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
    (Cons) can express a truth at a vat-world only if the spe... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    (Cons) can express a truth at a vat-world only if the speaker of (Cons) is not in a vat-world

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The metalanguage used to express (Cons) does not contain vat-English (the object language being described)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A metalanguage that does not contain vat-English is a language spoken only by non-BIVs
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A metalanguage can be spoken by a BIV if the BIV's causal-computational relations track the same semantic norms as non-BIVs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Putnam's own causal-historical account of reference permits reference-fixing through causal chains internal to the vat-world's computational structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, vat-English metalanguage is possible, undermining the claim that metalinguistic expression requires a non-BIV speaker.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Boghossian's meaning-skepticism entails that no privileged metalanguage exists that could establish determinate semantic facts from outside a system.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If no metalanguage is semantically privileged over object language, the distinction between vat-English and standard English collapses as a basis for truth-conditions.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    SkepticismPhilosophy of Language

    Connections

    1 linked claim

    (Cons) can express a truth at a vat-world only if its speaker is not in a vat-wo...

    Related

    (Cons) can express a truth at a vat-world only if its speaker is not in a vat-wo...A metalanguage can be spoken by a BIV if the BIV's causal-computational relation...A metalanguage that does not contain vat-English is a language spoken only by no...Boghossian's meaning-skepticism entails that no privileged metalanguage exists t...
    +4 moreShow less
    If no metalanguage is semantically privileged over object language, the distinct...Putnam's own causal-historical account of reference permits reference-fixing thr...The metalanguage used to express (Cons) does not contain vat-English (the object...Therefore, vat-English metalanguage is possible, undermining the claim that meta...

    Similar

    (Cons) can express a truth at a vat-world only if its speaker is not i...99%If the speaker were a BIV speaking vat-English, the speaker would not ...85%If the speaker is a brain-in-a-vat, then (T) gives the truth condition...84%If disquotation holds for vat-English, then premise (A*) cannot be tru...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: skepticism-content-externalism
    View source passageHide passage
    According to Brueckner, since (Cons) is not disquotational, the metalanguage in which it is expressed cannot contain the object language to which utterances of ‘I am a BIV’ (as meant in (Cons)) belongs. But then, Brueckner argues, (Cons) can express a truth at a vat-world only if its speaker is not in a vat-world. Here, Brueckner seems to reason that since the metalanguage being used to express (Cons) does not contain the object language being described (vat-English), the metalanguage being used
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit