That work shows that the "problem of" this concept arises from the fact that it is impossible to know whether previous uses of the word "plus" reference the "plus function" or an invented "quus function.
One work argues that the impossibility of this concept arises from a Humean sceptical solution to a certain paradox; that work uses the concepts of agreement, forms of life, and criteria to show that the paradox's solution is only possible in a community. That work shows that the "problem of" this concept arises from the fact that it is impossible to know whether previous uses of the word "plus" reference the "plus function" or an invented "quus function." The original treatment of this concept argues against it by showing that a past notation of ‘S' in a diary cannot be verified to apply to any particular sensation. Saul Kripke claims that the argument of this concept is a special case of an argument regarding rule-following, in a work titled for rules and this concept. The best-known treatment of this argues against it by considering a group of people who all have boxes containing some object they decide to label a beetle. FTP, name this idea deemed impossible in Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations, which consists of words referencing things knowable only to the speaker.
One work argues that the impossibility of this concept arises from a Humean sceptical solution to a certain paradox; that work uses the concepts of agreement, forms of life, and criteria to show that the paradox's solution is only possible in a community.
{private language}