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 Ironic utterances cannot be interpreted as meaning the opposite of what is said without violating the maxim of Manner.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Grice himself acknowledged that Manner governs how something is said, not whether implied content must match literal content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Irony achieves perspicuity at the level of speaker meaning precisely by exploiting the marked contrast between literal and intended content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A speaker who says 'What lovely weather' in a storm is maximally clear to competent hearers; no paraphrase would be more efficient given the rhetorical context.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sperber and Wilson's echoic use theory shows irony communicates attitudes toward a proposition, not simply its negation, making 'opposite meaning' a misdescription.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If irony does not strictly implicate the opposite but rather expresses dissociative attitudes, then no violation of Manner is required to explain its interpretation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The maxim of Manner requires speakers to be perspicuous and avoid obscurity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Implying the opposite of what one says is less perspicuous than stating it explicitly.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Interpreting Don's utterance as conveying the opposite of its literal content treats the implicature as doing work that direct assertion could do more clearly.
      ?

      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.