Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Frege's distinction between sense and force entails that predication as an act-type is semantically inert until tokened with assertoric force.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Predicating 'is red' in 'The rose is red' already contributes semantic meaning (property attribution) regardless of assertoric force. Meaning and force are distinct but not ordered.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Understanding a conditional 'If P then Q' requires grasping the semantic connection between P and Q before considering assertoric force. Semantics precedes pragmatics.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Frege's sense/force distinction aimed to clarify truth-conditions and mental content, not to claim unasserted content lacks semantic contribution. The claim overstates his thesis.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Sense determines what is said; force determines what is done. Predication without force is merely semantic content, not a complete speech act.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A sentence tokened as a question or conditional has identical sense to the same sentence asserted, yet produces different effects. This shows force is required for semantic activation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Frege explicitly separated the horizontal from the judgment stroke to show that grasping content differs from endorsing it as true. Semantic inertness captures this distinction.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.