Possible worlds semantics cannot account for the difference in truth-value between sentences (15) and (16)

Modality & Possibility Philosophy of Language

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

0 reasons for

1 reason against

Reasons Against

1 perspective

Reason against

1.The proponent of possible worlds semantics must take sentences (13) and (14) to have the same content
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.If (13) and (14) have the same content, then (15) and (16) differ only by substitution of expressions with the same content
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.If two sentences differ only by substitution of co-content expressions, possible worlds semantics requires them to express the same proposition and have the same truth-value
?
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.

Source

AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid

SEP: meaning

View source passage

As we have just seen, the proponent of possible worlds semantics must take the italic sentences, (13) and (14), to have the same content; hence, it seems, the proponent of possible worlds semantics must take (15) and (16) to be a pair of sentences which differ only in the substitution of expressions with the same content. But then it seems that the proponent of possible worlds semantics must take this pair of sentences to express the same proposition, and have the same truth-value; but (15) and

Extraction notes

Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 1 (0 for, 1 against)
Edits: 1 edit