Quine on 'the Indeterminacy of Translation' and 'the Underdetermination of Empirical Theory'

Abstract

The thesis of the indeterminacy of translation is that manuals for translation can be set up in divergent ways, all compatible with the totality of speech dispositions, yet incompatible with one another. On the other hand the thesis of the underdetermination of empirical theory means that empirical theories can be at odds with each other and yet compatible with all possible data. According to Quine, there is a parallel between these two theses, but the parallel fails in certain respects. However, the reasons Quine gives for the parallel-failing are not valid, because they presuppose the problematical doctrine of physicalistic ontology. Although these reasons may be invalid, I still believe that the thesis of indeterminacy plays a singular role in justifying a refusal of the hypostatization of meaning. It is in this respect that the thesis of indeterminacy ultimately differs from the thesis of underdetermination.