Response

a journal for new work

Response Issue 02 features excellent work by the following excellent people:

For this issue, contributors were invited to respond to the following:

Purposes and desires can be vague because their achievement or satisfaction conditions may have vague boundaries. This could be true even if there were no vagueness in language (or at most only parasitic vagueness in words like 'achieve,' 'satisfy,' and 'true'). Pierre's desire for some champagne may be vague because of the vagueness in just how much champagne is required to satisfy it, even though the words we would normally use to describe that desire, 'some' and 'champagne,' are perfectly precise, or at any rate, might as well be.

...

[Significance] is a context-dependent relation, since what is significant to one person may not be significant to another. Any use of 'significant,' or of any word whose content involves what is significant, requires an implicit subject with interests—an answer to the question: significant to whom?

— Delia Graff, "Shifting Sands: An Interest-Relative Theory of Vagueness", Philosophical Topics 28, no. 1 (2000): 47

Issue 02 was edited by guest editors Lex Kim Bobrow and Chelsey Grasso and series editor Daniel Elfanbaum. You can purchase a physical copy of Issue 02 here.