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
    If content is identified with cognitive significance rath... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Content must determine reference for subsentential expressions, just as it does for sentences.

    If content is identified with cognitive significance rather than reference, two expressions can share content while determining different references in modal or belief contexts.

    ?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's puzzle shows identical reference with different cognitive significance (Morning Star/Evening Star), supporting content-as-significance view.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Belief reports track how subjects conceptualize content, not mere reference; cognitive significance better explains rational agent behavior.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Modal contexts preserve cognitive significance across possible worlds while reference varies, making significance the stable semantic foundation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If content is cognitive significance, we lose principled grounds for saying false beliefs misrepresent reality—they just differ in conception.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Distinguishing content from reference without grounding content in worldly reference creates an orphaned layer of meaning without semantic function.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Identical cognitive significance in different modal contexts should yield identical truth conditions, but it sometimes doesn't—suggesting reference matters fundamentally.
      ?

      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

    Belief reports track how subjects conceptualize content, not mere reference; cog...Content must determine reference for subsentential expressions, just as it does ...Distinguishing content from reference without grounding content in worldly refer...Frege's puzzle shows identical reference with different cognitive significance (...
    +3 moreShow less
    Identical cognitive significance in different modal contexts should yield identi...If content is cognitive significance, we lose principled grounds for saying fals...Modal contexts preserve cognitive significance across possible worlds while refe...

    Details

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