Quine's Dilemma between Ecumenical and Sectarian response

Cilj ovog rada je razmatranje Kvajnove dileme u pogledu toga da li u slučaju subdeterminacije treba obe teorije smatrati istinitim (ekumenski odgovor) ili samo jednu od njih (sektaški odgovor). Ova dilema je značajna zbog toga što usvajanje ekumenskog odgovora predstavlja problem za Kvajnov naturalizam, dok usvajanje sektaške protivreči njegovim empirističkim shvatanjima. Videćemo da se Kvajn dugo kolebao između ovih odgovora, kao i to da nije najjasnije za koji se na kraju opredelio. Izložiću i rešenja koja su ponudili Gibson, Dejvidson, Đenova i Severo i nastojaću da pokažem da je Dejvidsonovo rešenje najuspešnije, zbog toga što zahteva najmanje izmene Kvajnovog sistema.The aim of this paper is to investigate Quine’s dilemma whether, in case of underdetermination, both theories should be considered as true (ecumenical view), or just one of them (sectarian view). This dilemma holds signiicance because the acceptance of ecumenical view represents problem for Quine’s naturalism, while the acceptance of sectarian view contradicts his empiristic preferences. For a long time Quine had vacciliated between those views and it is not clear what his inal conclusion was. I will review Gibson’s, Davidson’s, Genova’s and Severo’s solutions and I will argue that Davidson’s is the most successful, since it requires fewer changes in Quine’s system