Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Church's argument assumes that propositional attitude rep... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The standard account of identity entails that Pierre's doxastic position cannot be as described (or we must punt).

    Church's argument assumes that propositional attitude reports are fully transparent to co-referential substitution, a premise Frege's own framework was designed to deny.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Frege explicitly distinguished sense from reference to explain why 'Morning Star' and 'Evening Star' differ in cognitive significance despite referring identically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Propositional attitudes involve grasping senses, not merely having referents, so substituting coreferential terms can change truth conditions of attitude reports.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Church's argument conflates linguistic transparency with semantic transparency, ignoring that attitude ascriptions depend on how contents are conceptualized.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Frege's sense/reference distinction was designed for descriptive content, not attitude reports, which may operate under different compositional principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Even granting Frege's framework, it doesn't follow that Church's particular argument *assumes* full transparency rather than merely failing to restrict it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates what Frege's framework was *designed* to deny with what Church's argument actually requires as premises—an inferential gap.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Philosophy of Language1 linkedPersonal Identity1 linked

    Related

    Church's argument conflates linguistic transparency with semantic transparency, ...Even granting Frege's framework, it doesn't follow that Church's particular argu...Frege explicitly distinguished sense from reference to explain why 'Morning Star...Frege's sense/reference distinction was designed for descriptive content, not at...
    +3 moreShow less
    Propositional attitudes involve grasping senses, not merely having referents, so...The claim conflates what Frege's framework was *designed* to deny with what Chur...The standard account of identity entails that Pierre's doxastic position cannot ...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit