What do you think?
Rate this book
The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays
This expanded edition of The Ways of Paradox includes papers that are among Professor W. V. Quine’s most important and influential, such as “Truth by Convention,” “Carnap and Logical Truth,” “On Carnap’s Views on Ontology,” “The Scope and Language of Science,” and “Posits and Reality.” Many of these essays deal with unresolved issues of central interest to philosophers today. About half of them are addressed to “a wider public than philosophers.” The remainder are somewhat more professional and technical. This new edition of The Ways of Paradox contains eight essays that appeared after publication of the first edition, and it retains the seminal essays that must be read by anyone who seeks to master Quine’s philosophy.
Quine has been characterized, in The New York Review of Books , as “the most distinguished American recruit to logical empiricism, probably the contemporary American philosopher most admired in the profession, and an original philosophical thinker of the first rank.” His “philosophical innovations add up to a coherent theory of knowledge which he has for the most part constructed single-handed.” In The Ways of Paradox new generations of readers will gain access to this philosophy.
Quine has been characterized, in The New York Review of Books , as “the most distinguished American recruit to logical empiricism, probably the contemporary American philosopher most admired in the profession, and an original philosophical thinker of the first rank.” His “philosophical innovations add up to a coherent theory of knowledge which he has for the most part constructed single-handed.” In The Ways of Paradox new generations of readers will gain access to this philosophy.
350 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1966
9 people are currently reading
397 people want to read
About the author
Willard Van Orman Quine
105 books220 followers"Willard Van Orman Quine (June 25, 1908 Akron, Ohio – December 25, 2000) (known to intimates as "Van"), was an American analytic philosopher and logician. From 1930 until his death 70 years later, Quine was affiliated in some way with Harvard University, first as a student, then as a professor of philosophy and a teacher of mathematics, and finally as an emeritus elder statesman who published or revised seven books in retirement. He filled the Edgar Pierce Chair of Philosophy at Harvard, 1956-78. Quine falls squarely into the analytic philosophy tradition while also being the main proponent of the view that philosophy is not conceptual analysis. His major writings include "Two Dogmas of Empiricism", which attacked the distinction between analytic and synthetic propositions and advocated a form of semantic holism, and Word and Object which further developed these positions and introduced the notorious indeterminacy of translation thesis." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willard_...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
August 1, 2010
Essays on logic by Quine, including "Truth by Convention," which I'd read for school. The observations on logical syntax and on paradoxes were thought-provoking, but it was hard to get anything out of some of the essays because of two beliefs of Quine's that seem absurd to me: that there are no minds and that there's no qualitative difference between mathematics and the natural sciences.
August 30, 2016
If the only weights I lift at the gym are light and easy, I stay flexible -- but I don't get any stronger. So I try to balance being smooth and quick on a certain machine with the challenge of more weight.
I read a lot of lightweight books because they're fun and easy and relaxing (and they're a whole lot better than TV or movies), but just like having dessert for every meal is ultimately unsatisfying, every once in a while I try to push myself. Or, as I tell myself while struggling through a particularly boring or difficult book, it's weight-lifting for the mind.
"The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays"? Just trying to get the bar to twitch off the rack was a struggle in lot of these Willard Van Orman Quine pieces, which were mercifully short but sometimes brutally complex. Quine might have been the most important American philosopher of the 20th century, and the grand themes of his work (which interest me more than the gritty details) focused on how we are at the mercy of language and that our connection to whatever reality might be is more tenuous than we imagine. (Well, at least that's what I think, but I can't claim any real expertise here.)
But Quine was interested in more than language. He was fascinated with logic, its relation to mathematics, set theory, and how mathematics worked as a language -- and many of the essays in this book drill down to the fundamental connections between logic, logical and mathematical notation, and the nature of paradox.
The early essays in the book are the most approachable, but by book's end Quine was using terminology that any philosophy grad student would undoubtedly find familiar ("metalinguistic quantifiers," "disquotation," and "protosyntax" were some of my favorites) but a more casual reader would simply drown in.
Did I enjoy this book? Sometimes, but just a hard session in the gym doesn't really qualify as fun, "enjoyment" wasn't necessarily the goal. Did I learn something? Yes, if only that things don't get simpler the more you examine them. Would I recommend it? It depends on just how hard you want to work, and if you're comfortable with a writing style that assumes you know what "reification" and "ontological" mean and builds from there.
But I have to say I definitely worked some mental muscles that had been relaxing on my cranial couch for a very long time -- and though I may not actually be mentally stronger, I feel like I should be. And doesn't that count for something?
I read a lot of lightweight books because they're fun and easy and relaxing (and they're a whole lot better than TV or movies), but just like having dessert for every meal is ultimately unsatisfying, every once in a while I try to push myself. Or, as I tell myself while struggling through a particularly boring or difficult book, it's weight-lifting for the mind.
"The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays"? Just trying to get the bar to twitch off the rack was a struggle in lot of these Willard Van Orman Quine pieces, which were mercifully short but sometimes brutally complex. Quine might have been the most important American philosopher of the 20th century, and the grand themes of his work (which interest me more than the gritty details) focused on how we are at the mercy of language and that our connection to whatever reality might be is more tenuous than we imagine. (Well, at least that's what I think, but I can't claim any real expertise here.)
But Quine was interested in more than language. He was fascinated with logic, its relation to mathematics, set theory, and how mathematics worked as a language -- and many of the essays in this book drill down to the fundamental connections between logic, logical and mathematical notation, and the nature of paradox.
The early essays in the book are the most approachable, but by book's end Quine was using terminology that any philosophy grad student would undoubtedly find familiar ("metalinguistic quantifiers," "disquotation," and "protosyntax" were some of my favorites) but a more casual reader would simply drown in.
Did I enjoy this book? Sometimes, but just a hard session in the gym doesn't really qualify as fun, "enjoyment" wasn't necessarily the goal. Did I learn something? Yes, if only that things don't get simpler the more you examine them. Would I recommend it? It depends on just how hard you want to work, and if you're comfortable with a writing style that assumes you know what "reification" and "ontological" mean and builds from there.
But I have to say I definitely worked some mental muscles that had been relaxing on my cranial couch for a very long time -- and though I may not actually be mentally stronger, I feel like I should be. And doesn't that count for something?
March 8, 2007
A collection of W.V. Quine's most influential philosophical papers. Who's W.V. Quine, you ask? Well much like, say, Caryl Churchill or Okkervil River, he's an essential figure in his art/field who's never gotten enough props from the popular masses. (Screw you, pop. masses, for your shitty tastes! Recognize your critical thinkers, yo!)
March 8, 2017
I`ve read this book long ago, and use it in my current work from time to time.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews