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 reflexive (utterance-bound) content of an utterance is not the proposition expressed, but rather a set of conditions on the utterance and the proposition it expresses, with quantification over all relevant factors not determined by meaning.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Grice's cooperative principle and maxims are sufficient to derive contextual enrichment without quantifying over undetermined factors as a semantic primitive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Reflexive content, on a Gricean account, is a pragmatic inference layer computed post-semantics, not a component of content that structurally contains open quantification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Treating undetermined factors as internal to the reflexive content conflates the semantic level with the pragmatic process that resolves it, undermining the semantic/pragmatic distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Minimalists like Cappelen and Lepore argue that the proposition expressed by an utterance is determined by sentence meaning plus only a minimal set of context-dependent elements like indexicals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If minimal propositions are well-formed truth-apt contents without quantifying over all relevant contextual factors, the reflexive content need not be a set of conditions but can be a complete proposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument's premise that undetermined factors must enter the reflexive content begs the question against minimalism by assuming rich context-dependence at the level of what is said.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The utterance-bound content is determined solely by conventional meanings of words and modes of composition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Factors such as ambiguity resolution and reference assignment are not determined by conventional meaning alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the utterance-bound content cannot fully specify the proposition expressed without quantifying over those undetermined factors.
      ?

      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.