ve been wntten.
Jack SjJver has given me a tremendous amount of help. He was very generous
with his time and ideas, and his extraordlllary combinaton of mathematical and
phiJosophlcal ablllries have made his assistance nvaluable
Let me express my thanks to three orher members of rhe faculty, Emest
Adams, George Myro, and Bruce Vermazen, and to two of my fellow students,
Shaughan Lavine and Sreven YabJo.
Since Jeaving BerkeJey, 1 have been at rhe Unversty af Arizona. 1 used a