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 If Gricean pragmatics, the source of communicative-intention analysis, permits layered intentions not fully transparent to hearers, the openness requirement is internally unmotivated.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Layered intentions need not undermine openness if the primary communicative intention—what the utterance explicitly conveys—remains transparent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Openness can be independently motivated by epistemic justice or reciprocal respect principles, not solely by Gricean mechanics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Grice permits opaqueness about some intentions while requiring transparency about the core meaning-making intention; these aren't incompatible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Grice's framework explicitly allows speakers multiple nested intentions (intending hearers to recognize one's intention to affect them).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If communicative success doesn't require hearer transparency to all speaker intentions, demanding it is an arbitrary external constraint.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Openness requirements imposed without grounding in actual communication theory become unmotivated normative overlays.
      ?

      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.