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 Sentences differing in primary intension differ in one semantically relevant dimension of meaning, undermining the claim that (17) and (18) are meaning-identical.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Meaning-identity requires only that sentences have identical truth conditions across all possible worlds, not identical psychological determination procedures.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Primary intension conflates meaning with speaker competence and context-sensitivity; secondary intension captures the genuine semantic content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Two sentences can differ in primary intension yet express the same proposition speakers communicate, making the difference pragmatically, not semantically relevant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Primary intension captures how speakers determine reference in actual contexts, making it semantically relevant to understanding what words mean.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Two sentences can have identical truth conditions yet differ in cognitive significance, which primary intension explains and meaning-identity ignores.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If sentences differ in primary intension, speakers using them make different epistemic claims about how to identify their referents.
      ?

      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.