Grice's Class

Speranza

Jones was referring to Grice's explication (or is it explicature?) of "Extensionalism" (always in capitals, as "Church of England") as a

"position imbued with the spirit of
Nominalism [another demon], and
dear both to those who feel that
'Because it is red' is no more
informative as an anser to the question
'Why is an English mail-box called 'red'?'
than would 'Because he is Paul Grice' is an
answer to the question 'Why is that distinguished-looking
philosopher called 'Paul Grice'?', AND
 also to those whe are particularly impressed by the power of set theory."

Jones was wondering if one could have an "elucidation of what Grice is saying [or IMPLICATING?] here."

Part of the clue is in

"the power of set theory".

This reminds me of A. G. N. Flew, in "Apologia pro philosophia mea" (S.
Shanker, ed, "Philosophy in Britain Today", p. 78).

Flew is recollecting J. L. Austin's "Saturday Mornings",

"described once", Flew goes on,

"by Paul Grice [his tutor, incidentally] as

"the class for all those
whose classes have no members"

"(See Warnock, "Saturday mornings", in I. Berlin et al,
"Essays on J.  L. Austin" (Clarendon, 1973)".
Or not.

I always found Grice's formulation rather brilliant.

Cheers.