IS HIGHER-ORDER VAGUENESS A PSEUDO-PROBLEM?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18372/2412-2157.17.9782Abstract
This article proposes a critical analysis and evaluation of discussions concerning validity and importance of arguments pro et contra the possibility of higher-order vagueness.References
Sainsbury R. M. Is There Higher-Order Vagueness? // Philosophical Quarterly 41 (1991) : pp. 167-182
Keefe R. Theories of Vagueness − Cambridge: CUP, 2000. – 233p.
Russell B. Vagueness // The Australian Journal of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (1923): pp. 84-92
Black M. Vagueness: an Exercise in Logical Analysis // Philosophy of Science 4 (1937): pp. 427-55
Raffman D. Demoting Higher-Order Vagueness // Cuts and Clouds: Vagueness, its Nature and its Logic/ Ed. by R. Dietz & S. Moruzzi. – Oxford: OUP, 2010. – pp. 509-522
Wright C. Is Higher Order Vagueness Coherent? // Analysis 52 (1992) : pp. 129-139
Sorensen R. An Argument for the Vagueness of 'Vague' // Analysis 45 (1985): pp. 134 – 137
Hyde D. Why Higher-Order Vagueness is a Pseudo-Problem // Mind 103 (1994): pp. 35-41
Hyde D. Vagueness, Logic and Ontology – Farnham: Ashgate, 2008. – 226p.
Tye M. Why the Vague Need Not Be Higher-Order Vague // Mind 103 (1994): pp. 43-45
