H. P. Grice and P. T. Geach

Speranza

There are a few similarities in approach.

Both have Oxonian backgrounds. Grice had, on top, an Oxford career, but that is neither here nor there.

Both were older than Strawson.

Both were FASCINATED by Strawson.

Geach must have read about "Mr. H. P. Grice", since Mr. H. P. Grice is cited by Strawson in a book that Geach referred to quite often, "Introduction to Logical Theory".

Grice and Geach are concerned with Strawson's treatment of 'the vernacular' in attempts to display the logical form.

There are various references to Strawson in the work of Geach.

One topic is the truth-functors.

Not just 'negation'

but the 'connectives' as well.

Geach, like Grice, criticises Strawson's conclusions.

Geach goes on to deal with Strawson's account of the quantifiers -- cited by Grice, too -- 'all', 'some', 'the'.

Geach is unconvinced with Strawson's reference to an 'implication' of plurality in the case of 'some', that Grice does NOT deal explicitly with (but Warnock does, in "Metaphysics and Logic" -- oddly, "Metaphysics and Logic" is the title of the last section in Geach's "Logic matters").

Geach wonders what type of 'implication' is this?

"Some metal is ..."

being his example to refute (or cancel) Strawson's implication of 'plurality'. He objects that Strawson focuses on 'plurality' implicatures, as it were, while 'duality' or 'singularity' implicatures seem just as important.