Thanks to Richard Cartwright, Warren Goldfarb, Richard Heck, Vann McGee, Charles Parsons, Agustín Rayo, Ralph Wedgwood, Timothy Williamson, and an anonymous referee for helpful comments and discussions. Versions of this paper were presented at the University of California, Santa Cruz, MIT, and McGill University. I am grateful to my audiences there for valuable discussions.
Quantification and Realism†
Article first published online: 29 MAY 2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2004.tb00518.x
Additional Information
How to Cite
GLANZBERG, M. (2004), Quantification and Realism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 69: 541–572. doi: 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2004.tb00518.x
- †
Publication History
- Issue published online: 29 MAY 2007
- Article first published online: 29 MAY 2007
- Abstract
- References
- Cited By
This paper argues for the thesis that, roughly put, it is impossible to talk about absolutely everything. To put the thesis more precisely, there is a particular sense in which, as a matter of semantics, quantifiers always range over domains that are in principle extensible, and so cannot count as really being ‘absolutely everything’. The paper presents an argument for this thesis, and considers some important objections to the argument and to the formulation of the thesis. The paper also offers an assessment of just how implausible the thesis really is. It argues that the intuitions against the thesis come down to a few special cases, which can be given special treatment. Finally, the paper considers some metaphysical ideas that might surround the thesis. Particularly, it might be maintained that an important variety of realism is incompatible with the thesis. The paper argues that this is not the case.

1933-1592/asset/bannerforeground.gif?v=1&s=8b5bd4cfb54387f9d9758742c88cd829c8d5ae1e)
1933-1592/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=42464dbce091b6426a3d27f139b423756afccaa9)