On Putnam and His Models
Timothy Bays · The Journal of Philosophy · 2001
this paper, I examine one version of Putnam's argument---a version closely related to the traditional Lowenheim-Skolem Paradox. I defend three claims about this argument. First, I argue that a key step in Putnam's argument rests on a mathematical mistake, and I discuss some of the philosophical ramifications of this mistake. Second, I argue that, even if Putnam could get his mathematics to work, his argument would still fail on purely philosophical grounds. Third, I argue that Putnam's mathematical mistakes and his philosophical mistakes are surprisingly closely related. At the end of the day, I conclude that realists have little to fear from Putnam and his models