Imprecise Quantification.

Following David Lewis (1986) , Ted Sider (2001) has famously argued that unrestricted first-order quantification cannot be vague. His argument was intended as a type of reductio : its strategy was to show that the mere hypothesis of unrestricted quantifier vagueness collapses into the claim that unrestricted quantification is precise. However, this short article considers two natural reconstructions of the argument, and shows that each can be resisted. The theme will be that each reconstruction of the argument involves assumptions which advocates of vague quantification have independent reason to reject. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]