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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Grice's Cooperative Principle explains why explanatory talk appears context-sensitive without requiring semantic context-sensitivity in the 'because' relation itself.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If context merely controls which facts speakers mention, it doesn't explain why 'because' itself seems to mean different things (causal vs. contrastive).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Pragmatic principles operate *after* semantic content is established; they cannot fully explain apparent shifts in what the 'because' relation *is*.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Some context-sensitivity in causal explanations requires genuine ambiguity in the causal relation itself, not just selective salience of true causes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Speakers systematically flout the Cooperative Principle by omitting causally relevant but pragmatically irrelevant factors in explanations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The same 'because' relation can be truthfully cited with different emphases depending on conversational goals, without altering the relation's meaning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Grice's framework explains why 'Why did the plant die?' gets different correct answers (lack of water vs. genetic weakness) without semantic ambiguity.
      ?

      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.