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 The reference of an expression must be relativized to both a context of utterance and a circumstance of evaluation, not just a context of utterance alone.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kaplan's 'dthat' operator and his own formal system demonstrate that context alone can fix reference for all directly referential terms without invoking a separate circumstance parameter.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Temporal operators like 'In 100 years' shift what is said about a circumstance, not the referential mechanism itself, which remains anchored entirely to the context of utterance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Conflating the semantic role of circumstances in determining truth-conditions with the role of context in determining reference commits a category error that the two-dimensional framework itself was designed to prevent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Contextualist accounts in the tradition of Travis and Recanati hold that pragmatic enrichment at the level of context is sufficiently powerful to handle temporal displacement without positing a separate circumstance of evaluation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the truth-conditional content of a sentence is always fully determined relative to a rich, occasion-specific context, then introducing circumstances as a second index is a theoretical posit that violates Occam's razor.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Sentences containing temporal operators like 'In 100 years' shift the circumstance of evaluation without shifting the context of utterance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When a speaker utters 'In 100 years, I will be dead', 'I' refers to the speaker at the time of utterance, even though the speaker will not exist to utter the sentence in 100 years.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If reference were relativized only to context of utterance, there would be no way to account for the divergence between the time of utterance and the time relevant to truth evaluation.
      ?

      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.