This book was a fantastic exposition of the Dummett's semantic theory, as well as a rather succinct critique of the truth-conditional theories of meaning that are still rather popular. Dummett explains, in detail, his reasons for rejecting the universal validity of the law of excluded middle; and by entailment, his rejection of classical logic in favor of his brand of intuitionistic logic. The last two chapters are interesting looks at Dummett's view on objective reality (reality as it is in itself), and God.Yousef
Ontological empiricism is not stupid. Existence precedes essence. This just reminds me of Oliveira from Cortazars Hopscotch: essentially a long, didactic, explanation of how we can't be sure that things are actually how they are. Cartesian philosophy is the way to go. Sorry Dummet, metaphysics is pointless.Charlie
For the first half of this book Dummet seems to be heading towards the same mistakes that Russell makes but by the end you realise that Dummet is a much more modern mathematician and says some interesting things about the indefiniteness of maths: and therefore our perception of reality, but I still can't help feeling that for an Oxford lecturer it's a bit strange that he has ignored his predecessors Strawson and Grice.The book also finishes with a rather tired old argument for god that once again leaves me feeling that the influence of Spinoza is far greater than is ever acknowledged.This brilliantly readable book has done exactly what I hoped in clarifying my own opinions on the subject of thought and reality.