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
    Sentences must signify more than just the understandings ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Sentences must signify more than just the understandings of their constituent terms

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A sentence such as 'Socrates runs' deals with Socrates and with running, not with anyone's understandings of those terms
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When we speak, we talk about the world, not merely someone's understanding of the world
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.All linguistic meaning is mediated by mental content: we have no unmediated cognitive access to worldly referents independent of conceptual representation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If mental mediation is necessary for all signification, then what sentences signify is constituted by and inseparable from the understandings they produce in competent speakers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Abelard's distinction between signifying understandings and signifying the world collapses if the world is only accessible to language through the very understandings he seeks to exclude.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege's puzzle about identity shows that 'Hesperus is Phosphorus' and 'Hesperus is Hesperus' differ in cognitive significance despite sharing the same worldly referents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If sameness of worldly reference cannot account for this semantic difference, then sentence meaning must include something like senses or understandings beyond mere reference to external states of affairs.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Related

    A sentence such as 'Socrates runs' deals with Socrates and with running, not wit...Abelard's distinction between signifying understandings and signifying the world...All linguistic meaning is mediated by mental content: we have no unmediated cogn...Frege's puzzle about identity shows that 'Hesperus is Phosphorus' and 'Hesperus ...
    +3 moreShow less
    If mental mediation is necessary for all signification, then what sentences sign...If sameness of worldly reference cannot account for this semantic difference, th...When we speak, we talk about the world, not merely someone's understanding of th...

    Similar

    Empirical knowledge of the things signified by terms is usually needed82%Using a term with understanding requires understanding that the term h...82%Axiomatic definitions stipulate the meanings of all their constituent ...81%Using a term with understanding requires more than just being disposed...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: abelard
    View source passageHide passage
    Abelard argues that sentences (propositiones) must signify more than just the understandings of the constituent name and verb. First, a sentence such as ‘Socrates runs’ deals with Socrates and with running, not with anyone’s understandings. We talk about the world, not merely someone’s understanding of the world. Second, sentences like ‘If something is human, it is an animal’ are false if taken to be about understandings, for someone could entertain the concept human without entertaining the con
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit