Return to Revisions

Quine is simply presenting a definition of 'everything'. Think of it this way. If I ask 'what is there?', a correct but unhelpful answer is 'whatever there is'. You cannot disagree with that answer, since it is really just a re-expression of the content of the question. If you define 'everything' as meaning 'whatever there is', then 'everything' becomes the answer to the question 'What is there?' by definition, so you cannot disagree with it if you accept that definition of 'everything'. Of course, you can adopt the view that 'everything' has some other meaning, and therefore disagree with Quine on that basis, but then you would be making the mistake of arguing at cross purposes.