A Critical Analysis of Putnam's Thought Experiment: Twin Earth from a Saussurean Perspective
So the value of any given word is determined by what other words there are in that particular area of the vocabulary. That is true even of a word like soleil (‘sun’). No word has a value that can be identified independently of what else there is in its vicinity. [CGL] [160-161]
Introduction
Thought experiments, such as Avicenna's "Flying Man" or Schrödinger's Cat, possess a unique charm by challenging us to envision hypothetical scenarios that prompt deep philosophical reflection. This process aligns with Aristotle's philosophy, which posits that the contemplative life is the most fulfilling and happiest form of existence.
In this essay, we will critically engage with another well-known thought experiment: Twin Earth, proposed by Hilary Putnam in his seminal paper "The Meaning of 'Meaning'" from the book Mind, Language, and Reality (1975). This experiment is key in illustrating Putnam's argument for semantic externalism—the view that the meanings of words are not determined by internal psychological states. Putnam famously asserted, "'meanings' just ain't in the head." We will examine the original formulation of the Twin Earth thought experiment and analyze it through a Saussurean lens to uncover deeper insights into the nature of meaning in language.
Twin Earth: Putnam's Original Formulation
"This, in turn, is to be able to cut up each kind according to its species along its natural joints, and to try not to splinter any part, as a bad butcher might do." Plato's Phaedrus [266] (Cooper 1997)
In “The Meaning of ‘Meaning’” Putnam argues for what might be called natural kind externalism (Putnam 1975). Natural kind externalism is the position that our natural kind terms (such as “water” and “gold”) mean what they do because we interact causally with the natural kinds that these terms are about (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy). The concept of natural kinds is reminiscent of Plato's philosophy.
Putnam imagines a scenario where there exists a Twin Earth, a planet where Earthlings and Twin Earthlings are exact duplicates. However, there is one crucial difference: the substance we call water (natural kind term) on Twin Earth does not consist of H₂O but of XYZ (natural kinds).
This difference has not affected how the inhabitants of either planet use their respective liquids, but the liquids have different “hidden structures” (are different natural kinds), though the inhabitants are unaware of it. Putnam argues that when Earthlings use the term “water” (natural kind term), they still refer to the liquid made of H₂O (natural kind); similarly, when Twin Earthlings use the same natural kind term, they refer to their liquid made of XYZ (natural kind).
According to Putnam, the reason for this is that natural kind terms like "water" have an “unnoticed indexical component.” Water (natural kind term) receives its meaning by our originally pointing at water (H₂O, natural kind), such that water is always water “around here.” Thus, Earthlings and their Twin counterparts use their natural kind terms (e.g., “water,” “gold,” “cat,” etc.) to refer to the natural kinds of their respective worlds (e.g., on Earth, the natural kind term “water” refers to the natural kind H₂O, but on Twin Earth, it refers to XYZ). In other words, they refer to the “hidden structure” of the liquid on their planet.
Natural kind externalism, therefore, posits that the meanings of natural kind terms are not determined by psychological states but by causal interactions with the natural kind itself. As Putnam famously puts it, “Cut the pie any way you like, meaning just ain’t in the head” (Putnam, 1975).
Twin Earth: A Critical Reading Through a Saussurean Prism
Putnam’s Nomenclaturist Perspective
Putnam’s Twin Earth thought experiment exemplifies a nomenclaturist view, where language operates as a list of names corresponding to natural kinds. He argues that terms such as "water," "gold," and "cat" refer directly to natural kinds with specific properties. According to his theory of natural kind externalism, these terms are linked to real-world substances or entities through causal interactions and intrinsic properties. For Putnam, meaning is determined by the external world, not internal psychological states. For instance, "water" refers to H₂O because that is the substance fitting the category of water in the environment. This indexical component implies that terms refer to the relevant substance "around here," i.e., in the speaker’s environment. Thus, language functions as a way to label real-world entities, with the meaning of a term tied to the object or substance it names based on inherent properties.
Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. Genesis 2:19
Saussure’s Systemic View
In contrast, Ferdinand de Saussure's linguistic theory posits that language is a system of signs where meaning arises from the relationships between elements within the system. A sign consists of the "signifier" and the "signified". Meaning is not inherent in words themselves but derived from their place within the language system. Words gain meaning through their contrast and relationship with other words. For example, the meaning of "water" is shaped by its differentiation from terms like "liquid," "ice," and "drink." Saussure emphasizes the arbitrary nature of the sign; the link between the signifier and the signified is not natural but conventional, based on social agreement within a linguistic community.
Comparative Analysis: Source of Meaning and Role of the Speaker
The fundamental differences between Putnam’s and Saussure’s views lie in the source of meaning, the role of the speaker, and the nature of reference. For Putnam, meaning is externally determined by the actual properties of substances or entities in the world (natural kinds). The speaker’s psychological state is less relevant; what matters is the causal relationship with the natural kind. Reference is direct to the real-world entity based on its properties.
For Saussure, however, meaning is internally determined by the relationships and differences between elements within the language system. The speaker's understanding of the system of signs and their relationships is crucial in determining meaning. Reference is mediated through the system of signs, with meaning emerging from the network of relationships within the language.
Saussurean Critique of Putnam’s Thought Experiment
From a Saussurean perspective, Putnam's thought experiment overlooks the fundamentally arbitrary and internally consistent nature of meaning, emphasizing external reality over the internal structure of language that determines meaning for speakers within their linguistic community at a particular state. By focusing on the external, causal history of terms, Putnam fails to recognize that meaning is constructed within the synchronic reality of a linguistic system. Each language constructs its own reality and set of meanings unique to its speakers, demonstrating that meanings are deeply embedded in the internal structure of language.
Jonathan Culler illustrates this point effectively in his book Saussure:
“Not only does each language produce a different set of signifiers, articulating and dividing the continuum of sound in a distinctive way; each language produces a different set of signifieds; it has a distinctive and thus 'arbitrary' way of organizing the world into concepts or categories. It is obvious that the sound sequences of fleuve and riviére are signifiers of French but not of English, whereas river and stream are English but not French. Less obviously but more significantly, the organization of the conceptual plane is also different in English and French. The signified 'river' is opposed to 'stream' solely in terms of size, whereas a 'fleuve' differs from a rivière not because it is necessarily larger but because it flows into the sea, while a rivière does not. In short fleuve and rivière are not signifieds or concepts of English. They represent a different articulation of the conceptual plane” (Culler, 1976).
Therefore, while Putnam’s Twin Earth thought experiment is thought-provoking, it aligns with the nomenclaturist conception of language, which has been criticized for not considering the active role of language in shaping reality. From a Saussurean perspective, meaning is inherently relational and constructed within the linguistic system, not derived from an external reality. This fundamental difference highlights the complexity of language and the distinct insights offered by different theoretical frameworks. Saussure likely hinted at this complexity when he stated:
"The content of a word is determined, in the final analysis, not by what it contains but by what exists outside it. As an element in a system, the word has not only a meaning but also—above all—a value." [CGL] [160-161]
Conclusion
This analysis has juxtaposed Hilary Putnam's Twin Earth thought experiment with Ferdinand de Saussure's linguistic theory, revealing fundamental differences in their approaches to meaning in language. Putnam's semantic externalism, exemplified by his Twin Earth scenario, posits that meaning is grounded in the external properties of natural kinds and the causal interactions between terms and their referents. This perspective treats language as a nomenclature, directly linking words to the external world. In contrast, Saussure's systemic view of language emphasizes the internal, relational nature of meaning within a linguistic system. This approach highlights the arbitrary nature of the sign and the importance of the linguistic community in establishing meaning.
From a Saussurean perspective, Putnam's thought experiment overlooks the inherent arbitrariness and internal consistency of linguistic meaning. By focusing on external reality and causal history, Putnam's framework fails to account for the synchronic structure of language that shapes meaning for its speakers. Each language constructs its own reality and set of meanings, illustrating that meanings are deeply embedded in the internal structure of language rather than derived from external referents.
Ultimately, this critical analysis underscores the complexity of language and the divergent insights provided by different theoretical frameworks. While Putnam's Twin Earth experiment is thought-provoking, Saussure's systemic view offers a compelling critique that highlights the active role of language in shaping reality.
Language in Context: The Role of Time and Space in Synchronic and Diachronic Linguistics
https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2024/07/language-in-context-role-of-time-and.html
Naming and Meaning: From 'The First Morning' to Saussure's Semiology
https://derridaforlinguists.blogspot.com/2024/04/blog-post.html
Bibliography
Saussure, Ferdinand de. "Course in General Linguistics." Translated and annotated by Roy Harris. With a new introduction by Roy Harris. Bloomsbury, 2013.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. Cours de linguistique générale. Edited by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, with the collaboration of Albert Riedlinger. Arbre d’Or, Genève, 2005.
Culler, Jonathan. 1976. SAUSSURE. Fontana/Collins.
Chomsky, Noam. Language and Mind. Third Edition. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo, 2006.
Putnam, H.: Mind, Language and Reality. Philosophical Papers, vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975
Gáliková, Silvia, ed. Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind. Cognitive Studies Edition. Kraków: Towarzystwo Słowaków w Polsce; Filozofická fakulta Trnavskej univerzity v Trnave, 2013.
Crawford, Sean, ed. General Introduction to Philosophy of Mind. Critical Concepts of Philosophy, 4 vols. London: Routledge, 2011.
Feser, Edward. Philosophy of Mind: A Short Introduction. First South Asian Edition. Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2006.
Cooper, John M., and D. S. Hutchinson, eds. Plato: Complete Works. Hackett Publishing Company, 1997
Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy
King James Bible online
Comments
Post a Comment