Slavko Brkić, University of Zadar, Croatia
Gabriel Sandu, University of Helsinki, Finland
Andrej Ule, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Matthias Varga von Kibed, Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich, Germany
This course deals with the problem of analyzing metaphysical questions and finding a solution to the problem from the viewpoint of theory of meaning. Since the task of philosophy is to answer metaphysical questions, according to many philosophers, premises also become crucial. In this way, metaphysical question realism or antirealism has as a consequence the fact that antirealism implies rejection of classical semantic validity. Does this mean rejection of classical logic and accepting polyvalent, fuzzy, paraconsistent or dialetheic logics? However, theory of meaning decides about adequacy of logic, and not metaphysics, since the validity of logical argument depends only on sentence that is made of. DDoes research carry on from theory of meaning through logic to metaphysics or does metaphysics dictate theory of meaning as well as logic? Is it applicable in linguistics in a similar Way? What is theory of meaning? Does it describe our language practice?