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
    Grice's own framework accommodates non-standard implicatu... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Sneaky intentions must be ruled out of speech act analyses based on communicative intentions

    Grice's own framework accommodates non-standard implicature cases where speakers exploit conventions with partial concealment of their full meaning.

    ?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.Grice's framework distinguishes utterance meaning from speaker meaning, allowing speakers to convey propositions beyond conventional semantics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Implicature requires mutual recognition between speaker and hearer; partial concealment preserves this cooperative principle if discoverable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Irony, metaphor, and understatement are genuine implicatures that exploit conventions while obscuring literal content—Grice's model explains these.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Grice's framework requires that implicatures be calculable through explicit reasoning; true concealment undermines the transparency requirement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If meaning is intentionally hidden, the speaker may violate the Maxim of Clarity, contradicting Grice's cooperative principle foundations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Partial concealment suggests the speaker doesn't openly intend the hearer to recognize their meaning—violating Grice's mutual knowledge condition.
      ?

      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

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Grice's framework distinguishes utterance meaning from speaker meaning, allowing...Grice's framework requires that implicatures be calculable through explicit reas...If meaning is intentionally hidden, the speaker may violate the Maxim of Clarity...Implicature requires mutual recognition between speaker and hearer; partial conc...
    +3 moreShow less
    Irony, metaphor, and understatement are genuine implicatures that exploit conven...Partial concealment suggests the speaker doesn't openly intend the hearer to rec...Sneaky intentions must be ruled out of speech act analyses based on communicativ...

    Details

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