Every natural language concept is vague in this sense, from ‘heap’ in the sorites paradox, to ‘bald’, to ‘justice’ (on any conception), and ‘person’. For those interested, my introduction to vagueness, and my theory of it, in Chapter 4 of my first book. http://changizi.com/brain25000.pdf https://twitter.com/roundsqrcupola/status/967222450017722369 …
Sorry, don’t know much about this, could you elaborate? Bc naively it would seem contractual approaches dissolve the problem of what’s a person with the criterion of ability to enter agreement (though then some of the fuzziness migrates to what constitutes an agreement).
-
-
‘ability’, ‘enter’ and ‘agreement’ all vague. (And that is not to say they’re somehow fluffy and worthless! No, it’s just that all important concepts are vague, and we have to deal with that. And it also means we don’t want to give weight to slippery slope criticisms .)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.